User talk:Bignole/Archive/2010/March

Smallville

Was that an amazing episode of Smallville or what?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 03:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Yes, I agree. I thought all the fights were pretty awsome to be honest lol. I liked how they teased about Lex, yet again. I almost thought that we would finally find out that he is still alive, but I guess thats still for a later episode. I am glad they made it two hours, and was satisified on how they handed John Jones. The Martian form and him getting his powers back. They put a twist on the episode with Tess in the end. I liked it overall.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

This doesn't need a reply, I am just stating my amazement: The season 9 page went from about 5K viewers from the 1st to the 5th to 27.1k viewers yesterday. That is a huge spike in viewers!ChaosMaster16 (talk) 18:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

I know! Well, you have to admit that the extra promotion The CW did, did pay off. The Friday finals were released and Smallville got about 2.767 million, or 2.77, so the show held the origonal numbers well. Also, I found these:

society

legends

Would they mean anything since they are an organization getting money for the people of Kenya? I really wish The CW could clear the epsisode count of Season 9 up. With the two hour episode, is it two seperate episodes, does it count toward the 22 episodes, so that we would only get 21 now? I know that the answer is pretty solid, but clarification from the CW would help clarify and put all my doubts to rest.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 01:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

I found this interview with Alison Mack. [1]

In it she says she directed episode 13. And besides that, you can possibly use some material to add to the production section. Also, this is another interview with her. [2] And this one is with Erica Durance. [3]ChaosMaster16 (talk) 13:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Okay, that sounds good to me. Do you have a sandbox with the AJ material that I could maybe add to, exc? Also, I listened to a podcast recently, this site's podcast, and the most recent episode had one of the assistant editors of Smallville as a guest. I though if you liked Smallville THAT much you could check it out, I thought it was pretty insightfull. In the podcast, (Dona, the editors name was) said that The CW marketed Legends and Society as Absolute Justice. Now, I know we can't go changing things on wikipedia without a direct source, and there is no transcipt of the episode that I know of, but to come from someone who has actually worked on the show (she sad since season 6) I thought it would be plausible. But then again, many reliable sources, such as MSN and TVGuide still say the episode is 1 episode. I am not trying to get all annoying about this, but just thought I could point it out to you.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 00:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

I'll take a look at some of the sources when I can, and I will even look for more sources. And yeah, I think we will have to wait for the outcome of the end of the season. Did you hear of the shows The CW renewed? Smallville was not included in the list yet. I sure hope it does get renewed though. They renew Supernatural (the season five finale is supposed to wrap up the shows main storyline) but not Smallville (which the producers and a good portion of the actors have made commitments for at least one future season).ChaosMaster16 (talk) 20:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

I went ahead and read the enitre review and cut out parts that sounded like it should be in an article about the episode on Wikipedia. And no problem. For the reviews with "nicknames", should I just keep the sentece as "One reviewer said..." or should I include the name? Also, I am working on the reception section in one of my sandboxes, as I thought it would be easier to cut it into sections, exc. You can look at it User:ChaosMaster16/Test.

On a seperate note: Did you know that Absolute Justice's 2.77 million is a 67% decrease from the pilot episode, which had 8.40 million viewers, a 12% decrease from the season eight finale, which had 3.13 million viewers, and a 7% increase since the season nine premiere, which had 2.58 million viewers?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 00:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Finished the really rough copy of the reception. It still needs much work, but at least it is on the page and not on 9 different pages.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 01:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Was that episode amazng or what?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 02:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Absolute Justice was still 2 episodes. The CW just aired them together. I think they should still be listed as 11 and 12, as otherwise all of the numbers afterwards will be out of sync. 22 episodes were ordered but if you list it the way that you have dictated then there will only be 21 listed. "Lost" always lists 2 hour episodes as 2 episodes regardless of them being aired together, so does "24", "Desperate Housewives", "Ally McBeal", "X Files" and many more. 92.21.244.205 (talk) 11:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I liked it a lot. The heat vision is really getting annoying. Why cant they be consistant? I am thinking it is because the produers left the show; according to the season 2 article, they had some influence in changing it from Season 1 to Season 2. Anyway, I bet we will be really disappointed tonight. The previews look bad, IMO. I hope the limbs that we saw last week in the previews were like a VERY early on draft because they looked extremely fake. Did you hear the big news? It looks like Lex is comming back for 9-10 episodes next season!! I hope they could get him for more, but 9-10 is better than 0. Would it be wise to put a section in the Smallville article under Broadcasting, called Future, talking about Season 10?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 22:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Okay, that sounds good to me... Found this site with some really negative reviews about Persuasion, mainly bashing the episode for the 9/11 reference. [4] Should we use it on the season 9 page? And, alright, the tease for this episode looked pretty good.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 01:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

I totally misjudged the episode. I thought the pacing was alright. The major plot points are starting to smooth out well, and I am really excited to see what else they can do with it, EXPECIALY since Zod can fly! (Though, I think a lot of people guessed where Clark healing Zod and him coming back to life was going during the episode)ChaosMaster16 (talk) 21:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

I know we have talked about this many times before, but since it has no bad track record and is right on numerous things, (Mainly being titles, writers, and directors), why can't we use Kryptonsite? I see it as just like comingsoon.net, tvbythenumbers.com, and thr.com, just there to report news in a blog-like type of setting, but only related to Smallville. From WP:IRS: Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. Isn't Kryptonsite run by an established "expert"? Mainly, what I am trying to say is: Why not just use Airdates, titles, direcotrs, and writers from Kryptonsite. The site has never been wrong when I have checked and compared it to press releases before, and dates are always correct.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 03:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Okay. That sounds pretty sensable to me. Can you check out The Twilight Saga: Eclipse and input to weather a part of the music section should be included in the article? And should we start a section in the talk page about it?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 02:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Well, Muse has been part of the movie series since the first Twilight movie. And the reference that was part of what was in the article stated that the studio contacted the band, arranged for them to be apart of it, then the band stated how excited they are (you know, the usual). Then a few weeks ago, they stated that they would not be part of it. I personally think its notable since it was one part of the movie series that was the same for the two movies, then confirmed for the third, but then news broke out that they would not be part of it. It is part of the post production process at least. The studio wanted them to be apart of it, they were, but bowed out of it. Also, the reference said it would be one of the only things the band would be apart of in 2010. That would be notable (but also very likely to change). I dont think it would hurt the article; if I was just an average person who liked the Muse band in the first two movies, I would go on wikipedia to the Twilight pages and see if they would be in any of the sequels. And I'll look into the Smallville "AJ" thing in a moment.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Alright. And do you have a link to the Absolute Justice episode being 2 episodes accoridng to the writers?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Why cant The CW release a press release stating how many episodes were in the season? I mean, two conflicting reports, who do we trust? The wrters or the network that airs the show? MSN lists it as two episodes, then (unfortunately) lists "AJ" as a totally different episode.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 00:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Hey, I have this file ( File:51HHpbH3dgL SS500 .jpg ). If I were to make an episode table, what color would I make it If I made the previous season blue? (In your opinion, what color)ChaosMaster16 (talk) 22:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Thanks!ChaosMaster16 (talk) 22:59, 21 March 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Halloween

Hi Bignole,

You have reverted my edits and the edits of several other editors throughout the edit history of Template:Halloween series in order to maintain a particularly atypical template format. The standard method of linking to character lists when some individual characters have their own articles is to link the word "Characters" in the section title. When formatting navboxes, non-link text should be kept to a minimum. It is not accepted practice to introduce arbitrary linebreaks to preserve symmetry. Do you have any reason for continuing to revert these edits?

Neelix (talk) 02:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Bignole,

You have stated that I "should have immediately started a discussion about the potential change" after you reverted my edits. This is what I have done above. You did not respond to the discussion I started, even though I waited five days. If you would like to explain in response to the discussion I have started why you disagree with my edits, please feel free to do so. In the meantime, however, the template should remain as I edited it. I allowed the template to remain as you edited it for the full five days after I started the discussion on your talk page. Please allow me the same courstesy.

Neelix (talk) 14:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Bignole,

I am so sorry. I don't know how this happened, but I somehow did not see that you had contacted me on my talk page back on the 14th. When I saw the tag that told me that I had a new message on my talk page back on the 14th, I went to my talk page and only read the most recent message, assuming that there was only one; there was a bot that notified me of an orphaned image very soon after you left your message. I didn't even realize that you had contacted me until you linked to your message a few minutes ago. I hope I have not aggravated you too greatly.

The discussion I mentioned that I had started was the message that I left on your talk page originally. Because I waited five days after having left a message on your talk page and believed that you had not responded, I made the change on the template. Can we start this discussion over? We can have the discussion in the central location of the template's talk page as you suggest, and then hopefully there won't be any more confusion related to not realizing that the conversation is continuing. I'll wait for you to respond before I start the discussion on the template's talk page.

Sincerely,

Neelix (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Predators

My mistake. I thought the followed/preceeded by was about the continuity and not the chronological order of related films. My appologies for the editing! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.73.190 (talk) 02:17, 25 March 2010 (UTC)