Entertainment
 

Terminator Wiki:Current events

From Terminator Wiki

This discussion is listed as an Active Talk Page.


Current events is a centralized spot on the wiki where the community can discuss topics that concern the whole of the wiki. Think of it as a talk page for the entire database. If you want to open up discussion about a particular article, please do so on the Talk: page for that article.

Contents

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles Direct-To-DVD News

http://www.fmqinc.com/sarah-connor-chronicles/


Actor pages

I'm noticing a lot of actor names being wiki-linked.

What do you think of having a policy where we link most minor actor names to imdb or wikipedia? I can't see us as creating pages that could rival theirs... unless it's a major film actor like Ahnold or Linda Hamilton or a TV regular (like Lena Headey or Summer Glau.)
Basically, if the actor has a special tie to Terminator that we can elaborate on... then I love the idea of a Terminator-specific actor page for them. Otherwise, I can't see us doing a better or more relevant job than IMDB or Wikipedia? --Kanamekun 17:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
One thing that we can do on our actor pages is to have a screenshot from the show, so people can recognize who we're talking about. Most actor pages on IMDB and Wikipedia don't have headshots, especially for the minor roles.
Here's some random examples from other wikis -- Peter Jason on the John From Cincinnati wiki, and Tiffany Lyndall-Knight on the Flash Gordon wiki. I'm not saying those are brilliant pages or anything, but I think they're fun.
On the other hand, I'm probably not going to be the guy who ends up creating those pages here, so if folks want to link them somewhere else, then go for it. I'm just showing another possibility... -- Danny (talk) 18:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Ah that's a neat idea! A great way to make the pages relevant to the Terminator wiki :-). I'm not skilled in the screencap, so hopefully some people will step into the void and start uploading them! I'll do my best to create some pages for minor characters... --Kanamekun 18:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
It's sad Michael Biehn doesn't have his page yet while everyone in the series is covered properly. (yeah, why don't I create it, good point ;-)) Klow 17:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello everyone! So, I was trying to figure out how to make the Actor pages more Terminator centric and played with different formats. This is what I came up with:

1 Terminator Roles

1.1 Appearances
1.2 Behind the Scenes
1.3 Interviews

2 Acting Roles

2.1 Television
2.2 Film
2.3 Additional Works

3 Awards

4 External links

5 References

Here are four pages I recently created or edited to follow the above format:
If you guys (are there any gals here? ;) like the format, I'll start updating the rest of the Actor pages like it. If you want to add/re-arrange/make changes go ahead and edit the blank first page. Let me know what you think and what format you want! Thanks!
I've also started experimenting with templates and created some Infoboxes and tried my Infobox Bio template on some Actor pages. Let me know if you want to keep or omit that too. — Jeiara 01:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I guess I should have read this page before. I have created several actor pages that are not in this format. These include Paul Winfield, Bill Paxton, Dick Miller, [Danny Cooksey]], and a few others. Sorry. -Sec 1971 22:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Hm, for the very minor roles, I think a collective article is enough. I worked a little bit on some main actor pages, but did not notice the formatting template here... Will do that later, maybe. -Wikicide 18:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


Theories & Opinions

On the episode pages there are a lot of different opinions, and maybe there are other pages also that have the same thing. I made a little test on the Episode 103: The Turk-page by adding the symbol "↔", which a intended to mean that there are several/different opinions for a subject. This symbol now link to the "Talk"-page of the same page. For now it seems to be a nice feature, but I am thinking about making a separate page, maybe called "Opinion:Episode 103: The Turk". My idea is that we could use this same structure on any page that have several opinions of a subject. Is this something that people would like to have or should it stay on the "Talk"-page? Ascaaear 13:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think those need to be marked with a symbol. You can just put them under that Question, as two separate bullet points. By saying, "One possibility is", it's clear that it's not a definitive answer - that's more than enough of an indication for me? --Kanamekun 14:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
My intention is that the Q&A is not to be used for opinions of speculation. Non of the two opinions to the formula question in Episode 103: The Turk have any proof at all. I think the main articles should be as neutral as possible with as little speculation as possible. Beside this idea can be used on anywhere not only the Q&A. Ascaaear 08:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
One could add a "Theories & Explanations" section to articles and move their speculative content there. I don't think opinions should be there, I'd rather suggest we request that those be moved to personal blogs or talk pages. Or at least hidden behind the thin veil of phrases like 'reception of the character among fans has been less than warm' or whatever. -- Uliwitness 02:02, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I've just realized, it is a lot harder to keep opinion out of there. Thing is, stories leave questions unanswered, and a section like "Q&A" looks a little silly without answers or possible explanations. What do we do with questions raised but left unanswered by an episode, or things that are left unclear? Speculative answers like "Unknown, but it could..." seem like a good way to cover these. Also, I think fanfiction writers will appreciate being pointed at those. -- Uliwitness 12:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the Q&A sections belong on the discussion page. They usually end up being discussions, anyway, and those don't belong on the episode page itself. Anyone from the outside looking at an episode page might be confused. -Sec_1971 15:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

IMO important, interessting or central questions belong to the episode articles, even when there is no real answer (but no fanfic). But the discussion about these questions/answers should happen in the discussion/talk pages. -Wikicide 11:16, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


Synopsis

Am I the only one here that think the synopsis on the episodes are too long and detailed? In my opinion the synopsis I have read could easily be 1/3 and still have the main points of the events in an episode. What do other think? Ascaaear 22:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

It did cross my mind since they weren't short to change Synopsis to like Recap or something because they've been detailed.
Lemme get out the dictionary... synopsis: a condensed statement or outline (as of a narrative or treatise) : abstract So you think we should just outline the episodes? Jeiara 00:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I do like detailed Recaps, as they're great for super fans of the site. I would totally support renaming the sections as "Recap". --Kanamekun 00:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Although this talk is one year old: It seems "synopsis" is still/now the standard here, although some episode articles use "plot". All words incl. "recap" mean more or less "summary"/"abstract", so I would stay with "synopsis". And I also like detailed plot texts, so I wouldn't keep them short on purpose (but of course not every scene of an episode has to be described). -Wikicide 12:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
I like the long synopses, as long as there is a short, spoiler-free blurb at the top of the page, like we have it on most episodes now. That way, people can come here, see the blurb, realize if they've seen the episode or not, and if not watch it, or if they did read the synopsis to refresh their memory before the next episode comes up. Increases accessibility both for first-time watchers that get into TSCC late, and for fans like us who have seen the episode and want something more. -- Uliwitness 12:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)


"In-universe"-articles and "Real-world"-articles

There have been some comments about the different types of articles used on this Wiki. Kanamekun and I have found otu that there are mainly two types of articles:

  • Articles about things used inside the Terminator universe. Such as John Connor, Pescadero State Hospital etc
  • Articles which describe something in the Terminator universe, from a outside perspective. Currently it is named "Real-world"-articles. These are all articles like the movies, tv-series, episodes, books, comics, actors, music, games, timelines, voiceover etc.

I think we have come to a point where we have to structure and distinguish these two type of articles. Because of this there have been raised a few questions that need to be discussed by the users of the wiki. Please add more if you believe it is related:

What to name these articles?

Currently we would go for having two categories named "In-universe"-articles and "Real-world"-articles. Personally I think "Real-world"-articles sound like something else that the opposite of "In-universe", but as I understand "Out-universe" is not a word, its the best we have now. At BTTF Wikia] they use the term "Out-of-universe"-articles. Maybe this is suitable?

How to distinguish (in design) between these two types of articles?

Since these two categories goes deeper than just a regular category, I feel it would be more user friendly to distinguish between these two kind of articles. I was first thinking about a different background color, but it doesn't have to be so dramatically. Maybe have different color on the Main title of the article or something. Any ideas are welcome.

Ascaaear 09:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I was reading the link you just gave and it actually says, "Out-of-Universe refers to the perspective in which an article is written; it is the opposite of in-universe. Something written from an out-of-universe (OOU) perspective is written from a real life point of view. It will refer, for example, to real life publications, actors, authors, events, and so on, acknowledging that its subject is fictional...". So "real-world" can be seen as opposite. Sometimes it's hard naming things, even I thought that "out-universe" didn't seem to roll off the tongue right. :) — Jeiara 09:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Do we need to distinguish between the two? It usually seems obvious to me if an article is in-universe or not... so trying to get my arms around what problem we're solving with these categories. --Kanamekun 09:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I usually make things with the concept that: It should be functional and It should look nice and clean. I can't say it is a huge problem solver, but on the other hand I can't see any reason to not do it. I came up with a few arguments:
* When making a new article, the user will be focused on what the article should be about, and not just write a article because its cool to write something on its own.
* You know exactly what kind of article you read.
* The wiki as a whole would look nicer and you will have a better experience when navigating.
* I can't figure out any reason to not do it, so: Why not! As soon as we made a template for the category, the wiki will do the design automatically. So its not something we have to think about anyway.
Ascaaear 11:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Kanamekun that you usually can tell if an article is in the terminator universe or in the real world. So, do we want to use the [[Category:Real-world articles]] on the wiki? Personally, I don't really mind. Any other thoughts? — Jeiara 05:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Have you checked what Wikipedia does? As far as I know, Wikipedia always writes about everything from the perspective of the reality we all live in. 'in-universe' style is frowned upon. However, many articles can still contain pretty concise text that is essentially the same as in-universe, because they start with lines like "John Connor is a fictional character in the universe of the Fox TV Show 'The Sarah Connor Chronicles'". If you now mention that character's brother, mother, friend, whatever, it's immediately obvious that these are also fictional characters (unless stated otherwise). With some careful structuring, (i.e. put in a headline like 'Behind the Scenes facts' or the likes) it also stays immediately obvious which parts refer to production, and which are shown as part of the story. Adding (real-world) sources and attributing quotes also helps, since then it's obvious that the statement I made about time travel comes from episode 5 of the show, or whatever, and isn't something Einstein told me during a long walk along the shore ... you get the idea. -- Uliwitness 01:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


Episode infobox

I made a new infobox for episodes at Template:Infobox Episode and put it on the "The Demon Hand" page. Besides the different design, the other thing it does is automatically creates Prev/Next links so you don't have to. What do you think? Do you want this box on the other episode pages or do you like the old one better? — JeiaraTalk 00:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Not bad, kinda looks like the default box that you get when you start a wiki, though. But, much better than the current one. The current one is kinda bland. -Sec_1971 01:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I actually don't like the grey colors seems bland too...if someone can come up with a better color scheme let me know! :) — JeiaraTalk 01:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


Dusky Blue

I made the logo and title bars to a dusky blue color. — JeiaraTalk 01:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


Time Travel

I added a possible time-travel rule to this article here [1] but I'd like some outside opinions before I edit any other articles based on this idea. ROBOT SEX 00:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it's highly speculative, especially considering that there would be many other spatial movements (as you point out) to consider than just the revolution of Earth around the Sun. The reason Cameron knows about the date is probably because she's from the future, although I haven't watched the episode recently so it's just my immediate response to the question you answer. I do agree that there could be possible restraints as to the exact windows of time travel, from a given moment in time it might not be possible to travel back to any moment in time you desire but only to a subset. What the restraints may be are just too speculative at this time I think. Cuco81Talk 18:30, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


Home releases (DVD etc.)?

Maybe that's covered somewhere, but I didn't find it on a fast search: In "Pilot" there is a section about the DVD Extras, but maybe there should be central articles on the DVD/Blu-ray releases and their contents of the movies (different editions) and the series? -Wikicide 11:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

We have this article: Season 1 DVD, is the content different with the Blu-ray one? — JeiaraTalk 22:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the hint to the article. Don't know if the Blu-ray edition is different (don't think so) - who needs Blu-ray anyway? :-) -Wikicide 19:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


Staff member pages

Below the actor pages are discussed and I want also to ask how to deal with the staff members like writers and directors. Like with minor actors I favourite some main collective article which only covers one, two sentence each person plus links to IMDb and Wikipedia. -Wikicide 18:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

That sounds fine. I think that's what people are doing anyway? — JeiaraTalk 07:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


Homepage

So I moved the todo list box up higher, I was thinking visitors wouldn't bother scrolling too much? I tested on many browsers and IE6 gave me a lot of trouble, but I think the page renders ok. If someone sees any problems on the homepage, please let me know! — JeiaraTalk 07:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


Character Listing Format

After scanning all the television episodic pages, I think we should re-name the character listing from:

  • Starring • Guest starring • Co-starring

to

  • Main • Recurring • Minor

(just like the character categories)

It seems to make more sense to me that way. What do you think? — JeiaraTalk 22:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, especially if it's going to match the way an existing page or topic is already written. It also better organizes everything as there could be different meaning between guest starring and co starring (which has a level of importance and all). Go for it, in terms of those changes. --Terran Officer 23:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I'll change them soon. — JeiaraTalk 19:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


Front page

Wow, this wiki has come a long way since the Fall of 2007! That's when Danny and I found this wiki abandoned and built it up in time for the debut of The Sarah Connor Chronicles. I haven't had as much time to work on things here since then, but I'm glad to see that it's been in such good hands.

I'm interested in helping raise awareness of the site for people who are looking for great content about the new movie. I've been keeping an eye on search trends for the franchise, and there's obviously a lot of people searching for information about Terminaor Salvation lately. One thing we could do is feature the new movie content more prominently on the main page. If no one objects, I'd like to put some keywords up there that will help increase our pagerank on Google, and will also serve as a handy navigation tool for visitors looking for that content. I'll be tracking changes in Google Analytics and some other neat tools I have to guage the effectiveness of behind-the-scenes tweaks like this. Please let me know if anyone has any other ideas about how to further help improve these areas; I'm happy to hear them! —Scott (talk) 17:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I moved the What you can do box to the 2nd row, so people could see the current active franchises more easily. I think Terminator Salvation could use a Portal page like the televison one: Portal:Sarah Connor Chronicles. What ideas did you have? — JeiaraTalk 17:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
I was thinking something like this: Terminator Wiki. It's a quick portal to the main characters for the movie with text links right at the top of the page. After a couple days, Google will have those terms in their index for this site, and our pagerank should rise. Judging by search trends, lots of people are Googling "john connor christian bale" and "christian bale terminator." This will help us a lot and also works out well as a navigation tool for the wiki. —Scott (talk) 20:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I shrank the images from 60x60 to 50x50 and adjusted the spacing so the boxes would align again. — JeiaraTalk 18:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
According to my stats, "terminator 4" is the top keyword/phrase searched for Terminator. Is there a good place on the front page where we could stick that in to get some of the traffic from those searches? —Scott (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
I put a ref to that in the wiki news template. It may take 24 hours for google to update the search results. I specified google in the ref because I get "top search" news from my iGoogle page, and Terminator 4 is definitely the top search phrase for Terminator-related searches. Good lookin' out Scarecroe! -Sec_1971 14:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


Roland Kickinger

If Roland will be playing the actual T-800 sent back in time to kill Sarah Connor, I hope the writers remembered that the original terminator didn't have a military-style haircut. He actually had slightly long hair with bangs. The short hairstyle was actually the result of running through a vehicle explosion during the Tech Noir sequence. -Sec_1971 01:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


Didn't know where else to put this

Fox Broadcasting Company

Mr.Preston Beckman

General Manager

10201 W Pico Blvd Los Angeles,

CA 90064-2606

Phone: (310) 369-1000 Fax:

(212) 301-4220

Mr. Kevin Reilly

President of Entertainment, Fox

10201 W. Pico Blvd.

Los Angeles, CA 90035


Are these the actual addresses to write to petition for a third season? -Sec_1971 01:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles Season 3 Billboard Campaign

This is quite interesting, there is a fan funded project under way (from http://www.savethescc.com) to erect a mobile billboard to drive around and support the show for 3 days. It's raised over $1000 so far which is a third of amount needed to get this billboard up and running.

http://terminatorwiki.fox.com/page/Season+3+Billboard+Campaign http://terminatorwiki.fox.com/thread/3011246/promoting+TSCC+and+our+efforts...+ON+A+BILLBOARD%21%21%21

If an admin thinks it's worth it to promote this campaign on the home page I'm sure the organisers and all the fans would greatly appreciate it. Shane3x 10:58, 30 June 2009

That's pretty cool! They've already raised over $3,500 and are set to go! I hope they video the SCC mobile billboard. :) — JeiaraTalk 19:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


Image positioning and the page layout

Moved from Talk:Marcus Wright

The placing of images in their haphazard order is disrupting the page and generally making a mess of it. I keep cleaning it up but it seems someone (naming no names) keeps reverting my changes. There is no reason for this besides plain stubborness on their part. The page is fine how it is, leave it alone. If you want to include more images, add them to the gallery at the bottom. The biography section doesn't have to have every picture from every scene. Darth Raivon 15:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't see the page is much broken up by the images in old edit, except for "repairing an old Jeep, Marcus, Kyle, and Star are found and chased by an Aerostats. They leave in the jeep immediately. Marcus destroys it with a tire iron thrown like a Frisbee, allowing for their escape."

I insert the picture in the top of the paragraph which corresponds with the picture. It's common in writing a fiction section in a wiki-system page.

In the new edits, the pictures can barely corresponds with the contents, especially File:Marcuskyle.jpg and File:MarcusWright4.jpg. Making it looks like inserts a vertical gallery in the fiction section. And frankly speaking, no offense, I opposed it.

I've proposed several versions of the layout:

Which "sacrifice" the first 3 images (moved to gallery section) so the contents wouldn't be broken in monitor around 1024*768.
But this seems... void, empty or something like that.

--TX55TALK 15:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

This isn't Wikipedia where Forum Nazis throw bricks at anyone who mispells, but we do like to keep things tidy here. The pictures do not have to correspond. It isn't necessary and trying to make them so only disrupts the page structure. The images are in chronological order, which is enough for a page like this. The images are key moments from the biography. There's no reason to try and match the pictures with the paragraphs at the cost of page structure. Darth Raivon 16:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

If so, I'd rather to see all pics in the gallery. But I'd like to see if there is any different opinion. --TX55TALK 16:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Why must all the images be in the gallery? The gallery is only there because we have more images than we have space for. Just leave the pics in the bio section as they are. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the current layout. Darth Raivon 16:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know (or possibly know) why you di-imaged the T-800 (Terminator Salvation), but I have an example with the fiction section filled with some images. --TX55TALK 17:22, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

The T-1000 (character) page has always had an image placement problem, it seems. I changed the T-800 page because the images disrupted the page. I placed them in the gallery. Matching images to the events doesn't matter. What does matter is maintaining the quality of the pages, which is what I'm trying to do. Darth Raivon 18:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

In fact, images corresponding the contents is related to the quality of the pages. However, it seems not all the page need images in the fiction section because the section in those page are not long enough (and so, gets "effected" by the infobox template), that's why I can accept the change made to T-800 (TS)'s page.

The quality of the page is what I'm trying to do, too. There are too many page filled with not-so-related (not-correspond) images which mess the contents. And I've tried to clean up several of them recently. --TX55TALK 01:43, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but trying to match images with contents is ultimately flawed anyway, because most people won't immediately stop reading to glance at the photo. And most will see it long before the read the relevant passage, so what's the point. Trying to match them up only causes page disruption. As I said before; the page is perfectly fine as it is. There is no reason to change it. We're clever organisms. We can see and image before or after reading a sentence and still associate it without the pics being right on top of the context. Darth Raivon 01:49, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, that will be different to the reading habit of each person. Not all people have same opinion as you, and neither all of them have same opinion as me. In this case, the site is not movie magazine or other media, it's a database, of course the image should correspond with the contents if possible. --TX55TALK 02:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I just saw the similar changes made to the Series 800 page, and it created huge white areas in the article. I appreciate the idea behind matching pictures with text, but not if it's going to create huge white spaces in the article - that's really disruptive.
Btw, I'm not too keen on a gallery as a solution - it basically strips all pictures out of an article and make the text look really boring. Is there another approach? If not, I'd like to revert to our old policy which has served us well for several years now... That said - if there's a way to match up pictures and text that doesn't create white space... I'm all for it! Please share any ideas here... thanks! --Kanamekun 05:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

See Marcus Wright's page as it is now. This is how each page should be. The pictures are as close to the contents as you can get without disrupting the page and creating "white spaces". I honestly don't see the problem. I get that you don't like the idea of having images out of context, but that's not what I'm lobbying for. I look for a compromise between context and quality, and that's what I've done for Marcus's page. The T-800 page is a mess because of an attempt to match the images. There needs to be a middle ground. Darth Raivon 16:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


Deleted pages

I'd like to suggest that we can restore or keep the talk page of the delete page, in case some users try to recreate the page. If we kept the talk page, most of those users who want to recreate the page may take a look for the reason why the page should not be created. --TX55TALK 03:19, September 9, 2009 (UTC)


Image templates and categories proposal

I've work on the image templates and categories, creating several templates few month ago. I think we need a few more copyright info templates besides the generic Fairuse license since it would be better to make the image info and copyright much more specific.

The following is a scheme based on Jeiara's blueprint:

Unknown Own image Wikimedia Free licenses Other Fairuse

Those specified Fairuse templates come with those categories:

Categories

Any idea, suggestion and advise is welcome. :D --TX55TALK 06:24, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Change Merchandises to just Merchandise... it is weird with that s — JeiaraTalk 18:29, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for advise. ;-D --TX55TALK 03:09, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Stub templates

I'd like to create several more stub templates to help sorting out different article stubs, such as what articles are whole-stubs, whats are only section-stubs.

Any idea, suggestion and advise is welcome. :D --TX55TALK 06:24, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Bot account

I've created a bot account month ago for any potential bot usage. While before acquiring a bot tag, wikia staff notified me I should come to ask whether the site need a bot or not. In my opinion, I think there is a potential need for the bot usage. I'd like to know other users' opinions. (I don't know how to say, so I'm sorry if my words above are inappropriate.) :D --TX55TALK 06:24, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://terminator.wikia.com/wiki/Terminator_Wiki:Current_events"