User talk:Zythe/Jaime Sommers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] General advice

Rather than have subsections in a "Character history" section, I think there should be an "Appearances" section, with "1974 series" and "2007 series", and "Film" as well, if she appears in film. The term "Character history" implies an in-universe perspective, as though it should be written "Jaime Sommers was born in 19XX" when it should be "Jaime Sommers first appeared in 19XX". Speaking of which, I'm not sure it's relevant to list her DOB in the infobox. It's kinda trivial, not to mention easily retconned (since when are DOBs ever consistant with fictional characters?). Also, some of the info in "Development" probably shouldn't be there. Were the writers thinking of Buffy and Faith when they were creating her, or was that a comparison made by outside comentators? If it was outsiders, it should maybe be moved to a "Critical reception" section or something. What do you think? Paul730 18:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking that as this is a alternate portrayal character, that it should be treated largely like a comic book article. I was considering shifting "conception" into its own "conceptual history" section and discussing it much like the "publication history" section in good comics articles. To make a comprehensive comparison, I feel concise fictional biographies are needed... two paragraphs each being sufficient. Not every good article has to be identical in format, right?~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I know not every good article has to be identical, but I'd just rethink the actual title of "Character history". To me, it just sounds like a breeding ground for in-universe stuff. You can summarise her history without making it a biography; my Buffy sandbox basically covers her life from the film to the comics, just in an out-of-universe way. Since the two versions of Jaime are significantly different (they're completely different people, right?), perhaps a different approach is needed. After all, Buffy is basically the same character in the film and the TV show, even if the film isn't canon or whatever. Since Jaime only has two versions (as opposed to the dozens of Supermen, Wolverines, etc), I'm not sure exactly how to lay it out... Can we find something better than "Character history/biography?" Paul730 23:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Paul asked me to come back and bring suggestions, it will have to be tomorrow because I'm a little busy with a paper right now. I assume though that you are planning on merging the two character articles?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, this sandbox is for both versions. Zythe told me he's gonna propose a merge when this article is finished. Paul730 00:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

One option is a straightforward appearances, which would largely mirror the IMDB layout and treat it all as one character, only mentioning that the latest instance is a franchise reboot. But I can imagine that would be messy and complicated. Which is why I felt a "conceptual history" section (a la publication history in Superman, Batman, Storm (comics), Silver Surfer, Barbara Gordon, Spider-Man). Fictional character histories alongside a conceptual history would simply be an another approach of the "Appearances" section. If you look at all those articles, their detail fictional history is incredibly brief, which is all this article would need! After all, there's BionicWiki and BionicWoman.Wikia and Bionic.Wikia for the excessive in-universe detail.

What I would love to find are scientific journals that make comparisons between modern day prosthetics and the original Bionic Woman enhancements. That way a section could discuss scientific inaccuracy / science fiction becoming science fact whilst succinctly covering Jaime's abilities.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 12:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I understand more what you mean now, and that seems like a good plan. :) I agree that an "Appearances" section probably could get too complicated. So long as you keep the fictional histories very brief, not like some in those articles you linked to (Surfer and Barbara's are huge!). And yeah, scientific journals like you say would be very useful to provide real-world context for her powers. If the current show gets a decent DVD release, there might be something about SFX on that. Paul730 12:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If Superman uses "Publication history", you could say "Televised history".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Only it has its origins in a book? Hmm. ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 13:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Bionic Woman does??  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess not. I just think "televised history" would limit the scope "conceptual" history would have.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 20:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

If you like Conceptual history, that's cool too. But, when I read "conceptual history", I think that the info will be primarily real world info, and not really that much about what happens with her character on the show---which I'd be all for, but I'm sure there are plenty of other people that wouldn't want a limited IU knowledge.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)