Talk:Chell (Portal)

Chell depictions

Re: "there are hundreds of Mario games, but we do not depict Mario in every one just because we may discuss his design in them". This is a silly analogy. We do not depict him in all of them because there are "hundreds" of them. There are only two Portal games, it is not in the least bit difficult to show Chell in every game she's ever been in. Also, the Mario article shows the evolution of his character, from 2D to 3D to high-quality 3D, not only his latest appearance. It's also a poor analogy because Mario's design has not changed at all in more than a decade, whereas Chell's character is dramatically different looking from Portal to Portal 2. I'll try to find a source that more explicitly states that Valve tried to increase her sex appeal for Portal 2, then perhaps we can include both pictures to illustrate this fact. Some guy (talk) 22:44, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

That aside, it's not currently a particularly long article, three non-free images of the same subject rather pushes the boundaries of the WP:NFCC. I support not using all the images in this article for that reason. Rehevkor ✉ 22:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. This is quite a small article, and I think that the concept image is a better image to demonstrate the non-sexuality of Chell versus the more sexual depiction of her. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

But the concept image was for Portal 2, this leaves the original game wholly ignored. Additionally, most of the "Reception" section refers to her appearance in the first game, which is not even demonstrated. You have people praising, and criticizing, the non-sexualized appearance, but only demonstrate the sexualized appearance and a concept image irrelevant to the reception. I agree the article is short, but with at least two-thirds of it dedicated to Chell's appearance (what else is there to her? she has no backstory or dialogue), the current selection of images is lacking. Some guy (talk) 05:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Chell

Little is given about Chell, but it is revealed that she is stubborn, has a high IQ, is rather athletic, and is apparently a mute. Should this be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.141.78 (talk) 04:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

She is also possibly a child of an Aperture Science employee, as her name, in a child's writing, is on one of the bring your daughter to work day projects, which since they are still up had to be near the time GLaDOS gassed everyone. However, She is also shown in one of Cave Johnson's promotional video, on the Portal 2 site, before his death, or even before he was sick, full grown. This is contradictory, but nothing can really be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.141.78 (talk) 04:23, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

There's really no information about Chell's characteristics for a whole section on it, but some of it might be able to go in the "Development and design" section. The only real solid sort of characterization is this quote from Erik, and even then, it's not much:

"I always had this feeling of Chell is a character who's just pissed off the entire time and having to do this, and just not giving them the pleasure of saying anything. She probably can talk."

Just as a note, Wikipedia is very harsh on original research and synthesis, so even if there is indication that Chell is a Aperture Science employee's daughter we need it to be specifically pointed out or for one of the creators to say it was so before putting it in the article. It can be a pain, but it helps keep speculation out of the article. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Are these statements based on any reliable sources or are these all guesses based on your personal opinion? If the last one applies, this would be original research.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@Maxeto0910: You replied to a comment from 10 years ago. -- ferret (talk) 13:27, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

I know. Is this a problem? Users may still frequently visit the talk page and read through the discussions.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 15:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Bumping long handled issues isn't always great, no. Especially since Harry explained 10 years ago that it was OR already. The only detail mentioned here that is usable is that she's probably a child of one of the employees, which is included in the article and denoted as being speculation by a reliable source. -- ferret (talk) 18:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Chell: Appearances

Do we really need a full plot twist by plot twist spoiler summary of Portal 2 in the Appearances section? What does any of that have to do with what media Chell has appeared in? The description of her appearance in Portal 2 should be kept as abbreviated as her appearance in Portal 1 and Portal 2: Lab Rat. Leave the plot summary for the Portal 2 article, where they actually have a heading for Plot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.83.206.22 (talk) 05:48, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The description of Portal and Lab Rat are so short because the first game hardly had a plot (no offense meant) and she didn't really make a major appearance in Portal 2. What she does in the media she appears in is very related to the media she appears in. – Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Additional way to view Chell

I think it is worth mentioning that you can view Chell in her entirety right in the game. All you have to do is go into the game's console and type:
sv_cheats 1
thirdperson
Windoze96 (talk) 01:29, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Or use portals SGPolter (talk) 18:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

It's not necessary. You shouldn't consider that readers will play the game.--維基搗蛋鬼 (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chell (Portal). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110429085219/http://uk.comics.ign.com/articles/116/1160119p1.html to http://uk.comics.ign.com/articles/116/1160119p1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:34, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Adding the Fact that the Character is Well Over 50,000 Years Old?

I am uncertain whether or not to add this. The article, as is, is excellent enough in its avoidance of the soon-to-be-proposed accuracy-improvement, the article doesn't make any mention of the plot explained time-frame: According to GlaDOS, this A.I. has an ¨quicksave¨ feature that forces the A.I. to reexperience the last two minutes of their life, which the A.I. claims to have been for the last years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0__zvbhGDY&feature=youtu.be&t=19m20s -- or: you can play Portal 2 and find the dialogue. This is seemignly self-sourced plot synopsis aren't required to have a source--the plot of the content is literally the source. So, this should be valid to add; that Chell is well over years old (the intro of the game also mentions: "Hello, you have been in suspension for - NINE NINE NINE NINE NINE NINE NI-"; which additionally verify the claim--assuming the announcer is not broken). If plot can be added without a source; someone add this, properly for I can not add it properly. If even plot synopsises requires a source; I'll probably go ahead and drop a few pages which needs additional verification. -- An anonymous person.

Answer

The entire game shows that the facility has been destroyed by an apocalypse, and when we see GlaDOS revived, water spurts out of her at first, indicating damages to her and the facility. The announcer is broken for sure, like everything else in the facility. Even the original game had parts to show the facility was not entirely functional, as GlaDOS gets distorted in one of the original game's first test chambers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrman19 (talk • contribs) 19:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)