Talk:Smallville/Archive 2

message: There is trouble with links of the characters of dis series. Some, like Luthor, Lionel, Cloe and the characters created for the show are O.K. Some others like Clark, Lana's and Clark's parents link to COMIC BOOK pages.
:Please sign your comments. As for the character pages, if they go to the comics it's because that is the place they originated from, and the Smallville portion is mentioned there. If they go to their own page it's because they are not part of the comic book lore. Bignole 23:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias

message: I think we could start taking a page out of their book. Bignole 02:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Lost (TV series)]] 

message: Howcome lex gets his own "Lex Luthor (Smallville)" page and Clark and Lana don't? I think it's safe to say the 3 are in the same situation and therefore should be treated the same way in wikipedia... aren't they?--201 03:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This has already been brought up. I don't know why Lex has his own page. I'll rectify that accordingly and place a "merge" tag on the smallville page, because it shouldn't be there. Bignole 03:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Trivia sections are usually discouraged. It's more advisable to include a note in the test where he is mentioned. Also, even if it's superficial, it could be good to just have a reference to where someone else mentions that little fact. I mean it's obvious that they are twins, but sometimes it's good to have all your ducks in a row, and currently the main article is plagued with little citations. Bignole 11:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: you are replying to my post about the twins, but where did my post go? nevermind, its above in a differenct areaM8gen
Oh, ok. I guess I'm confused. Cloe and Lionel have bios, but they are secondary... Lana, Lois and Clark are main, but don't have bios. It's weird, but they do have thier own page covering all versions of the character... on the other hand, the smallville versions are so different, that as the Lex (Smallville) article proved, they could have their own articles. They are based on DC Comics characters that have full articles (missing much Smallville info, though), but they have had biguer roles than those of Cloe and Lionel. 
Although you're right maybe it is getting too trivial. If wikipedia has clear policies against trivia, we souldn't be breaking them.--201 18:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bio (Smallville) 

message: I noticed some articles like Sydney Bristow, Jack Bauer, Goku and even Lex Luthor (Smallville) have those, I think it'd be neat for the Smallville bios (which ever you choose to have) to have similar devices. Wikipedia seems to be following that format with most tv characters. I've been told to design one myself, but I'm not a systems engeneer. Another option is using the Lex (Smallville) box and simply change the data. In my experience that works too. 
I hope you find this observation useful. Thanks--201 18:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What exactly are you asking? Bignole 19:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Side character boxes

message: I went to Smallville (comic) and it stated at the top there was a debate about whether it should be merged with this one. Frankly I think that's a bad idea, because they are completely different. One is a TV SHOW the other is a fictional place within comics.  Mrja84 01:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reasoning was "it's all about the show", which is false. So, no the page isn't going to be merged. I don't think anyone would be able to merge it really, it's two separate mediums. This page needs some work, but it is going to stay right here. Bignole 01:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging with Smallville (comic) 

message: The school article is a mere stub that doesn't have enough unique info to justify a separate article.
*Support CovenantD 04:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from [[Smallville High School]]

message: I understand that only a liimited number of copyright images can be managed under fair-use on wikipedia, but is having the image of the original actress of Martha really notable in the universal context of this page. Of course we can't use a heap of pictures, but surely an image of Clark would serve a better purpose in this situation!? Smallvillefan 15:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The image of the "original" Martha is used in context with the "original" PILOT, which didn't use Annette O'Toole. How would showing Clark benefit a sentence that says "Martha was recast after the original Pilot was filmed for unknown reasons; Cynthia ... was originall cast." ? The image is meant to prove she was in the pilot. Clark was never recast. Bignole 16:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh maybe you did not understand what I was trying to say, my point is that the page is 31 kilobytes long right? Yet we devote an entire image to two lines of text (After the pilot for the series had already been finished, due to unknown reasons, Cynthia Ettinger was replaced with Annette O'Toole (who played Lana Lang in 1983's Superman III), and Cynthia's parts were reshot with Annette O'Toole.) I just don't see how it is important enough to warrant an image? As it clearly says the parts were re-shot, so what significance does it hold now? It is merely a piece of trivia that is aplicable to the pilot only, so why should there be an image of it on the main Smallville page? Maybe the pilot episode page, but not here! Surely early promo posters/cast image or something would be way more beneficial to the average reader? Sorry, but when I looked at the page I just thought wtf does this have to do with anything? I just think it is odd that the ONLY image used throughout the entire page (excluding top/dvd covers) is of that...? Smallvillefan2 04:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Ah ok, I did not know about that. I'll have a look around for an article or something then. Smallvillefan2 04:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

text: My problem is that, even though Kryptonsite is usually right and one of our sources for the show, it's only barely mentioned in the article and could be easily questioned. See if there is anything else, otherwise we may have to just use that. Bignole 11:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of images

message: for dr. claire foster, for instance, along with other links within smallville articles? is this allowed?
:Of course it's allowed. They do not have pages on Wikipedia, and there isn't enough information on them to support a page, so we linked to the closest thing. Wikia generally has information that isn't suitable for an encyclopedia, but it had something so we linked it there. Not every DC character has a page here. Bignole 23:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  why do some of the wikified links lead to the smallville wikia? 

message: The descriptions of each character in this section reek almost entirely of original research. Wisdom89 18:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They were supposed to start with just basic information about the characters in the show, that can be viewed from watching, and then find some sourcing for the actors in the role. Several edits have added more information that isn't necessary. Trim back as you see fit, I'll see if I can find some cites for how actors were chosen and such. Bignole 21:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cast and Characters

message: I've got a number of concerns. First, "only Kal-El has flown"? IIRC, Clark brought down that ICBM... Second, has the show bible established how much of the character interrelationship is canon? Not being a fan of Supes, I always thought he didn't meet Lois until he joined the Planet. (Then again, in Jerry & Joe's origin, Clark is an orphan.) Have you noticed, if they intro Wonder Woman, they could spin off Justice League? (Or, seeing how young they are, Teen Titans. Maybe they could rent the suit from Chris O'Donnell.) Finally, does anybody wish somebody would tell Olllie, "You know, you look just like Vanth Dreadstar?" Or see a '53 Stude Commander (or '94 Taurus) & say, "That's really you."?  Rorschach 01:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are referring to the missle in Season 5, Clark didn't "fly" to it, or "bring it down", he jumped on it, rode it into the upper atmosphere and then fell back down with it. There was no flying involved. The rest of your comments aren't really contributive and I don't know how to answer them other than Smallville is its own universe and not a "prequel" to anything. Bignole 02:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Loose [[canon]]

message: Aquaman is not really a spin off is it? Maybe that section in the introduction should be rewritten a little. Maybe "lead to the creation" or something? Davey4 06:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: reps considered it a spin-off. A "spin-off" doesn't necessarily have to mean it ties directly to the show it started with. I understand your point, but Gough and Millar have always referred to it as a spin-off. Bignole 07:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: even more recently?  There is a bit of a conflict:
*The actor who plays Aquaman is different in the Smallville Series and Aquaman pilot.
*The actor who plays Aquaman in the pilot plays Green Arrow in Smallville.
*ALTHOUGH: I guess if you consider the introduction of a character in one show leading to the creation of another show (regardless of who plays him or whether the character was originally created in an entirely different medium) then I guess it is a spin off.--Torourkeus 19:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they considered Ritchson for the part because of fan response to him in general (although they kept him for the upcoming Justice episode, probably for continuity efforts). I don't think Aquaman was a direct spin-off, but apprently in the pilot they made reference to some of the things that AC says in Smallville. In "Aqua" the dolphin incident is mentioned, and in the Pilot the incident actually takes place. I think they wanted to start fresh, and that required a lot of changes. The fact that Justin Hartley is not Oliver Queen is only because the show wasn't picked up, and Gough and Millar liked his performance in Aquaman that they recast him into the Smallville family. There is a good chance that if the show is picked up (it's had great response on the internet) that they will recast Arthur Curry, because of the now established character of Oliver Queen on Smallville. Bignole 19:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Aquaman

message: Um, Clark can fly now and nobody seems to have mentioned it.  I don't have the time or patience right now (sorry for being annoying for that) to do the research but I know Clark can fly now, or at least do a kind of Ultra jump.  It was first shown in the episode where the crazy kid shot off a rocket, but there wasn't a show that emphasized the power.  So I'm not sure whether it's an ultra-jump or flying.  Of course, If you are a nerd like me than you heard about the legal problems of a flying Clark Kent in Smallville, so they may have explained it away as an extension of his super strength (only, you know, through his legs).  Anyway,  if anyone has a clue, please let me know.
(btw, I know Kal-El flew earlier than this but we're focused on clark here.--Torourkeus 19:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He wasn't a "bad" Clark, he was a "reprogrammed" Kal-El, who knew of all his abilities. Clark doesn't know how to fly. Levitating isn't flying. Bignole 02:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Superman Returns is NOT Smallville. Smallville is its own thing. Secondly, the unmistakenable word in the section is "ESTABLISHED" which means the writers have clearly stated that this is a power, which usually means an entire episode is devoted to the power. Now, the only time this hasn't occurred is when Kal-El flew in "Crusade". Clark Kent has never flown voluntarily. He's awakened "hovering" and had dreams of flying, and flown with others that have the ability, but he himself has never consciously flown anywhere.   BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  04:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Citing Wikipedia is a reference for something on Wikipedia is not considered reliable. You can't say "it says so here on Wikipedia that so and so...", that's like saying "well my article is crap, but it looks like this article". Regardless, Clark wasn't "hovering" consciously, he was doing it in his sleep. We are not discounting his ability to do so, but the fact that he doesn't have any control over it. Hence why it was removed completely. When you see him hover in a conscious manner, then it can be added.   BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  04:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

text: First, hovering and flying are two distinct processes. To hover is in essence just levitation, while flying involves directional motion. A helicopter can either fly, or it can hover, but doing one isn't doing both. Humingbirds can hover and they can fly. There's a disctinction about the process. Just because running involves the same tools as standing, that doesn't mean they are the same. Now, to the article. Its removal was in reference to Clark's abilities. Hovering itself is not an "ability" that he has, that is why it was removed. You don't see him hovering around Smallville in any of the episodes (minus dream sequences). In regards to your recent edit, I agree that Kal's mention is more fancruft trivia than anything and I thought you had removed it before (but I checked the history and saw that it was restored right afterward). It seems to all go along with another debate about Silver kryptonite. We know that it comes from Brainiac, we saw that, but it's an interpretation without reliable sources to verify (which goes for flying/hovering as well). Some people interpret some of his jumps as "flying", but they are interpretations.   BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  05:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Powers

message: What exactly happens to the freaks of the week. Some clearly die at the end of the episode, but others don't, and don't lose there memory either, and have clearly witnessed Clark's powers? - Matthew238 01:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To quickly answer your question, no one knows. But, please refrain from "forum-esque" talk, as it isn't constructive to the article. Bignole 02:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I had intended to write more, related to the article. For example, the Overview (and Series histor) section mentions the criticism of the plot device of having a villian created at the beginning of each episode by Kryptonite, but no mention of the fact that many episodes are ended without the villian being properly disposed off (something not mentioned in the Villain of the week article either). - Matthew238 04:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Freak of the Week

message: I think the article should have more information about the actual production of the show.  Like, critical reception and reviews, how well the show is doing compared to other shows (I heard it was number #16 in January), and what the show costs to produce and how much ad revenue it's generating, as well as dvd sales and merchandise.  Does anyone know more about any of these? 69.220.2.188 04:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, well if you come across that information let us know, it isn't very easy to do. Bignole 12:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reviews, Ratings, Costs, Ad Revenues? 

message: We are(have) removed all uncited information from the article. That information will be placed here until(if ever) a source can be provided for it. Please do not archive this list, ever, because it will never be closed until all sources are found, or the information is finally deemed unverifiable. Thank you. Bignole 16:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited sources

message: Should Belle Reave be added as a possible sub topic? It's mostly because of several epsiodes having used the mental hospital as either setting or part of backstory
LadySatine 01:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Containing what information? Bignole 02:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It's not very encyclopedic. Now, if you had 'out of universe' information on it, like where they actually film, if it's a real sanitarium or whatnot, that would be good. Then after we get all the production information from it, we can explain that it's an intricate part of Smallville. But just talking about the "places" doesn't hold any encyclopedic value. Bignole 02:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Then you'd probably be interested in reading WP:WAF. It's about "writing about fiction". Bignole 05:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm pretty sure correct spelling is Belle Reve, French for "beautiful dream". (Helps to know French to understand shows produced in Canada.) Avt tor 06:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belle Reve 

message: I somewhat agree with Bignole. At a minimum, some of the character detail about Clark could go onto the page for Clark, instead of the main page. Avt tor 04:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Level of detail 

message: Just a minor thing: should there be a way to show when a recurring character like Lionel or Lois joined the regular cast?LadySatine 22:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean?Arcayne 08:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recurring Characters 

message: Rather than have low-grade edit war begin over the subject, perhaps both sides can explain their reasoning behind inclusion/exclusion of silver kryptonite. Be aware that in order to make it into the article, someone is going to need to cite sources (keeping in mind verifiability and the reliability of sources (WP:RS).Arcayne 08:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its inclusion isn't what should be up in the air, but rather its explaination of origin. It was named in the show as silver kryptonite, whether it legitimately was or not. It's obvious that it came from Brainiac, but that inclusion would need some reliable source. Not really sure where to get such a thing, because I'm sure people don't usually talk about such a minor detail during a Q&A.   BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  11:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well then, how about mentioning its existence without alluding to its origins: "Silver kryptonite has been seen in (insert episode name here) but it's origins are unspecific."Arcayne 12:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I can see that. I don't think we should abandon a search for a source that can reliably verify the origin, but that should do for now. That's the problem when it comes to verifying fictional information. Maybe it's something that can be brought up on the WikiProject Television page, something about how the episode shows this, but doesn't explicitly say so ...yada yada.   BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  12:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you want to add it, or shall I? I don't know the name of the episode it showed up in.Arcayne 13:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Silver Kryptonite

message: Now that there is a Smallville DVD releases (good stuff), maybe the table in this article can be moved there. I always thought it looked out of place and cluttered things a bit. I think it would be more useful in Smallville DVD releases. Srfanone 12:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Move the table (er..delete since the table is already over there..and if the other is missing something then just add it). Keep all prose information here (anything in the paragraph).   BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  13:20, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move DVD table

message: I just read something odd under the Other Media section:
::: The comic book limited series Superman: Birthright introduces some elements from Smallville into comic book continuity. For instance, Clark and Lex are friends before becoming arch nemeses like in the series.
While Birthright was indeed a good series, it was not the first time that a boyhood relationship was noted. In fact, a boyhood friendship existed almost fifty years ago between Superboy and Lex. Back in the so-called Silver Age, Lex's backstory was very similar to that presented in Birthright. I think it should be removed as inaccurate. On a side note, I think that Lex Luthor: Man of Steel as quite awesome, making Lex seem almost reasonable. Which is creepy in and of itself.Arcayne 05:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it could be listed with both of them? I think it would be worth mentioning, if Clark and Lex's boyhood friendship isn't widespread throughout the series. Disinclination 07:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthright statements