Talk:List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes/Archive 1

message: The current synopsis for episodes are pretty poorly done.  They could be greatly expanded, but this would tax the length of the page more than it already is.  Is there any reason to not give them individual pages, such as The Boy in the Iceberg, The Waterbending Scroll, and Siege of the North, along with their own Infobox, similar to the Simpsons infobox?  If there are no nays, I can get things started. Lesoria 18:51, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate pages? 

message: Although I'm greatful that someone takes the time to write these things, they're not done very well.  I'll take some time to edit them and I hope some other people will do the same, atleast for the sake of grammar, spelling, and continuity.  I'm starting with the most recent episodes and moving back...slowly. D4chess 02:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  text edit 

message: In order to resolve the long standing debate over fair use of screenshots on List of Lost episodes, I am now trying to resolve the issue under the belief that the issue is an opinionated matter and not a matter of policy. Talk:List of Lost episodes#Fair use criteria number 8.  I ask that people share their comments, but please try to keep the conversation in this section focused.
One thing that works against us is that the conversation tries to defend too many points at once. Try not to respond to comments about other aspects of the debate, and just take this one step at a time. Basically, respond if you think this is an opinionated matter regarding policy point 8 of WP:FUC or not.
I believe if we can break through on the issue of point 8, the rest will fall into place. -- Ned Scott 08:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, what you just said is great. If you could say that or something like that on the Lost image debate, even if it's just your impressions, it'll help demonstrate that editors do believe that screenshots identify the subject of the article (the episodes). -- Ned Scott 05:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots as fair use 

message: Considering that The Library and The Desert were aired together originally and advertised as "The Fury of Aang" and Serpent's Pass and The Drill are being aired together as "Secret of the Fire Nation" can the table be updated in such a fashion as to reflect this? 56.0.143.25 18:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why...in every real sense, both "movies" are just two episodes. A note on the episodes’ articles is enough.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Fury of Aang/Secret of the Fire Nation 

message: Episodes 216 to 220 are on IMDB. Some of these entries are suspicious, however. 
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0794679/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0799575/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0827263/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0831941/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0822878/
--choi9999 (talk • contribs) 23:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah...IMDB is well known to be entirely untrustworthy in this regard. I see they have removed some of the worst, but the editorial process they use is a joke. Just about anything can get on.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 03:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to mention it kinda conflicts with the episode list we currently have, and these have already been disputed over. Then again Tv.com isn't exactly the prime resource for these episodes either. Whydoit 05:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Hmm, I checked Tv guide and Verizon's tv listings, it put's "Appa's lost days for the 13th of October as the next episode, therefore "Aang's Calling" is false information as I have two reliable sources behind this I'm removing that and editing in the date. Whydoit 02:11, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I will also be removing the other episodes listed on IMDB for now since neither TV Guide or Verizon's listings confirm them. Whydoit 02:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, I might have deleted something else that was also proven, if so, my bad. Just trying to keep the article based on more reliable sources. Whydoit 02:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  IMBD Episodes 

message: I don't really think that the Behind the Scenes and the Legend so Far (even though I got a screenshot for it) belong with the episodes. There are more other than those two. Maybe we should create a section just for the Avatar Tv Specials and take them out of the episodes. Dylan0513 20:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. --choi9999 (talk • contribs) 23:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tv Specials 

message: Look, it has to be said -- the constant reverting back and forth regarding the broadcast dates of "Lake Laogai" et al. just plain silly -- and I'm saying silly because it's kinder than saying stupid. I understand why people are doing it -- why don't we all come up with some kind of agreement on how we should handle upcoming broadcast dates? What acceptable sources are regarding broadcast dates (e.g. not Tv.com), what exactly we should say (e.g. TBA, Q4), etc --Choi9999 02:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's…exactly what we've been saying, basically. The problem right now, as is said on the talk pages I and several others have been asking everyone to look at, is that no one really knows when these episodes will air. Nick's schedule has been updated several times with information that makes absolutely no sense. I've yet to see one person on a talk page anywhere say why that info should be used: they just keep reverting and ignoring requests to see talk pages.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 03:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the Nick.com shedule is updated again and this time it's for real. It has Lake Laogai on the 3rd at 8 with the episodes at 11 and 11:30 on the 4th corrected/ I still think we wait a little to make sure the Earth King will come out on the 10th. -Dylan0513 10:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be safe, at this point, to use Nick's date for Lake Laogai, since that one at least makes sense. If noting else, it might end the edit warring. Earth King should still be left as TBA, though.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to CableTvtalk.com,  (Bottom of the page), Lake Laogai on the 3rd, The Earth King on the 17th, and the two-part season finale on the 1st of December. Wheather this can be counted as a source or not it up to you guys, but it should be up on the November highlights shortly. -Dylan0513 19:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: This is also coming from pooldude's site: dongbugeng.net []. He also writes that a contact at Nick informs him Lake Laogai is a "can't miss episode." Only 10 days to go! -Dylan0513 20:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  revert scuffles re: airing dates 

message: It occurred to me that, as this list is now, the airdates are the only way someone can tell if an episode has been aired or not. That should, in my opinion, be clearer. I think I have a solution. I propose we change the article’s layout to the way it is in this example I’ve created in my userspace. Some notes:
*Unaired episodes are meant to be moved to the appropriate season after they air. 
*The Unaired section only needs to be divided into seasons if episodes are announced from more than one season. 
*Although most unaired episodes won’t have images (at least, not legal ones) available, I’ve left the picture field in to make moving the entries easy. 
*This removes the need to mark unaired episodes’ airdates as scheduled individually, since the field is labled that way at the top of the table.
So, what’s everybody think?--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the idea a lot. It definitly removes a lot of confusion and makes it a little easier too. -Dylan0513 20:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the 4th part. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 20:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The only thing I don't like is that it's called unaired episodes. It makes it seem like they were cancelled or something. It should be like episodes not aired yet, or something to that manner. -Dylan0513 00:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Genius! Oh. Hmm. Call them 'Future Episodes'. 202.72.187.152 04:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking either that or "Upcoming Episodes". Only potential problem with future is that somebody might think its actually set in the future.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, future is confusing too. Hmm... -Dylan0513 10:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Set widths for all but one column, which becomes the "flexible" column, in the table headers. That should fix it. -- Ned Scott 06:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they are. The codes between seasons are identicle so I don't see the problem. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 06:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed them.  -- Ned Scott 06:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout Change 

message: Well, I've got Firefox 2 now and it has a spell check built in. So I'm going around and fixing spelling and some language within the Avatar episodes. That's why you'll be seeing so many "Language and Spelling" edits by me. -Dylan0513 22:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't depend too much on it though, sometimes there will be a common typo of a word that it also a completely different one, be careful. --Whydoit  (Strangle Me for My Mistakes) 01:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: There's going to be a new Avatar episode called Lake Laogai scheduled to air and they said that you can watch the first 2 minutes of this episode at Turbonick. However, i ended up going to Turbonick and ended up seeing the entire episode. That was weird. A episode to air on Turbonick. I don't understand but i guess it's worth it.
:From what's been going around, it seems that episode was released early on Turbonick by mistake. Its been removed, now.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird 

message: I think upcoming episodes are The Conspirator and The Failure. Both will air on December 1 2006.
Just see the below link. Looks like a good trustable source.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0831941/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.4.195 (talk • contribs) 
:OMG! First, just think about it. Would an Avatar episode be named the failure? IMDB IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR AVATAR EPISODES!!! -Dylan0513 11:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure that imdb also described an episode with the Earth King being a polygamist. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 15:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, they had an episode called "76 Wives" or something like that. One time, just to test their  so-called editorial oversight, I tried submitting an episode named "Blah" as episode 42 of season 3. A week later they put it it up.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol, they must of taken it down soon since I didn't see it. And the episode was called "Seventy-Three Wives" XD. -Dylan0513 20:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  19 and 20 

message: On this page, it states that "The Guru" will air on November 24. But on the actual page, it states that it will air on December 1. Which one is it? Raven23 23:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Guru will air on December the 1st. Whoever is editing ti needs to stop. -Dylan0513 01:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Guru 

message: What color should the word earth be. I was hoping to nominate this for featured list and taht would mean that a consensus would be needed for the color. On the templete it is a shade of green, and here it is brown, which is better? Cnriaczoy42 15:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely brown. I'll go look at the template now. -Dylan0513 16:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Green, because brown comes out too red or just non colored at all. Brown is not part of the earth kingdoms colors which are yellow and green. When Book 3 goes up all you would see would be Blue, Brown, Red and the brown won't be distiguishable. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 18:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ill say green since it is the color used most in the show to represent earth NekrosKoma 22:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Keep it brown because earthbenders can only bend stuff like rocks, metal & earth-like materials not green stuff like flowers & plants..
*I've never seen the show but if they have a standard color that represents earth, then that should be the choice. Wikipedia shouldn't come up with it's own symbolism. Jay32183 01:46, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only do most earthbenders wear green, but in the opening, their nation is represented with the color green. Cnriaczoy42 01:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  color of earth??? 

message: Do you think that the original pilot should have its own page with a synopsis?
:It should, but unfortunately, I don't think most people have seen it. -Dylan0513 03:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that would mess up the episode template. I guess there could just be another catagory for other. As for the page now, Avatar pilot or something like that. -Dylan0513 21:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunetly, it was suggested in the FLC that this be added to the article because it is mentioned but not put in. It could always be put in as episode 0 at the top of Book 1 with the reminder that this isn't part of the continuity. If someone could PLEASE make that article for me because i don't have the DVD I would EXTREMLY apreciate that. Cnriaczoy42 02:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Does anyone have time to view the episode? I'm sure this wouldn't kill the article's chances, but it is at the top of the list with a red link. Cnriaczoy42 03:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A single redlink won't stop an FLC, although some one may request that a stub be made. Jay32183 04:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can slap up a stub easily enough, though I've never seen it (don't have the DVD) so it'd only be a placeholder-type deal until somebody could expand it and/or point me at a link with info on it. What I would need to know, though, is the episode's name.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 04:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can't find a real title then Pilot (Avatar: The Last Airbender) is an appropriate name. It would parallel Pilot (House). Jay32183 05:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I've made a rather stubish article, not much but its a start. I would say, though, that I don;t really think we need to put it on the template. It would ruin the formatting, and its really not necessary.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 06:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Original Pilot 

message: Since It was suggested that the article summaries be cleaned up, does taking the summary from nick count as COPYVIO or not? If so then I will work to write good summaries. Cnriaczoy42 22:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I'm almost positive that it's not a copyright violation. The summaries are to inform people about the upcoming episodes. They're not to be touched for now. -Dylan0513 23:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the only things that are problems are summary length, missing the pilot episode and refrences, beyond that the article is good to go. Getting it nominated has already improved the opening text, and if we all work on improving this article, i'm sure that it will passed. Cnriaczoy42 02:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that I think about it, there probobly are copyright issues. I mean, this IS text taken directly from other webpages. Besides which, the wording in many of them is idiotic (it gets a little tiresome having to fix every one so it says "Iroh" instead of "Uncle"). I really don't see why we should be locked in to word-for-word copies.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Do not copy text from other websites without permission. It will be deleted.
Unless the Nickelodeon site explicitly puts its text into public domain (ha!) then lifting the episode guide is as straightforward a copyvio as you will find. Just because Nickelodeon write the summaries to "inform people about the upcoming episodes" and display them for free on their web site, doesn't mean they forfeit their copyright (which is an automatic right). This is not an issue that requires consensus like some formatting opinion. If the FL candidacy has any hope, you all need to quickly come to an agreement on how best to write and reliably source the edit summaries, and get on with producing a fair amount of original text. Colin°Talk 14:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:COPYVIO]]? 

message: I'd like some opinions on what to do about the article's references. Many such lists use TV.com, but, unfortunately, the editor there for Avatar regularly adds future episodes based only on a "source" from Nickelodeon that he doesn't name or give any further information about. It IS good for airdates and what-not of past ones, though. Would it be possible to use it as a source, you think, but only for info on already-aired episodes?--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly what would we be referencing? One voter asked for references and that makes no sense. I understand it for the future episodes but their references are listed on that episode's page. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 20:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You only need to post a general reference for the list, so that anyone can verify titles and airdates. TV.com should be fine if you don't go into details about future episodes. Jay32183 20:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I really don't like Avatarspirit on there, but it's ok. Just don't complain about Tv.com there and not complain about avatarspirit. They're wrong like twice more than pooldude is. And again I state that pooldude is the most reliable source out there other than maybe nick. -Dylan0513 20:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I know AvatarSpirit isn't great, I'd not trust them for future episodes, either. It was just the first source for the previous episodes I thought of. Anyway, I was thinking about what to do with future episodes, and it seems to me TV.com can be a source for them, so long as it has independent verification (ie, not just another site copy/pasting what TV.com says). Make sense to everybody?--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, maybe pooldude's site http://dongbufeng.net/ which has an episode guide in addition to Tv.com? -Dylan0513 22:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a bit over the line. Avatarspirit has helped us multiple times in the past. I don't see why there is a huge discussion on the topic really. We need a "source" that proves that we didn't just put them in our own little order. Anything will do. I doubt we need more than 3 though. H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 02:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References