Talk:Smallville season 6

Season Overview

Why don't we use the following text said by Al Gough?

The theme of Season 6 is the rise of Lex Luthor. You're definitely going to see the more ruthless Lex Luthor you know from the comic books really start to emerge. The season will also be about the corruption of good — not only Lana, but Martha. Will she get involved with Lionel? And when Clark does come back from the Phantom Zone, what will it have done to him? We never really explored what happens to somebody inside the Phantom Zone, which is really the ultimate incarceration. [...] The idea was that on Krypton — and we'd like to explore some of this in Season 6 — Zod was the ultimate terrorist. He and Jor-El were once friends and became enemies. As a result, there was a breakaway. It has more to do with political intrigue rather than that the planet started spinning too close to the sun, which has always sort of been the traditional story. Source: http://www.spoilerfix.com/smallville.php

Because that isn't an overview, that's more of what Gough would like to do. So, it really doesn't correspond to this page, or any page. They will release a more official overview later. They are still writing and filming right now, and will be until next year. But, for the first couple month's episodes they are still working on them right now. Bignole 23:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Season 6 premiere date

If we don't yet know the date on the main Smallville (TV series) page, and it says the date is yet to be set in the first paragraph here, then why do we have the episode "Zod" scheduled to air September 28th? Emily ^{(Funtrivia Freak)} 19:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

That's the presumed date. It's probably a safe bet that the that is the date, but I think that all the dates should be noted as being "presumed" because anything can change. Bignole 20:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Iguazu Falls

Iguazu Falls are in Misiones not in the Patagonia. The are near the border between Argentina and Brasil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.255.157.53 (talk • contribs)

I removed it so now it just reads "Iguaza Falls". Since we don't know where they are, and the possibility that they got the town wrong. Bignole 23:10, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

The Iguazu Falls are in Argentina, in the state (provincia in spannish) of Misiones. You can check the information here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iguazu_Falls)

Reverting Edits

For those who believe they own this topic let me explain something to you. YOU DONT!!

Millions of users world wide view Wikipedia, many thousands feel a need to update and improve articles. Unless an article is obviously Vandalised (see Wikipedia policy on what constitutes true vandalism,)then you have no right to arbitrarily revert someone elses work.

If you don't agree with the edit/change then you should post your concerns here in the discussion page or open a dialog with the user responsible. Always try to come to an agreement on the edit and your reason for objecting to it.

If you can't agree then get the other users of this page to decide via the Discussion Page or have one of the WikiPedia Moderators decide. Wikipedia is a Democracy not a Dictatorship.

In any case, no one owns these pages, no one has the right to delete someone elses work and no one decides how a page should look, how long an article should be, how many links it should have, and how many times a link can be done.

These things do not have set rules in Wikipedia and just because you have your own set of rules does not meen others must follow your rules.

Have some patience with new users and don't be a bully with these articles. If someones work makes the artice more informative then leave it alone. Just because you have links earlier on other pages, doesn't meen they can't be linked again. Not everyone follows this topic from the beginning. Some users appreciate links in articles even if they have been repeated from others on previous pages.

Links don't hurt, they only make the Wikipedia experience more enjoyable for all. So before you just delete the work of others, think how you would like it if someone deleted your work.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.49.235.50 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
Wikipedia is not a Democracy.
Wikipedia does not have moderators.
Wikpedia does have guidelines on article size.
Wikipedia does have guidelines on how many times a term should be linked. CovenantD 07:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't mix your comments in with another editors. Leave them after and be sure to sign your comments. CovenantD 07:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Let's get one thing straight Anon, WIKIPEDIA IS NOT WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and as such has rules and regulations that guide it. When you do not follow those you either get reverted or blocked. You ignored the rules when you linked everything on the "Wither" episode, even after someone explained that you were wrong in your edits. It wasn't your edit that got you blocked it was your repeated behavior at reverting something you were informed was wrong. Second, plot summaries are not substitutions for watching the episode. If you want to read every detail of an episode I suggest you go to Wikia-Smallville and read it there, or write it there if you want to do that. But, if you continue to claim ignorance of Wikipedia policy reguarding fictional articles then you will continue to be reverted. Bignole 11:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I've restored these comments since they were blanked, although I would ask that everyone try to remain civil about this.... If there is something that can't be resolved by talking to each other, I would suggest you look at dispute resolution instead. Hopefully you will be able to reach an understanding. -dougk (Talk ˑ Contribs) 06:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Bignole Comments about Sunlight and Episode Sneeze

It's highly unlikely he would have been "still week from the Phantom Zone", because he wasn't weak from the Phantom Zone. The PZ just removed his powers, once back on Earth he had them back. It's known (even in this series) that he gets his powers from the Sun, and the fact that he does all of his rebuilding at night (i.e. no sun) means he cannot regenerate the energy he loses at night, especially since he continues to work to rebuild his own home. Even Superman has to rest, and the fact that he's constantly working is why he's drained of energy. Now, one could argue that he could have "caught" something in the PZ but it's never actually stated, just thrown in there as a possibility. Bignole 20:36, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

In reference to your edit comment "it's because he's doing it at night (i.e. no sunlight to recharge)", I don't think I can agree with you on that point.

1. I just re-watched the episode and it is clearly stated by Martha Kent that he probably has a cold due to his immune system being removed while he was in the phantom zone. Over exersion has worn him out leaving him now open for infection Quote Clark "I've never pushed myself this much".

2. Superman gets his abilities from his Kryptonian Heritage, which are super enhanced under a Yellow Sun environment. As the Earths atmosphere is radiated by the sun at all times (regardless of which side is facing it), working at night does not effect Supermans powers in any way. Superman does not get his powers from the sun.

3. Unlike Captain Planet - Superman does not need to "Re-Charge" , although in the new movie Superman Returns, this is alluded to in one scene, it is certainly not cannon.

Therefor the original line should stand as true.

Research Source: "Superman - Last Son Of Krypton" Elliot S Maggin, "Sneeze" - Smallville TV Episode NeilinOz

It's been established in almost every continuity that his has to recharge his powers at a certain point, it's the mere fact that he's always in the sun that you don't actually see him do the "Superman Returns" and fly up high to the Sun. As you quoted "I've never pushed myself that far before", thus that's saying he's never exerted that much of his abilities before, hence the "draining of his powers because there's no sunlight to recharge his abilities". He's like a solar powered being that just absorbs solar radation that it isn't like he's weak at night, it's just that if he over does it then he becomes weaker. Martha made a suggestion, she didn't say that was what it was, she said "possibly". Don't argue semantics with me. She was giving a possible reason for his cold. Also, you cannot pick what source your use for continuity (i.e. using Maggin and not others). Superman gets his abilities from the solar radiation of our Yellow Sun, that act to "super charge" his unique molecular structure. Go back and watch "Perry" and you'll see that Smallville established that the Yellow Sun is the means to which Clark get's his powers. Bignole 21:29, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Clark has to face Jor-El face to face, with each having powers. Clark Tries to ring Peter Ross but finds out Peter is in love with anotherman. Using reserch Clark finds out that Peter is in love with Jor-El. Chloe says Peter is cursed but is that true... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.175.247 (talk) 08:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

As one of the writers of the Superman Comics and the Author of 2 brilliant books featuring Superman, I would say that Maggin is an authority on Superman and his abilities and therfor a perfect source from which to research. As a person who has read just about every Superman comic ever published and a major fan of this character for over 35 years, I can say with some authority that it has never been "established in almost every continuity that his has to recharge his powers at a certain point". Anyway, your comment "Don't argue semantics with me" shows that you feel this is an argument rather than a discussion, and that you are taking it personally. Before this becomes offensive I will agree to disagree and leave it at that. NeilinOz

I wasn't taking anything personal. You were trying to say that what Martha said what a "fact" when it was a "possibility". You even quoted Clark as discussing "pushing his abilities this far" which is talk of "over exerting yourself". Now, you cannot quote canon from another source, seeing as Smallville is its own source. You cannot begin to assume that whatever "source" you choose as canon for Smallville will automatically work, seeing as Smallville is writing its own version. Having been a writer of Superman comics and author of (what YOU deem as brilliant books) does not make him an authority about what IS or ISN'T current canon (especially when it has no grounds in this discussion seeing as Smallville, again, is writing its own continuity). What is current in the Superman world of comics is what is "Superman's continuity", it doesn't matter if Maggin wrote the best Supe novels around, if they are considered current canon then it doesn't matter (even so, that's SUPERMAN comics that YOU are quoting, not Smallville the television show). What has been established on the show is that Clark get's his abilities from the Sun. Martha made a suggestion (which if you read is incorporated into the sentence, but since it isn't fact you can only go with what is actually there..sorry no assumptions) and write it as such. The fact is that he's been working day and night, he's over exhausting his body and powers with no rest, and there is a "possibility" that he could have contracted something from the PZ. Bignole 22:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. The way it reads at the moment is fine. NeilinOz

Music

Can someone with some spare time and google powers put the music featured on each episode, as has been done before on other seasons? thanks Lue3378 07:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Episode Glitches

Watching the episode Static, I can't seem to forget noticing that in the battle between Lex and Static the knife was on the floor before frequencies were shifted prior to Static actually being stabbed. IMHO, it seems like a blooper in the episode that the knife was accessible after the frequency shifting even though no one was holding it before and/or after the frequency shift had occurred. This is can be further witnessed by noting that during all other frequency shifts, objects were only shifted if they were held by someone. Anyone else notice this? Localhost 03:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Bronson wasn't holding anyone, he was dead, and he came through. I think it's one of those suspension of disbeliefs in the fact that "anything" residing in another "frequency" that didn't originate in the "frequency" is forced to revert back when Jimmy pulled them all through. Bignole 03:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

In the first episode, 39mins. 15secs in, Martha Kent has a small suture over her right eye, which then switches to over her left eye, then back to over her right eye. (171.100.219.82 (talk) 12:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC))

Other areas

When is series 6 coming to the UK/Australia e.t.c For all the non-American fans I think the dates should be added. Although I don't know them myself if anyone else does...please and thank you.Bendragonbrown47 21:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean "coming to the UK". Are you referring to your airdates for each episode, or are you referring to DVD releases? Bignole 22:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

AFI song on Subterranean

I went ahead and put the AFI song on the passage for yesterday's episode the same way songs have been listed for season 5. 64.119.53.133 05:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is this season's page so different from the rest?

The summaries are getting longer and longer, and practically incorporating everything from each episode, down to what happens in the last minute of the episode. This is different from the other seasons' pages where generally just a short summary is written about the overall premise of the episode. Why is there such a difference, and should that be changed or should it just be left like this? 199.111.214.227 22:36, 11 December 2006(UTC)

This season is different in that it has more story arcs, with multiple characters, all happening at once. Normally it's just one or two arcs over the whole season. This season we have Green Arrow, Phantom Zone criminals, Lex and Lana, Lana and Clark, Lois and Oliver, Chloe and Jimmy, Lionel and Martha, the black box, the fortress being rebuilt. I'm sure that they will be trimmed again. Bignole

I don't see how that differs much from the amount of things that have already been going on. There was only one episode this season which had two separate story arcs in the same episode that would entail a longer description (Static). Otherwise there shouldn't be any reason people should be writing exhaustive summaries that are uncharacteristic of what has been presented on this site. I just wanted to know if this page was going to remain this way or if at some future point we should trim it down to make it more concise. 199.111.214.227 02:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

No, the Lex/Lana arc has been playing out almost every episode, and whenever there is Oliver there will be Lois. Fallout had several arcs going on, Raya back, the black box, a Phantom Zone criminal seeks out Clark. And again, they'll be trimmed again toward the end. It's usually easier to put what you can in and then go back and trim later. If there are things you think shouldn't be mentioned feel free to go in and trim yourself. Bignole 02:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Raya, the black box, Lex and Lana fighting over the box, and Baern are all connected together. What I was saying was Static appears to be the only episode this season with two distinctive story arcs that would require explanations on two different fronts. Anyway, there is obviously a lot going on this season, especially with getting into the new superhero stuff and all. I just wanted to know if we should begin trimming these articles of the nuances and complete episode synopses which I've started on a few.

Well you're doing it now so there's no reason to wait. Bignole

Protection

This page seems to protected? How come, and when will it get taken down? Davey4 14:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protection was invoked on January 2 because anonymous editors were continually adding advance plot details which could only have been plagiarized from other web sites (since the episodes in question had not yet been aired). Repeated pleas for people to stop doing this were simply ignored — or possibly never even noticed by those involved. Richwales 15:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

ADD

Add fi:Smallville (6. tuotantokausi) on article! so: add fi:Smallville (6. tuotantokausi) in article! --80.221.124.22 18:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Taken care of. Bignole 18:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

UK Air Date

Anyone got any knowledge of a UK air date? UltimateNagash 15:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Episode Titles Linking to Outside WikiProject

Could somebody please explain to me why each episode title from this particular page links to an independent wiki project located at http://smallville.wikia.com? I'm not sure if it's just me, but isn't it quite inappropriate for a Wikipedia article to link to an outside source within the article, especially when readers would be expecting to be directed to another Wikipedia page? Equally disturbing is the fact that summaries available on the aforementioned site blatantly plagarize information directly from http://www.cwtv.com Please voice your opinion on this, because I'm currently baffled how such a thing could have come to pass on Wikipedia. All the while, I may be missing something. If that's the case, please enlighten me on this subject... Homologeo 11:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

That's the way it was done awhile ago, but the other season pages have had it removed. The removal came mid-sixth season, so when people created the temps for the final episodes they just followed what had previously been done.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

So, should the links be also removed from this page? I don't want to start removing so many links until it's clear that this is what the Wikipedia community would support. Also, it turns out that links to http://smallville.wikia.com fill the Wikipedia pages for both Smallville Season 2 and 4. Homologeo 11:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I thought they all had been done. Yes, you should remove the links. I thought they had all been done and a "wikia" link was placed at the bottom of the page for each season...hmm. Anyway, per WP:HEAD, we shouldn't link in the headers. A bunch of us didn't know that when we started it, it was meant as a way to encourage the type of pages that were created for individual episodes (see:Hothead (Smallville episode)) to be created on a wikia, because all of the individual episode pages are nothing but plots and random trivia (unverified trivia at that), with no actual encyclopedic content in them. It was best served on a Wikia. Anyway, you grab this season, I'll jump over to Season 2, and whoever is done first can grab the others.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I took care of them all.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Quick work! Bravo =) I'll try to keep up with you next time.Homologeo 12:36, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

It's the early morning, I just got to work...I have nothing else to do, that's why I did it so fast. lol.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 12:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I think its all well and good that you removed the links to an outside source, but at the same time, you should have made new pages with the full episode summaries just like they were.

New pages of what? episodes articles? Wikipedia is not a substitution for watching an episode. These summaries are too long as it is. There is no critical commentary on any of them.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 10:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The Simpsons has articles for each episode. Wrad 16:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

And they shouldn't. Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Episodes and Wikipedia:Television episodes tell you how you should go about it. They also say avoid doing mass AfDs for television episodes. So they fact that they exist is wrong (for probably 90% of them, because I'm sure there are a few notable episodes), but other than posting a merger tag on the series page, you'll probably never get rid of them. There are too many people that run that series of pages, and they probably shouldn't let you get away with it. Even if you are right. I personally have no problem running AfDs on Smallville episodes, because I don't want this series of articles to turn into that. They are a wasts of mainspace, because they are nothing but plots and trivia, two things that Wikipedia is not about (Wiki doesn't want overly long plots or trivia sections).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I we did it, we'd have to be careful. Simpsons' episode are actually quite good, and many of them have a GA rating. Apparently they've found a way to do it right. Wrad 16:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

First, being GA doesn't mean anything other than someone thought the page was satisfactory. Anyone can promote an article to GA. Compared The Crepes of Wrath to Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire. The latter is GA, and its the pilot. It has production information, the first one has only trivia. I don't want to get into creating 131 pages (41 already exist as is) that have nothing but plot and trivia attached, because no one bothered to find production information. The method of work should be focus on the main article, then focus on the derivative articles (list or seasons; in this case it would be season), then focus on individual episode articles. The problem lies in the fact that if you put all of the encyclopedic content of an entire season of almost any show, you could, most likely, easily fit it on one article. Which is what I'm doing (see User:Bignole/Smallville seasons) first. I'm working on enhancing the season pages, and if there seems to be a lot of info on a particular episode, then I'll work up an episode article. Another problem is that it being television, there aren't a lot of reasons to "review" it. You'll probably find notable reviews for the pilot, the finales, or a big episode (like the 100th episode), but not for joe-schmo episode number 7.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Episode Titles

Why do they no longer have the hyper link? {[Supermike|supermike}]

Because, per WP:HEAD you don't link inside headers.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Huh? But I like the Travel and the other stuff these is bullpop supermike

How long till the Episode Titles

are fix come on stop screwing the smallville page supermike

I have no idea what you are asking.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

when you click on the title of the episode it take you to the episode page I want it back supermike

There are no episode pages for Season 6. If you are refering to the title page taking to an episode page in Smallville Wikia (an external site), then the link to Wikia is at the bottom of the article.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

LOOK all I want to do is click on the episode titles and read the stuff inside ALL the other shows wikia page do it why can't smallville why does the page keep getting screw with supermike

Go to the bottom of the page. Click the link for Smallville Season 5 Wikia, and then traverse all the episodes you like.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Jor-El as a recurring character

Why is Jor-El listed as a recurring character? He's only in 1 ep.

Because he's a recurring character for the entire series. It doesn't matter if he doesn't show up in many episodes, his character has made a steady appearance since season 2.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

...Yeah, but this page is for season 6 only. The table for recurring characters is for recurring characters in THIS season; or else you would have to add all character who have been recurring since season 1. Why can't you just delete him. He's not a recurring character in season 6.

He's recurring for the show, it doesn't matter if he only happens to show up for one episode in one of the seasons though. If he was a one episode a season guest, then he'd be a "special guest", but this is the first season that he only made one appearance. The character of Roger Nixon was a recurring guest star, but he only made one appearance in season two, and that was the premiere, when he died. It was still part of his run as a recurring guest star for the show. Why would we list people that are recurring if they don't show up in the season? He showed up. If a reader is visiting the season six page, they've either visited the other pages, or they know the show already anyway. He's a recurring guest for the entire series, and he had one appearance in season six. His recurring guest position doesn't change, it just happened to be limited this season.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's true, but this page is for season 6. We don't need to know which characters have been recurring throughout the whole show and that are on this season, but rather the main recurring characters in THIS season. If there is a section for recurring character of the whole series, then he would go under that heading, but he is not a recurring character for season 6. This page is for season 6 only, we don't need to know that he has been a recurring character for the whole series. If looks at the season 6 page, they'll want to see the main recurring characters of that season. Maybe you could add a newsubheading for Jor-El, because I don't think he belongs to where he currently is.

The section is called "Recurring guests", not "Recurring guest for season six alone". Anyone visiting season six is probably already familiar with the series anyway. It isn't like someone is going to go "hey, how come he gets mentioned when he appeared only once"? The reason being, he's appeared regularly each season, he is an established recurring guest, this season just happened to be that he was only used once. It's "Recurring guests" nor "Special guests". The fact that he was used once is irrelevant to the fact that he was already established as a recurring guest. If he only appeared in one episode a season, since his introduction, then yes, I wouldn't think he should be mentioned. But so far, this is just a random season that happened to not use him.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 10:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

...Yes but that is exactly my point, this page is for Season 6. The recurring guests is for those who are recurring for season 6. If there was a table for all characters, then you would say Jor-El has been recurring from season 2-6, but you wouldn't say he has been recurring IN season 6. That's the difference. ...If anyone else has an opinion please feel free to add.

No, the "Recurring guests" section are for recurring guests that appear in season six, not for recurring guests of season six alone. I understand your point, but at this time he is a recurring guest. Sarah Jane Redman wasn't listed from her appearance in "Promise" because she hasn't appeared on the show for several seasons. Terence Stamp has been consistently on the show since season 2, his episode count just varies.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

...I really don't agree, but I will go along with what you say because if I delete Jor-El, you'll just bring him back and it will be a really annoying cycle. So fine, leave Jor-El as a recurring character, I really don't care anymore.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Smallville (season 6). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090207104230/http://www.visualeffectssociety.com/downloads/NomineesPressRelease2008.pdf to http://www.visualeffectssociety.com/downloads/NomineesPressRelease2008.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Smallville (season 6). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080506091718/http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3ia86f2344390974364713657828f73244 to http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3ia86f2344390974364713657828f73244

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:07, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Smallville (season 6). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090209123632/http://leoawards.com/winners_2007.html to http://www.leoawards.com/winners_2007.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707173509/http://www.ascmag.com/news/awards/awards_history.php to http://www.ascmag.com/news/awards/awards_history.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:57, 18 September 2017 (UTC)