Talk:The X-Files/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Initial message

The photo on the X-Files page seems to have disappeared. We've seen this on a couple of other pages lately, presumably due to all the server troubles and file moves, so we just re-uploaded the original photo with the same name and dimensions. Is the uploader of the original photo still around? — B.Bryant 04:25, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

External link

The website for foxhome.com seems to be a commercial site with little or no information relevant to wikipedia X-files page. JWSchmidt 20:41, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Morley

The cigarette brand of The X-Files' character Cancer Man. Obvious similarities to Marlboro.

Agent Monica Reyes also happens to smoke Light versions of the same cigarette brand. Not sure if this has any symbolic significance.

Clueless 08:50, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Major edit and revert

I think that the edit reverted here had a lot of merit. There were some POV problems, but I believe those could have been corrected without removing all the text added. I'm going to restore the edit soon and attempt to bring it to a NPOV unless someone responds with a good reason not to.

Acegikmo1 21:27, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I agree. I was going to do a re-write - but reverted it in order to have the original more NPOV to add information to. Wikipedia banned my IP (someone in my apt. complex is a bit of a vandal, I think) so I didn't get a chance to re-work it. There was definite potential, but the language was not encyclopedic or NPOV. Apologies for not managing to clearly state my intention with the reversion. --Abqwildcat 22:33, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I generally like to leave a POV edit intact and attempt to remove the POV. But if you prefer removing the edit and then re-writing the article with the information it contained (minus POV), that's cool as well. Are you still planning the re-write?

Acegikmo1 22:54, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Be my guest. I hadn't started on it as of yet and don't have a strong desire to do it myself. Good luck with the editing, if you want to do it. --Abqwildcat 23:10, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

All right, I shall. Thanks. Acegikmo1 23:44, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Why does the above refer us to http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/signon/sl.pl?u=40f44785f2b516ed219e83194ad1279f ? What edit are we really talking about here?

Lovecraft Inspiration?

A website I stumbled across yesterday has posited a very interesting theory; namely, that the root theme of the X-Files series seems to have been inspired by the root theme of the fictional stories of American writer H.P. Lovecraft. Here is a quote from that website, and the source link:

On TV, that zeitgeist-tapping program of the '90s, The X-Files, bears the unmistakable stamp of Lovecraft upon it like the mark of Cain or the "Innsmouth look" of "The Shadow over Innsmouth," complete with bloodthirsty cults, rural degenerates, sanity-destroying horrors and overall vision of humanity as unknowing puppets of malign alien influences. The X-Files also shares Lovecraft's device (innovative in its time) of setting a series of otherwise unrelated stories against a fully developed artificial mythology with an internally consistent set of references.

In particular, Fox Mulder's New England patrician origins, strange phobias and warped, stunted sexuality make him a very Lovecraftian protagonist, though the FBI agent's dogged pursuit of knowledge is out of keeping with Lovecraft's assertion that some facts are better left not pondered by human minds.

Compare The X-Files' famous catch phrase, "The Truth is out there," with Lovecraft's statement that opens "The Call of Cthulhu": "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far."

Source: http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/01.02.97/cover/horror1-9701.html (it's about halfway down the page)

It's an interesting theory, however I am unsure as to whether it's relevant (or the examples agreeable) enough to paraphrase and add to the article. What do the rest of you think? --Cormac Canales 23:51, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

First, I just want to say that I'm not sure whether this would be appropriate to add to the article. It seems like more of an opinion/essay thing than simple facts. Let's see what other people think.

In any case, I do think it's a rather interesting theory (except for the part about Mulder's "warped, stunted sexuality"... I don't know why you think that about him. Perhaps I just haven't watched enough of the series?). In addition to what you quoted out of "The Call of Cthulhu", recall the dialog between Mulder and Scully at the very end of the series, at the end of The Truth (9x20) (see Scene 29 in this transcript). Mulder, having finally found the "Truth" about the alien conspiracy, despairingly admits that he feels helpless and hopeless because of the very answers his lifelong search uncovered, which seems to be just what Lovecraft said.

But the series does finally end on a more hopeful note, with the characters believing that perhaps there is a greater "Truth" not yet uncovered, of greater powers able to change a destiny seemingly set in stone. It is only this blind faith -- which some might call ignorance -- that allows the characters to finally whisper, "Maybe there's hope."

Clueless 08:45, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Separate pages for individual seasons

I must say that I don't like the idea of individual separate pages for the individual seasons. Seven of the nine pages simply list the episodes that were aired in the season; this information is presented in List of episodes of The X-Files. Of those that do, one (The X-Files (season 5)) contains a tiny bit of information on one episode and a decent chunk of information on another but nothing else. The other, The X-Files (season 1), gives a fairly in-depth analysis of the first five episodes and then stops. The biggest problem with this setup (other than the clumsy layout) is that it is totally inconsistent with episode information for other series (e.g. Star Trek: Enterprise, Stargate SG-1 etc.). It also goes against the nascent policies on being fleshed out at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Television.

I propose the following:

1. The seven content-free season pages be deleted.
2. The content about individual episodes be moved to separate articles about those episodes. Such articles will be linked from the list of episodes (and possibly from the main page if they're significant enough).

If no-one objects, I will begin implementing the proposal in a few days.

Sincerely,

Acegikmo1 02:55, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Single articles for each episode are invariably always stubs. Keeping in mind that at any time in the future they can be split off, I recommend using the season pages. They can offer a way to guarantee consistency between each episode, and involve a heck-of-a-lot-less page jumping for the reader. I myself, if I was a fan, would prefer to read the summaries one after another, maybe even print it out or link to it from outside. Recommend going in that direction... and even moving other TV shows towards that. -- Netoholic @ 20:50, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I must respectfully diagree. In my experience at least, articles on individual episodes are usually full articles. For example, most of the episode articles listed on List of Star Trek: Enterprise episodes or List of Star Trek TNG episodes are not stubs. Instead they are relativly long articles that would not be suited for combination into pages by season. Although this isn't the case yet for The X-Files, my guess is that eventually people will write fairly long descriptions about the important episodes and the by season format will become cluttered and unnavigable. It's also worth noting that no other TV series (that I know of) uses the by season format for episode list articles.

I think that there's a bigger problem than consistency and navigation though. Most of the season pages have absolutely no content. Everything in The X-Files (season 9) (and most of the other season pages) is dublicated in more consise format at List of episodes of The X-Files. As such, the pages are unnecessary. Moreover, the articles are not properly named. If the articles actually described the significance and plot developments that occurred during a specific season, I think that they would be very useful (much could be said about The X-Files (season 3), for example). But they don't do that. As such I'm really failing to see their usefulness.

Sincerely,

Acegikmo1 21:31, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Before taking any steps, I recommend taking a look at the season pages from Futurama (Futurama (TV series)#Season details) as being an excellent example of this system being successfully implemented. Each episode summary has about as much information as each Star Trek example you cited. Remember too, episode summaries are just that, summaries. When you try and expand too much, it can become more like IMDB than an encyclopedia. -- Netoholic @ 22:25, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree that the system you are using works well for Futurama. However, the Futurama summaries are significantly shorter than most Star Trek episode pages. There are also fewer episodes per season for Futurama than for Star Trek or The X-Files.

Nevertheless, I think that since the summaries that have been written so far are generally short, keeping the seasonal format is acceptable. However, I propose that all content-free pages (e.g. all except for The X-Files (season 1) and The X-Files (season 5)) be redirects to List of episodes of The X-Files unless and until some summaries are written. I also think that if the information for a single episode gets to the length of, say, "All Good Things...", it should be split off into its own article. I would expect that this would happen for "significant" episodes (like "Anasazi" or "Paper Clip"). Can we agree on this as a compromise solution?

Acegikmo1 23:15, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Individual season pages

I have updated with small synopses for seasons 1 through 6, and seasons 8 and 9. I will do 7 in the near future, once I have watched them all.

I have also updated the recurring cast list on the main page, and have put links to well-known guest casts in the episodes concerned. Hope that's okay. :)

Daydream believer2 08:42, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

Fight the Future

I don't think the general reaction to the film was really as universally negative as the article portrays. I can certainly say that as a longtime fan I enjoyed it, I saw it with someone who'd never watched the show and she enjoyed it and subsequently became a fan. I've talked to several other people who had similar experiences. Moreover, I've rarely heard the criticism related to Oklahoma City, and would like to get a source for that. I think anyone who can draw the distinction between reality and fiction can tell that the bombing in FtF was a fictional event. By that standard X-Files itself should be criticized for implying that the government is hiding the truth about the existence of extraterrestrials. It certainly was similar in that it was a bombing, but that's pretty much it. Can we get some more info on these issues surrounding the film?--Xinoph 04:17, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

As far as the reason for the rating decline, making the movie plot so integrated with the show's plot was what made me stop watching. I and other fans hadn't seen the movie and so I couldn't understand the first few episodes of the new season and stopped watching. Everyone I know who saw the movie did like it. Anyway sources for the "fan reactions" need to be cited immediately instead of these weasel words like "many fans". The person who wrote that or others can probably find a news article or something to claim as a source! --Sketchee 11:31, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

what now, the film was quite profitable or domestic box office was substantially less than what the studio spent ?! --S.

"ratings decline" section

This entire section should be removed due to extreme POV-ness. If no one objects within a few days, I will remove it. An objective section about the show's ratings over the nine seasons would be appreciated, though. Taco Deposit | Talk-o Deposit 04:25, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

No opposition here; remove it. -DH 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Season Eight POV content

The parenthetical comment "(though this was less the fault of the actors than the way the characters were written)" is not NPOV and should be removed.

--Kelly Martin 05:19, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

Krycek

Should Krycek really be under the cast as opposed to guest stars?

Success of the X-Files

The Success of the X-Files is based on the fact that the stories are real!

For Proof: There is one episode concerning a fanatic sect around a wargod priest
believing to be praying to the Allmighty God.
The setting: A small white Church.
Fanatics(of A Wargod NOT the Allmighty)
danceing with snakes(mistaken for a symbol of sin in their mythology)
around their necks.

If you people search for that episode plz add the season and title
thanks in advance
--62.206.114.179 00:45, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)Jan Girke, Germany, Berlin

The episode you are looking for is called "Signs and Wonders" and it was in season 7. -- Bill the Greek 12:19, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Krycek

I do believe Krycek should remain in the cast list, because he was - at times - credited as "Also Starring" which is the same reason that William B. Davis is there, for example. As such, he was treated as a main cast member but was not added into the credits both to save money on designing a new credits sequence, and because of his less-than-regular appearances.

Spoilers?

It seems like it might be appropriate to post a spoiler warning somewhere, as this certainly reveals plot details. Notthe9 07:05, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Thoughts

I have breathed upon the article, and tried to give it a polish. I watched the first few series on and off, and quite enjoyed the show. In the UK, it seemed to catch the public mood, what with the UFOs and mentions of Roswell, and its subsequent decline, long after I ceased bothering about it, is quite hard to encapsulate in an encyclopaedia article; like the old Batman TV series, it passed like a summer breeze. Now that the heat has died down the show should be easier to write about.

My further thoughts. The main text has no significant mention of either Walter Skinner or the Cigarette Smoking Man - I remember them being quite important cast members; perhaps someone could trim the opening paragraphs and write a short 'Major Characters' section at the top. Understandably for something so trivial, there are a lot of 'some sources argue' and 'it could be said that' assertions. The article was, until I had a go at it, split into present and past tenses. There was a section which lauded the work of producers Glen Morgan and James Wong; perhaps they were crucial elements of the show's success, but the article shouldn't read like a bitter tirade. I know science fiction fans, I know how they think. I could have gone down that path myself.-Ashley Pomeroy 20:54, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Disgruntled ex-fan

I have cleaned up a lot of the POV whining I could find. Most stems from an edit made almost a year ago by disgruntled ex-fan 24.193.202.119. (See [1]) Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco July 9, 2005 19:22 (UTC)