Talk:Smallville season 4

message: The overview needs to be overhauled. As with the other seasons it contains too much information. It is like reading the episodes, only placed all together in one paragraph. It should only contain the major plot arcs for that season. Bignole 05:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Overview

message: Hello folks. When OrphanBot removes an image, it should be treat as a final opportunity to rescue them by adding appropriate information on the image description page. Restoring them back to the article without rectifying the mistakes/missing info does not help. The JPS talk to me 10:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've rescued :Image:Smallville season4.jpg The JPS talk to me 10:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: AwesomeBignole 11:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphanbot 

message: All editors, please see discussion here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Smallville episodes Bignole 18:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season Pages or List of Episode (individual Ep pages) 

message: Bignole, you say "sorry, him being naked is not important".  I'm not really interested in fighting about it, but I have to disagree.  This is the first time that Clark and Lois meet, and I think it sets some of the stage for their future relationship.  (I know it got me a chuckle in Fade when the tables were turned.)
Looking at it again, it might not be important enough for the Overview, but perhaps it could go in Crusade.
Thanks for the comma fixup in Bound.
Jordan Brown 17:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you trying to insinuate that her finding him naked in a cornfield, or him seeing her naked in the shower is what causes them to have a relationship later in life? I removed it because it wasn't an important detail that was going to alter the plot any. If it reads, "Lois finds Clark in a cornfield", I don't think adding "naked in a cornfield" is going to change the meaning any bit. And, as you said it "gave me a chuckle" is probably a good reason to not include it. You wouldn't want to point out all the jokes thereby ruining it for others. That was my reasoning behind it (and also because you wouldn't place it in paranthensis with an exclamation mark even if you were to include it). It wasn't personally against you or anything like that.  Bignole 16:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, but her impression wasn't about his nakedness, it was about the fact that she believed he was struck by lightning. The first thing she says to Martha wasn't about his being naked (though she made a joke about it), but more about the fact that she believed he was struck by lightning. The problem is with trying to assume what was going through a fictional character's mind when something happens. I don't think the fact that she found him naked in a field would impact their relationship anymore than when she was possessed by a spirit and had Clark take her to the prom, in pink no less. Bignole 22:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naked Clark 

message: I found a citable reference equating the two, so I cited it and did.  Let's talk about it over at Talk:Smallville (Season 5)#Equating Smallville characters with DC characters where I did the same with Aquaman.
Jordan Brown 23:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bart Allen == The Flash 

message: I read that this episode took up a 90 minute time slot in the US. Was this episode really long, or was there a whole lot of ads (over 40 minutes of them) added in? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.165.83.3 (talk) 07:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a forum, please make sure to keep your questions to improving the article. But to answer you, the episode was just over 60 minutes, with 30 minutes of commercials.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 13:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Commencement

message: Did anyone get the "love potion" featured in episode "Devoted"? I saw something like a propane with a phenyl group in Carbon-1 and an amine group in Carbon-3. Albmont (talk) 22:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Love Potion in "Devoted" 

message: The link is fine.  Ideally, it should be incorporated into the article prose, but if that's not possible, it's a reliable source and perfectly acceptable as an external link.  I've seen this happen on a number of other articles; fans don't like seeing any outside interpretations - even those made in a reliable source - acknowledged in the article, especially if those interpretations don't agree with the canon or the writer's intentions.  How Smallville has been received and studied in third party sources is relevant on Wikipedia, whether fans agree with it or not, so this link should remain to provide that real world context.   Paul  730 05:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Section break

message: At the top of the article it says the rating average is 4.4 million but on the seperate episode count it is overall much higher, atleast a quarter of a million higher. Are the seperate episode ratings not accurate or is the overall one not?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.18.233 (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that we can never actually tell if when the calculate the average for the whole seaso if they are using the overnight figures, the Live+7 figures, or the Live+7+DVR figures. It kind of throws everything for a loop, because whatever they are using it's the same for all of the shows because they are ranking Smallville based on that figure. Since we don't know which we they are using, we're left with just listing the figures that we have sources for on an individual level.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 20:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rating Average? 

message: It seems that this article is using colours in the infobox which don't satisfy Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines. The contrast between the foreground colour and the background colour is low, which means that it may be difficult or impossible for people with visual impairments to read it.
To correct this problem, a group of editors have decided to remove support for invalid colours from Template:Infobox television season and other television season templates after 1 September 2015. If you would still like to use custom colours for the infobox and episode list in this article after that date, please ensure that the colours meet the WCAG AAA standard.
To test whether a colour combination is AAA-compliant you can use Snook's colour contrast tool. If your background colour is dark, then please test it against a foreground colour of "FFFFFF" (white). If it is light, please test it against a foreground colour of "000000" (black). The tool needs to say "YES" in the box for "WCAG 2 AAA Compliant" when you input the foreground and the background colour. You can generally make your colour compliant by adjusting the "Value (%)" fader in the middle box.
Please be sure to change the invalid colour in every place that it appears, including the infobox, the episode list, and the series overview table. If you have any questions about this, please ask on Template talk:Infobox television season. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colour contrast problems 

message: Hi all,
I changed a little bit of the description to Episode 19, where Clark gets amnesia. I added a definition for retrograde amnesia, along with a source, as I felt it was a better description for what Clark suffered. However, it appears that I cited the source wrong in WikiCode, so I will revert the article back to its previous state until I figure out how to cite that source properly. Once it is back up and you feel that this edit is completely unnecessary, feel free to remove it or give feedback. I thought it was a more accurate description since it provided the specific type of amnesia that Clark suffered from. Thank you! JustinC7 (talk) 19:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that the episode uses the term "retrograde amnesia", so it wouldn't be appropriate to use that term and then explain the term. At best, we would just link to amnesia and move on. It isn't relevant that it's something specific that isn't specifically discussed as part of the episode.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 20:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, nice work on Wikipedia! I didn't know that you were responsible for most of the Smallville content on here. So what you're basically saying is that what I want to add is too specific and isn't really worth the mention? I plan to add it again because I need to cite sources related to cognitive psychology for my university course and amnesia is one of those things. I'm trying to add small details about amnesia to things I've seen on shows and movies, such as this episode of Smallville. Feel free to remove it when I add it back, as I will still get credit on my assignment for my contribution here. (I'm a Wiki noob, sorry!) JustinC7 (talk) 22:29, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Your college course allows you to cite your own edit to Wikipedia? That seems odd. As for the removal, you can (and should) just self-revert the action. Again, the episode doesn't use that term, and putting it in would be considered original research. Not to mention, giving a definition of the term isn't something you would do in a plot summary for a show/movie.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 14:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Change of plans; I'll just drop it. Have a good one BIGNOLE. JustinC7 (talk) 06:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retrograde Amnesia in Episode 19