Talk:Stargate SG-1 season 7

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Episode coverage / Stargate

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article is supported by the Stargate task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Older versions of episode articles before their redirect here

For merging, transwikiing, etc.

– sgeureka ^t•c 22:38, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lost City merger

There seems to be enough real-world context (albeit sourcing could improve) for the episode that merging doesn't seem to be the best of ideas at this time, IMO. Doniago (talk) 18:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lost city was one both a finale and the spinoff point for Stargate Atlantis. I would expect there to be adequate sourcing to meet the GNG. Jclemens (talk) 01:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Those two reasons make it notable. It was also nominated for two notable awards. Dream Focus 17:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Episode titles in regards to two parters

I think that there should be some way to indicate if an episode of Stargate SG-1 is part of a two or three parter. At first I was putting Part 1, Part 2 or Part 3 after the respective episode title but various unregistered users didn't like that idea and reverted my edits because that's not what it said on the screen. I think it's helpful for myself and other people to know when they're coming across a two or three parter before they watch it. Pinging Doniago since he reverted one of my edits regarding this matter. I'm open to any ideas anyone might have. 74thClarkBarHG (talk) 01:02, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the episode titles should be those officially used. If the episode is a continuation of a prior episode, that can be mentioned in the summary easily enough. Willing to hear from other editors on the matter, of course. DonIago (talk) 07:16, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For this, and other seasons where this applies, there should be no deadly problem with the addition of (Part X). The episodes are generally broken into two parts in the original airings (sometimes months apart), as compared to a two hour special that is broken into parts only for later replay. The one exception is given different episode numbers, so still not a terrible indignity to use the helpful (part X) adder. Would suggest using lowercase "p" in all examples, so that it is shown as (part X). Would suggest putting (part X) outside the quotation marks, if they are not in the official title of the show - but, again, do not see a problem with the helpful application of (part X). In keeping with seasons where multi-part episode titles are in bold, would also apply that extra touch on the these titles, including the (part X) portion itself. Covering this in the summary is logical, but does not, for example, help in the article List of Stargate SG-1 episodes, where it would simply look like a typo. Thoughts? Jmg38 (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]