Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Heroes task force/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Television. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

The Company

I see an article has been made for Primatech, but I personally feel that it should serve as a subsidiary portion of a greater article detailing "The Company" itself. Perhaps a listing of known employees of The Company, both past and present, and what roles they serve(d), if known. There could also be a section detailing any other front organizations that become known. We already know of Primatech, and from the information gained in Company Man, we know that Kaito Nakamura has at least worked for them in the past, so there is reason to believe that we will learn that his organization serves as a front, as well. Granted, we know little of The Company, but I believe we know enough, both through information from the series and the graphic novels, to warrant an article. Windmillninja 21:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, no response means no negative response, so I went ahead and made one. It's not complete, yet, and I'm not about to start changing links. Anyone who wants to hop over there and make some possible structure/format suggestions, feel free. It's here. Windmillninja 04:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

multiple timelines/universes and status of characters.

hey, could a few people check out my comments and discuss them please? thanks. dposse 16:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternate Future (Heroes) : Nominated for Deletion.

This article has been nominated for deletion. Please discuss it at the AFD page. Thanks. dposse 19:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Character articles in need of condensing

Maybe it's just me: but most of them seem like massive guides to every appearance that the character has had. Wikipedia shouldn't be turned into character guides, due to the show being popular and so on. I understand a lot happens in Heroes: but that's no excuse to why most of the character articles are so huge. I wouldn't even want to imagine how big the articles would be, if Heroes was in a second or third season. In comparision (if you look at Lost character articles, for 3 seasons): they aren't massive guides to everything (from what I've seen at least). RobJ1981 05:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. However, what i'm worried about is someone will go overboard (see the Peter article). We do need to start condensing infomation, but we need to do it in such a way so it doesn't destroy the meaning of the artiicles. dposse 15:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Not just the character articles, but the episode articles, as well. They're all WAY too wordy. I plan on personally addressing this once the season is over and there's no more new content to keep up with. All it takes is a short gander at some of the episode articles for Lost (which has at least one Featured Article award under its belt) to see the direction we should be taking the scope of Heroes on Wikipedia. Windmillninja 04:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Powers

I notice a lot of the information in the "Powers" section of Heroes character's articles are directly pasted from HeroesWiki. What should we do aboutg this? EditingManiac (contribs) 13:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Major Cleanup Needed (Summer Project!)

Alright, Season 1 is officially in the books. We all have summer homework to do. Practically every single article related to Heroes is in need of major cleanup/condensing. We're looking like a bunch of amateurish fanboys, and that ain't cool. The Lost fans are laughing at us. Windmillninja 02:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree completely. I've already posted as much on the Heroes page and the List of Characters in Heroes page. But please, BEFORE ANYONE DECIDES TO TAKE THIS PROJECT ON, discuss things with the rest of us. Show us a plan of what you want to do. dposse 16:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Kirby Plaza nominated for Deletion

Kirby Plaza has been nominated for deletion. Please discuss it at the AFD page. Thanks. dposse 22:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Warning regarding episode articles

Hello... just a "heads up" of what may be an impending problem. In case you're not yet aware of this, TTN has embarked on a unilateral quest to eliminate single-episode articles. (See the AN/I report I filed here.) TTN's claim is that most television articles fail the "episode" guideline. However, there is considerable disagreement over TTN's methodology, which involves blanking every single episode for a series, and redirecting the empty pages to the "List of episodes" for that series. There is not attempt whatsoever to incorporate any of the deleted material into the episode list, nor is there any attempt to actually assess the article. TTN has already erased several dozen collections, and has many more lined up for deletion, including Scrubs and Red Dwarf. (TTN hasn't mentioned Heroes yet, but it is important to note that he/she has now stopped posting notices of impending deletions because it "isn't worth the effort". That's how Weeds articles died earlier today.)

How to approach this? Well, in a nutshell, get sources. Lots of them. This is a highly acclaimed series, with loads of respect among viewers and critics alike. Track down any and all information (verifiable, of course) about the individual episodes - critical reaction, producer/director/actor comments, relationship to the overall arc, etcetera. I'm not sure when the DVDs will be released, but if you've got one, listen to the commentaries and glean every useful, relevant bit of data you can from them. Look through other series articles, like the The Simpsons, and get ideas on how to flesh out our articles. (BTW, yelling at TTN won't work, and abuse won't do anything but get *you* blocked. The only solution is to pour your energy into the articles.)

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that is what is going on. Cheers. --Ckatz^chat _spy 05:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Episode coverage

The WikiProject Television episode coverage taskforce have recently been working on a review process for episode articles. There are a rash of articles about individual episodes which fail notability, and are unlikely to ever reach such requirements. Many contributors are unaware of the specific guidelines to assess notability in episode pages: Wikipedia:Television episodes. We have expanded these guidelines to make them more helpful and explanatory, and we invite you to read the guidelines, and make any comments on its talk page. After much discussion, we have created a proposed review process for dealing with problem articles. See: Wikipedia:Television article review process. We invite discussion of this process on its talk page. General comments about this whole process are welcome at the episode coverage taskforce talkpage. Thanks! Gwinva 10:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Episode coverage refering to later episodes

I've been reading some episode pages after seeing the first couple of shows. I noticed that they often contain small spoilers from episodes yet to come. By this I mean episodes that have aired and are covered in this great wiki project, but which the viewer may not have seen yet. I often read wiki pages for the shows I'm watching and usually they very neatly steer clear from spoilers on what's going to happen further on in the show. They rather focus on what's known thusfar, and what can be deduced from the information given in the episodes upto the one your reading about. I can't and won't edit any pages, but I'm interested in your viewpoints on this... PoofBird 21:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Episode Summaries and What Wikipedia is not

In 5 days (June 25, 2007) I will be redirecting any Heroes episode articles that do not have "real-world context and sourced analysis" as per WP:NOT#IINFO to List of Heroes episodes. Thank you. --Phirazo 17:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but that would be inappropriate. There is a process for this, which involves tagging the articles and having them reviewed. Please check out the links in the previous section for details. --Ckatz^chat _spy 19:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

"If the articles contain little content, consider merging or redirecting them into another article". That is what I am doing. The five days deadline is a courtesy. --Phirazo 03:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

As is asking you, politely, to reconsider. The articles are maintained by an active Wikiproject which has announced plans to upgrade them. None of the articles can be described as having "little content" under the provisions of WP:EPISODE. As such, redirecting - especially given the Heroes project's goals - is contrary to the "good faith" principle. --Ckatz^chat _spy 04:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not entirely convinced that an article for every episode can reliably sourced. For the moment, I'll keep an eye on these articles without the dramatic 5 day deadline. If this drive to improve the articles in Category:Heroes episodes is successful, then there will be no need for the redirects. --Phirazo 04:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for changing your plans and taking a less "dramatic" approach. (The effort to revise WP:EPISODE actually began as mass opposition to another editor's bulk redirects and "5-day warnings", so your change of heart is appreciated.) You are probably correct in that some television articles may never be able to be reliably sourced. There is a good chance, however, that these one can be, given that the series has received a lot of press and the DVD set is coming out in the near future, apparently with commentaries etc. We shall see as the revamp project progresses. Thanks again. --Ckatz^chat _spy 05:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

image proposition

For characters in Heroes, the majority of the fair-use infoboxed images used to illustrate these fictional characters appear to be publicity pictures--probably lifted from NBC somewhere. Then, a few (if not more) of the characters have further non-free images which are rationaled because they typically depict the specific character using their powers, which is understandable given the reasoning and these important aspects of the characters. I want to propose the idea of replacing the publicity pictures with good screencaps of the characters that would suffice to both illustrate the character's powers, as well as identify them.

I bring this up because the non-free criteria require not using "Multiple items [...] if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary."; and since we can probably (for most characters) perform this double-purpose imaging, I wanted to bring this up here and see if anybody had any thoughts/ideas/objections. I don't personally have the episodes from which to make screencaps although some folks here might; even so, I'm sure a multitude are available online and might even serve this purpose w/o any special effort expended. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 04:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Charlie Andrews (Heroes)

I think the article about Charlie must be deleted. It's a character appeared in 2-3 episodes and didn't have an important role. The article is more a plot description of her part in the episodes -including quotes like "You're sweet"- and nothing more. I want to ask you opinion before i nominate it for deletion -- Magioladitis 10:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

At best, it could be merged into Hiro Nakamura. --Phirazo 04:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I nominated the article for deletion. Please write your opinion here -- Magioladitis 06:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Templates

Someone made Template:Heroes characters redirect to Template:Heroes claiming it was "redundant." Is it apparent that a character-specific template is even needed at this point? I would agree that eventually one will need to be made, but perhaps right now just keep it at a single template? There's going to be more characters introduced to the series in season two, not to mention Origins. This is just my opinion, feel free to disagree. --24.19.144.93 05:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd tend to agree - the main template is more useful. Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat _spy 09:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Narration

I think the narrations for each episode are more suited for something like TV.com or the like, not for what are trying to be encyclopedic articles. Thoughts? --iTocapa ^t 19:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Project nominated for deletion

This Wikiproject has been nominated for deletion. I think this is a mistake; if you agree, please register your opinion here. --Ckatz^chat _spy 21:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)