Talk:List of Sliders episodes

message: Hi! I tried updating the information on this page yesterday from the library. I didn't have my password with me, so I just let the wiki log my IP address. I added some notes about continuity--where Fox showed the episodes out of order, for instance--and I corrected something that was factually untrue: the site says that Fox produced the program, which it didn't - Universal Television did, and it aired on the Fox network. When I checked the wiki this morning, however, all my work had been undone! Why did this happen? If all I need to do is log in, I'll gladly redo it under this login. I'm just baffled right now as to why it was changed. Thanks. -- TOM-H-CRGL3 14:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Stuff about the episodes being out of order belongs at Sliders (it already is as well TMK) ;) Deus Sum (Matthew Fenton) (talk • contribs) 14:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The was something about it at one time I believe.. but feel free to add it, dont forget to cite your source though . Deus Sum (Matthew Fenton) (talk • contribs) 17:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Undone revisions?

message: I think episodes 5. "The Prince of Wails" and 6. "The Summer of Love" should be interchanged. I didn't watch the original broadcasts, but the point is: in the summer of love the sliders end up in some original clothes and in the beginning of the prince of Wails they are precisely in that clothes. If there are no other comments on this I'll change it later on for the sake of logics.
Dubovik 22:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to change the entire order of the first season to coorespond with production order. That is also the order the sci-fi channel ran them in during syndication. Also, Summer of Love was originally intended to immediately follow the pilot. When the order was changed, some scenes from Summer of Love had to be cut because they would not have made sense. Q0 07:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Interchange of episodes 5 and 6

message: I noticed that someone renamed all the sliders episodes to have (Sliders episode) as a suffix. I think it would be better to just have (Sliders) as a suffix; (Sliders episode) is unnecessarily longer and when I'm typing the link, it's obnoxious to type suffixed names. At the very least, I'd like to have short names when possible. Q0 04:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears that some were changed while others were left with just (Sliders), and whoever did it also didn't bother to change the links in the episode list to reflect the new titles. I don't think it matters what the suffix is (the featured episode lists are done both ways) but there needs to be some uniformity. Right now it just looks sloppy. Propound 06:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sliders episode 

message: Since the writers and directors aren't listed for anything past Season 2, how about if we remove this information from the episode list and keep it on the individual episode pages only. I don't mind volunteering to create stubs for the Season 1 episodes that don't yet have their own articles to make sure that the writer/director info is preserved. Propound 05:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good.  It would be great if you could make an external links section in each and link to its tv.com page. - Peregrinefisher 06:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good idea. I did some work on the pilot, I think I'll stick with that format unless anyone has a better idea. Propound 08:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it would be better to elave them redlinked for people to create as they write content. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 08:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  For writers and directors? There's nothing to redlink to because the information isn't there. Propound 08:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writer/director 

message: Since Sliders so often sampled other science-fiction and fantasy stories for plots, it might be interesting to have a column in this list indicated possible sources--for example, h.g. wells the time machine for the episode "the last of eden" (i.e. the morlocks and eloi), or star trek (tos) episode "what are little girls made of?" for the episode "state of the ART."  any objections? Chadbald 00:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This would be original research. — Val42 04:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps.  But several Wikipedia articles already note these similarities.  Nevertheless, what if such derivations were noted not by original research but by citation of external articles, such as on earthprime.com?  Chadbald 19:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I like having information like you want to add.  However, my understanding of Wikipedia policy is that websites like earthprime.com (fan sites) are not reliable sources for information.  Nevertheless, if it is a notable fan site, we could link to this site in External Links. But we need more input than just the two of us. — Val42 02:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For your consideration, the article for "This Slide of Paradise" contains this sentence: "The plot of this episode owes a debt to the H.G. Wells novel The Island of Dr. Moreau."  Do you also feel that is inappropriate?  I think the reason no one has complained about that sentence is that the debt is quite unquestionable and did not require "research" to uncover.  I don't feel that we would be propounding a "new theory" since, for example, John Rhys-Davies has publicly (and citably) noted the pattern of borrowed plots in Sliders.  I can of course see the potential for abuse here, as people might see subtle derivations which could be debatable and a matter of opinion.  However, what I would suggest is that such information be included only for episodes that bear similarities patently obvious to the common sense of anyone familiar with the source--such as the Dr. Moreau rip, or the Time Machine rip, or the rip of "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson.  I suppose I feel that it would be less than original research because the pattern has been discussed in citable sources, and we would only be cataloging it or filling the gaps. Chadbald 05:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as you can give some citeable reference, then we can include it.  Nevertheless, even if it is obvious, we can't use it otherwise.  However, there are Wikipedians who see their purpose to remove any such trivia, so this type of information will be a target. — Val42 15:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cribbing Column

message: All of the episodes of this series fail the notability guidelines for television episodes. The way for these articles to be improved is through the inclusion of real-world information from reliable sources to assert notability. That is unlikely to happen, and these only contain overly long plot summaries, trivia, and quotes. Per that, they need to be a small part of this list. If there are no objections, these will be redirected soon. TTN 23:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I object.  Please use the Wikipedia:Television episodes/Review process. - Peregrine Fisher 05:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was just a random spam message placed on twenty or so discussions. The review is an optional feature to help figure out if these have potential. They don't, so it would be a waste of time. Before creating season articles, you should get this up to the standard of Wikipedia:Featured lists to see if they'll be necessary. TTN 17:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why having articles for each episode is a problem. They seem to meet all guidelines and do not violate any rules. I object to having it simply redirect to the list of episodes and with a simple sentence description. What is wrong with having an episode summary for each episode? Other shows such as House have them and as long as they can be improved upon they should exist. 76.116.109.221 04:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Episode notability

message: I was just watching 3.01 "Rules of the Game," and thought it looked surprisingly similar to the final street battle of Hunger Games and to the overall Hunger Games premise of a survival obstacle game for an "audience".  Not sure where to put this observation, as the eps don't have their own pages, but I wanted to put it somewhere.  That ep was broadcast in 1996, Hunger Games was published in 2008.  Thoughts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.187.53.173 (talk) 05:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Episode 3.01 resemblance to Hunger Games book 3 finale

message: Some arrival/leaving minute details seems to suggest that. Given on what scale changing order of the episodes from the intended one cahnges the experience, this seems important.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.63.21.34 (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are you sure Season 4 (and 5) did not mess with production order? 

message: Why does s03ep17 appear as "the last show filmed with John Rhys-Davies" and not s03ep20? IKhitron (talk) 15:23, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last show 

message: The rows of episodes in the tables for season 1 and 2 are sorted by actual airing date with the second column ("No. in season") denoting the intended viewing order.
Season 3 inverts this established pattern.
The rows of episodes in the table for season 3 are sorted by intended viewing order with the second column ("No. in season") denoting actual airing order.
I'm not going to edit the article because I don't know how. I think this message might be the first contribution, if you're generous enough to call it that, I've ever made.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sooung (talk • contribs) 06:31, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent formatting