Talk:The Colony (American TV series) season 2

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 July 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	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.

Article naming

Since the first season article (The_Colony_(2009_TV_series)) actually incorporates information about the entire series as well as the first season specifically, I suggest creating a top level The_Colony_(U.S._TV_series) and moving The_Colony_(2009_TV_series) to The_Colony_(U.S._TV_series)_season_1. Coreyob (talk) 01:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, having one page for The TV series and then a List of Episodes like normal tv show pages have is more ideal and doesn't depart from the norm. -- (Mrja84 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 18:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Information is NOT right about episode 1

Where's the source for that info? I know that the situation wasn't sleep deprivation for sure. The projects list is missing.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. Unlike the first reason, they did not show any sort of "phase list" on the screen. They even skipped ahead more quickly as a way to get information out that was key in the first season (eg: the water filtration system which took up only about 2 minutes of screen time). This information, visible on the screen as each phase began, is a key reason the first season's article is so large. Placed here, it's of a more assumed fashion and may not fit here at all which, in turn, my mean this article could or should be relatively short when compared with the first. If it ends up too short by the end of the season because there would be little to no room for expansion, the seasons might be merged back as one article. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 18:52, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Judegmental Comments

The article showed “He is the most levelheaded person of the group who defuses arguments within the group before they turn violent.” I have taken out “is the most levelheaded person of the group who” and made it “He defuses arguments within the group before they turn violent.” as calling him levelheaded is a judgment (and one I REALLY disagree with, since he screwed up so badly by falling asleep on watch- he‘s EXTREMEMLY lucky Gunnery Sergeant TICKNOR wasn’t part of the colony yet).174.25.121.131 (talk) 05:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)A REDDSON[reply]

The Ending

I found it confusing that this was the last episode and intended as a sort of cliff hangar. I grant that the colonists had no capability to secure both their old and new locations. And the house they were aiming for seemed to lack a lot of the infrastructure they had built up, such as a source of electricity. But it would appear they are now is a nearly hopeless situation. Seems there should have been another episode. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.26.207 (talk) 21:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, is there a source that the 10th episode is the last of the season? tedder (talk) 04:41, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know that my word isn't good enough to be used as a source (though I am not sure why a source is needed), but the commercial for the final episode states that it is the finale, and from the very start they mention "50 days" and it was day 50 when they left for the new location. As for it being a cliffhanger, it was likely negatively designed to show that things don't always work out for the best since the first season ended in such a positive way. Consider this (sorry this is so long): the show (both seasons) were likely less "reality" and more "experiment." They may have not been able to eat as much and did have to fight back to at least keep from being pepper sprayed, but for the details, the production team could have told them their projects for the day just to see if they could do them unsure of the results. ("Ok, today you need to build a source of power," "now you need to find a way to get food," "now you need to find a better way to explore," "tonight you may be attacked," "this place is getting dangerous so you need to find a new place to live.") They built a motorcycle that they only used once finding only one building worth entering, a smoker that they only used once or twice, a metal forge that they only used a few times, a water filtration system in the exact same way as the first season (thank goodness someone knew how to do that or they'd have to boil all of their water taking up lots of fuel, right?). Tick shows up providing a feast that he supposedly caught himself within the area, but they never eat nearly as well again (his trapping skills must have failed suddenly). They raid the other colony who don't immediately pursue even though they are now weighed down with heavy containers and have to travel two hours back home. They leave the drop-off point with the home being blown up by a special-effects-quality fireball that was captured on three cameras including one that captures the running colonists at the same moment as the explosion with this act adding emphasis to the point that they can't go back there, and then end up discovering their new location is compromised, leaving their fate in question. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 06:03, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously it was all scripted, sometimes in a rather lame way. Mentioning that it had plenty of scripted events in the article, would be a valid addition. Dream Focus 00:33, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was also very confused and thought there would be more episodes. According to the Discovery Channel website though, there are only 10 http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/colony/episodes/colony.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Floydofoz (talk • contribs) 18:24, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Screams and pounding

[1] That did in fact happen. But they didn't explain it at all. It does seem rather unusual. What else could the sounds be? Perhaps mention it, but say there was no explanation given. Dream Focus 17:45, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute?

There aren't that many blue links in the article. I don't see as how any of them are inappropriate to have. It is not a "sea of blue". Two editors have reverted your removal of links so far. You are the only one that wants them removed. More opinions would be welcomed here. Dream Focus 18:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I was excessive in removing all of 97.87.29.188 / 108.73.113.13 links from the talk page, but some of them are absurd, or clearly overlinking. To begin with, that editor (yes, it's only one) believes in WP:Wikilinking any word that comes to mind, even in edit summaries. Specific examples of overlinking follow:

Militia (United States) is not the appropriate link for "militia"; as far as I can tell, it's actually an army of a temporary government (in the absence of a real government), rather than any of the definitions in militia or [[militia (United States).
homeschooling is both a bit obvious, and not necessarily what the writers had in mind.
Pilot licensing and certification is completely inappropriate, pilot's license, or perhaps [[pilot's license|pilot's license]] (do not follow any redirect) might be better.
The Red Cross is clearly the American Red Cross, rather than the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
bayou, if linked, should be linked at the first occurance, and have Consistent Capitalization.
" Fuel: Michel begins to build a [[Distillation|distiller]] that will be used to [[Fermentation (biochemistry)|ferment]] [[yeast]] and other chemicals to [[Ethanol fermentation|create ethanol]] to [[Ethanol fuel|power]] the escape boat<nowiki>." is extremely overlinked, and <nowiki>[[Ethanol fuel|power]] is just wrong. There's no reason to have both Fermentation and Ethanol fermentation linked in the same sentence.
I don't know if body language matches the writers' intent, but I probably shouldn't have reverted that one.

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these concerns are being dealt with by User:Dream Focus. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noticed some problems and fixed them already. You should fix incorrect links not try to remove them entirely. Dream Focus 18:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It links to Fermentation (biochemistry) not Fermentation. Dream Focus 18:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ethanol fermentation is a subarticle of fermentation (biochemistry); they shouldn't both appear in the same sentence without a specific reason. Perhaps an improved version would be:
Michel begins to build a [[distiller]] that will be used to [[Ethanol fermentation)|ferment]] [[yeast]] and other chemicals to create ethanol to power the escape boat.

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is it the American Red Cross and not the international red cross though? He might travel and help people in other nations. The official website just says "Red Cross disaster volunteer". And it is the same organization isn't it? Dream Focus 18:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The American Red Cross is a national affiliate of the International Red Cross, but I've never heard of a project being done by more than one national affiliate at a time. The logos are not identical. I suppose it's possible that he's with a foreign affiliate, but the international organization is supposed to coordinate through the local one, if there is one. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It says "Pilot's license" now, and links to where Pilot's license redirects to, which is Pilot licensing and certification. Dream Focus 18:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It would be better if it were left as a link to the redirect. The bot which follows redirects violates guidelines. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why link to a redirect page? That doesn't make sense. For years now people and bots have eliminated unnecessary redirects, updating links to the proper article. What guideline do you believe is being violated? Dream Focus 19:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTBROKEN. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. I was unaware of that. I believe a bot has done that to thousands/millions of articles. No problem changing that then. Doesn't seem to matter, since most people won't notice anyway, and they get to the same place in the end. Dream Focus 20:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

homeschooling is illegal in most countries. Some readers might not know what that is. So a link is appropriate. Dream Focus 18:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]