Talk:List of Stargate SG-1 episodes/Archive 1

Untitled
I think I'm going to be bold and remove most of the links on this page. All the links except for "Wormhole X-Treme!" don't actually point to pages about the episodes listed. Instead, they point to articles about the world or phrase after which the episode is named. I think that's unnecessary (or even duplicitous), nor does it conform to the linking formula for other episode lists (e.g. List of Star Trek: Enterprise episodes). If anyone objects please let me know why here.

Acegikmo1 20:04, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Wouldn't it be better to make them links to possible episode pages, which is in line with similar pages.--John Lynch 13:51, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I've just added the links back because I've generated a bunch of templated episode pages that I'll insert over time. So far only Wormhole X-Treme! and Spirits_(Stargate_SG-1) have been updated because they already existed. -- Journeyman 06:16, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I have some articles for a few episodes that I am preparing to add once I get them reformatted, similar to what I added to Absolute Power . The episode titles are listed on my user page. Any comments would be welcome. KorbenDirewolf 22:43, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

New FAC
I'm resubmitting for FAC, see if we get anywhere now we've addressed most of the issues as best we can. --  Alfakim  --  talk   08:43, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

List Formatting
Considering the long list format and seeing how other TV shows have gone about creating the lists I was wondering if converting the information from a list to a table with more information on would be more useful. i.e. The List of Star Trek: Enterprise episodes uses a table which would perhaps be more efficient. Any ideas on this thought and if I were to change it should I change the way Stargate Atlantis episodes and Stargate Infinity episodes are listed as well.
 * I take it this was said before it was done. I'm going to table-ify the whole list now.--alfakim 15:18, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Please Help Fill Out The Table
If anyone has any ideas for more boxes or whatever, say so and add! For now, please all help by getting 16:9 ratio screenshots for the episodes and sticking them into the pic cells with thumb width of 150px. Discuss that if you want. The longer box beneath is for a one-sentence plot description. each episode should have its own page, so help make those too! see the wikiproject discussion for standard layout.--alfakim 15:18, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Done all of Season 1. May need checking. Please help out and fill in the pics and synopses on the other seasons. A great source for pics is at stargatefan.com. crop them to 640x360 or other 16:9 ratio if necessary.--alfakim 21:09, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't know a thing about putting screenshots on Wikipedia, but if I can find the time, I can help put the synopses in. bob rulz 21:40, August 19, 2005 (UTC)


 * I have created a category called Category:Screenshots of Stargate SG-1 which will eventually have screenshots from every episode of the series. What do you guys think?  Is there anyway we could do this better? Thanks for the input.  --Mattwj2002 02:17, 21 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Nice work. We can use the category to fill out this table. Link?--alfakim 23:05, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Nice work everyone so far, this is filling out nicely.

I'll have everything done for seasons 6 and 7 in a few days. Framegrabs and synopses. --Klaser 06:46, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Style Guide
Just so it's clear (we can debate this if necessary but i dont think we need to), and to make the page look good and be decent, try to do the following when adding to it:

Pics:
 * All images should use a thumbnail width of 150px. [[Image:Example.jpg|150px]]
 * All images should be in the 16:9 ratio, and cropped if necessary.
 * All this means is that if your original image is 640px in width, you need to make sure it is also 360px (640/360 = 16/9) in height, so you'll probably need to cut off the top and bottom if it's a screenshot from an early series (later series screenshots are already 16:9).
 * You can crop images before uploading them in any photoediting program... even MS Paint.


 * Try to give the picture a name that corresponds to the episode, eg [[Image:Children of the Gods (Part 1).jpg|150px]] or [[Image:Message in a Bottle (Stargate SG-1).jpg|150px]]
 * .JPG is probably preferred.

Synopses:
 * Try not to push open the cell; ie: stay below 3 lines of text.
 * Always try to make the synopses as full as possible, and not just intros. This is so that someone could read this article and get a full plot summary of SG-1 without mysterious bits missing (what else is this article for?). So something like "Carter and Daniel get stuck" is bad; "Carter and Daniel get stuck but are rescued by the Asgard" is better.
 * Try to wikify the synopses as much as possible . Someone might be only reading season 8, so they dont want to have to scroll back up to season 1 to get all the links.
 * Try to make the synopses mention anything important in that episode, for instance the creation of the Kull Disruptor.

Readymade Code to Copy and Paste
Single-part episodes:

"Episode Title" is an  episode  of the science fiction television series Stargate SG-1.

Details
Do an intro at the start of the article. You can now use the TVep template, as below:

The TVep template is powerful, and can accomodate multipart episodes, pilots, finales, premieres, etc. See its page at TVep for more info on how to use it fully.

The sgspoiler template is also now a standard. It's already in use in normal SG articles but has been adopted for episode articles. Use eg:

gives:

Include the infobox whether you can fill it out or not. Note the new field Episode list. This should always be set to Episode chronology, where the piping is essential. Put the infobox code first thing on the page. eg:

Leave fields empty if you don't know them. The Production field 'xxx' is always: :SeasonNumber:&:EpisodeNumber:, eg Season 8 Episode 19 & 20 has production numbers 819, 820.

The page structure should be as follows:

Try to also include (add a new section if necessary) important info like if a new piece of technology is introduced, or a new race, or if there's controversy over the episode.

Put   at the bottom if you don't fill out the details.

I have gone thru all two-part single titled episodes (Redemption, Evolution, Heroes, Reckoning, Moebius, Avalon and The Fourth Horseman, respectively) and added atleast an intro to the pages. I will be reising the work as I watch the episodes on DVD. Any contributions are certainly appreciated (except on The Fourth Horseman, which is unaired). - Mattathias


 * "==Part One==" and "==Part Two==" should only apply to a two-part episode on the same page (such as Reckoning, Moebius, Redemption, Avalon, etc). It wouldn't apply to single part episodes on a single page (such as Prometheus, Death Knell, Threads, The Nox, etc). -- Mattathias

I've abridged all the long summaries to bring them back under 3 lines. I tried to do this without removing any information but some needed fairly severe editing to reduce below the limit. If anybody has a problem with this - please discuss before reverting. - Trewornan


 * Does anybody else think episodes 217 and 218 have been swapped?

Splitting the article
This article is waaaaay too big and should be split into individual season guides. How should I phrase the title? List of Stargate SG-1 episodes: Season 1 etc.?--Zxcvbnm 01:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * No way!!! This article is perfect. It isn't too big.  If a reader is unsure of the season the episode they want is in, they would have to go to 9 pages to find it rather than one.  It also looks far more beautiful and impressive as one article.  Cut it in 9 and instead of having one fully complete list, you will have 9 terrible ones.  Tobyk777 06:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Also If you split this article it will not fit into the Stargate Topics template. Tobyk777 06:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * One more thing. These articles follows the same format, and no one has sperated these:
 * List of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episodes
 * List of Star Trek: TOS episodes
 * List of Star Trek: The Animated Series episodes
 * List of Star Trek: TNG episodes
 * List of Star Trek: Voyager episodes
 * List of Star Trek: Enterprise episodes
 * Template can be changed. That said, It should probably stay as it is. D-Rock (Yell at D-Rock) 08:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Disagree. a) no other tv series has to split its episode lists b) it would look terrible c) it would make navigating WORSE, d) there's nothing actually wrong with the current page e) it would be much harder to find an episode if you didnt know its season.--  Alfakim  --  talk   15:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The pictures slow down loading and the large size makes navigation hard. You have to split it, it's against Wikipedia guidelines.--Zxcvbnm 22:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I loaded the page within 1.5 seconds. And my connection isn't that great.  Even if it is slow for some users, it's not enough reason to ruin the article.  Better a slow good article than a fast terrible one.  Even with the slowest dial up connection possible, it would take longer to search 9 pages for the episode you want, than to load one big one.  It would also be very annoying for users with good connections to have to search 9 pages instead of one.  Also, what guideline is this article violating.  I have read most of them, and i'm not sure what you are talking about.  Tobyk777 00:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * See Article size for what I'm referring to. The article is waaay above any of the maximum article sizes.--Zxcvbnm 01:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Most of the "article size" in this article comes from the Wiki Markup. i.e. the page is actually full of {| |- | 43532 ||| {|} asd{| }|{|| | |||  asd|} and so on, when all that the above would show is "43532 asd asd", which is nothing. my point is that the article size limit is to stop pages having huge essays on them, nothing else. its also to worry about loadspeeds, but as has been shown (see below as well), this page loads very quickly even on a dialup modem, mainly because the pictures load after the text and structure and the page loads as your scroll down, so in effect it takes less than a few seconds to get the info you need. dont fix what isnt broken.--  Alfakim  --   talk   16:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1.) As has been pointed out, the style of this article conforms to that which is found in similiar articles.
 * 2.) The Article size page lists suggestions, nearly all of which are based on the (very dated) premise that the average World Wide Web user is utilising a version of a browser that is nearly a decade old. (not likely) There is no real technical reason to split the article, and as far as I can tell, there is no firm policy that regulates the size of this article. If there *is* one, please let us know. Article size does not perform that function in this context.
 * 3.) This article loads fine even with 56k v2 dialup. I just tested this using an old US Robotics external 56k v2 made in the late 1990s. Definitely a point in favour of keeping it as it is. If people start adding 600dpi .TIF files, then we can worry about the load time.
 * 4.) In sum- why fix something that is not broken? This article is progressing nicely. The text is really not an issue- the pictures are what stalls the loading. That can be remedied a bit by resizing the originals- there are always other options to consider.


 * →  P . Mac Uidhir  (t)  (c)  11:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Disagree with a split up. Aside from the reasons already named, most people now a days use a web browser which loads images after the text parts or most of the text. As said before: Don't fix what is not broken. --SoWhy 17:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Removed split-template as there seems no support for this proposal --SoWhy 19:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Article size reads: "A rule of thumb for splitting articles, and combining small pages (tables, list-like sections and markup excluded)" notice lists are excluded from the 32k limit in that section and in the tire of reading section and as mentioned above the technical reasons are long gone Discordance 02:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

2001 Screenshot
The Screenshot for the episode 2001 is from 2010. Philip Stevens 10:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * no its not, its from 2001, you just have to watch the episode closely and youll see it Xornok 06:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I can only see it in the recap, does this count? Philip Stevens 20:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Copy vio from gateworld
Hi I just noticed that on many of the summaries there is plagaurism from gateworld. Who is wrtiing these summaries? Tobyk777 03:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * the people from gateworld...... you just said it. as for who's coping them and transfering them, different people. i do it sometimes, just to give a basic outline until it can be rewritten. Xornok 03:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It shouldn't really be a problem since the Gateworld site has been linked on both Stargate wiki and Satrgate SG-1 wiki. 12:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

fair use for images
it seems we may not get a featured list unless we explicitly tag every image used on this page as fair use (done), and provide an explicit rationale. So please help out by going to each image and adding this code:

==Rationale for fair use in List of Stargate SG-1 episodes==

This picture is being used in Wikipedia's episode listing for the television show Stargate SG-1 (MGM). Although it is subject to copyright, the editors of Wikipedia, among them myself in particular, feel that it is covered by US fair use laws because:
 * It is a low resolution still image;
 * It does not limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the related product in any way

Further, we believe our use of the image is fair because it is not being used merely to decorate the related article, but rather:
 * Aids commentary on the plot outline;
 * Poignantly illustrates the related episode

Particularly because:
 * It illustrates a significant or unique moment in the episode

NOTE: change the last line as appropriate. To avoid being accused of blanket-fair-use, it's probably necessary to say individually for each image why we want to use it. So in each image's case, replace the last line with something that describes how the image is illustrative. For instance, an image of Daniel Jackson for the episode "Children of the Gods" might have this as the last line:


 * It illustrates the significant moment when the viewer, and the main characters, first meet with the character Daniel Jackson again.

--  Alfakim  --  talk   15:10, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Template
What was wrong with the template? It looks fine. --Will2k 14:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Granted the template is most useful for new lists, it can be useful for already established lists. For example, it makes future formatting much easier. Also, I didn't see any weird table renderings myself, ether. This is a featured list, though, so I can understand reluctancy to adopt some new template. I'm curious to the errors Alfakim experienced. -- Ned Scott 14:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the template is most suitable for featured lists to prove that it can work.--Will2k 16:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Column headers became disaligned, broke into two lines (e.g. "Episode number" as "Episode  number" despite a large cell) -- don't know why. The template either introduces a new row, or else an extra thick line, beneath each cell, which looks really ugly. Cells all misproportioned. Also, the template introduces a more complex code than the original table markup. Although the advantage of a template is that format style can be changed easily later, we don't ever WANT to change the format style of this article. It's perfectly fine. --  Alfakim  --   talk   17:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The coloured rows are part of the agreed upon structure. If you find that line ugly, you should voice an opinion at the project page. However, nearly all episode lists contain such a line.--Will2k 19:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Use of images in Lists of episodes
A head's up that a weeks-long discussion has been going on at Talk:List_of_Lost_episodes/Use_of_images about the inclusion of screen captured images, such as those used in this list article. The position by some admins appears to be that they are a violation of Copyright and do not fall under Fair Use. Consequently, the images were deleted from the Lost episode list, and likewise will probably be removed from this one-- unless opinion on the use of such images changes. -- LeflymanTalk 20:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking for more participants for WikiProject List of Television Episodes
Currently WikiProject List of Television Episodes is looking for more participants and input for the project. If anyone is interested in giving their input please drop by the project page or the talk page.As a featured list, List of Stargate SG-1 episodes already provides inspiration to other lists of episodes articles, and anything you guys have to share would be greatly appreciated. -- Ned Scott 07:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This list is one of the best, if not the very best list on all of WP, however it was mainly made by members of wikiproject Stargate, not the list of TV episodes project. Perhaps the stargate project could give tips to the TV episodes project on how they got it so good.  Also, I propose that the two projects corodiate on List of Stargate Atlantis episodes.  Tobyk777 08:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * More specificaly, the Stargate project members want to make a second FL. On the Talk page for wikiproject stargate the two projects should discuss how to do this, and then work toghther to make the changes.  The list is already almost there, we just need to make a few more improvements.  Tobyk777 08:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Excellent, I look forward to the valuable input of WikiProject Stargate! -- Ned Scott 21:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Screenshots as fair use
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. 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 08:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Descriptions
Id say half of them give away the ending and half dont. I personally like to ones that dont as they sound better but what do yall think? American Patriot 1776 07:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I prefer the complete (i.e. spoilerish) synopses per the reason given in the style guide above. EEMeltonIV 03:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I say let's remove th spoilers. As a frequent user of wikipedia, i often use it to see which episode is next, And when i read the description to find out what the problems are in this episode, i find out the start, the plot and the end. Thats one more episode ruined. I beg of al the people who are reading this, Start trimming the descriptions down. Glisern

Britian
When do the season 10 episodes start broadcasting in the UK? and wouldn't it be useful to include the British broadcast date as well as the Americian one?? --Mollsmolyneux 13:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC) The first airdates are included, not the first date the episode aired in the States (check season 10). I see no reason why we should mention both. The global date is much better.byeee 16:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
I want to express my opinion that I do not think that the screenshots should be named after the episode title. That makes it difficult to track them. I would rather suggest to keep the naming as it has been done since season 9, naming the screenshots "sg1-sXXeYY-0.jpg" where XX is the season and YY is the episode number. This way multiple shots for one episode can be numbered simply by changing the "-0" to "-1" "-2" etc. and you easily find them again. It also helps if an episode has multiple names (like alternate spelling on air and on DVD). What do you think? --SoWhy Talk 12:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 100% agree.-- Alfakim -- talk  00:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That is indeed a better idea. -- Ned Scott 08:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good standard. Do we have other Stargate standards - perhaps we should create a Manual of Style for Stargate ;-p Morphh 13:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool idea, lets go for it No Way Back 13:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * There are a lot of standards subpages, but no singular manual of style. For instance, the WikiProject Stargate/Episode style sheet. -- Alfakim -- talk  14:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

It is the uploaders choice in how he or she names the image, they may wish to use the title of the episode of the name or the episode number, however it is there choice. I my self am happy if they just put the name of the episode in the summary. Matthew  Fenton ( contribs ) 11:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Disagree. A specific naming allows to have a scheme for naming the episodes in a way that you can find a screenshot without knowing it's name just with season and episode number. If you disagree, vote against the proposal below. --SoWhy Talk 10:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * voting is evil; Also it is not upto you to decide the filename it is the uploaders choice. Matthew  Fenton  ( contribs ) 09:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Says whom? Is there a policy disallowing specific naming systems? --SoWhy Talk 09:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * This is also something that I'd like to push for WikiProject List of Television Episodes. It's already listed as a recommendation via the template instructions, but I haven't gotten around to proposing it yet for the over-all guidelines, since they need their own updating and tweaking right now. -- Ned Scott 09:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Theres no naming convention exactly, thus why you can not go on a crusade on how YOU would like to name things. The uploader chooses the uploaded name. Matthew  Fenton  ( contribs ) 09:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * My questions is still remaining: Which rule states that it is illegal for the majority to create specific naming conventions? --SoWhy Talk 18:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I never said it was illegal, i said its not upto you how the uploader names a file. Matthew  Fenton  ( contribs )</b> 18:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Vote
Name episode screenshots as described above? Pro Contra
 * 1) SoWhy Talk
 * 2) Alfakim --  talk 
 * 3) Ned Scott 04:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Morphh
 * 5) No Way Back
 * 6) Tobyk777 23:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) (voting is evil) Matthew <b style="color:#3366ff;"> Fenton  (</b> contribs <b style="color:#3366ff;">)</b> 09:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

To big?
I'm wondering if maybe the list is getting to big? Right now its at 82k which is way past the recomended 32k. I'm thinking it might be time to do something along the lines of the List of The Simpsons episodes to make it a bit more managable and reader friendly. At eighteen seasons long the main list article over their is 63k and much easier for the reader to look through. Thoughts? --Argash 10:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * WP:SIZE is oudated. -- Ned Scott 11:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I dont think we need to worry about the size of the article yet.  Matthew Fenton  (Talk | Contribs) 11:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It won't be growing too much in the future either. The movies will barely be as big as a whole season. Let's keep them all in one place better. byeee 16:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed, no sense in changing it now that the show has ended Rayman3005 16:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers for upcoming episodes??
Should we really allow MAJOR plot spoilers for episodes not yet aired in the descriptions? Ex. The Shroud, I know its under a warning, but I think most people just want to look at all thesaesons at once, and maybe just want the basic plots of upcoming episodes..EnsRedShirt 22:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If there going to look at spoilers and dont want to be spoiled then they shouldnt look :-P, maybe we could trim down to synopsis only tho as each episode has its own page ? User:MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 23:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't really think hiding spoilers is much of a problem since each episode has a date next to it. If it hasn't aired then don't look at it. -- Ned Scott 23:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I would just thinking we can rewrite it without giving away the character and what happened.. so that some things are still a surprise. EnsRedShirt 06:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I completely aggree that spoiler-containing blurbs should be edited. For example, instead of "Where they discover daniel jackson has been turned into a prior" we could say "where they disover a most puzzling and disturbing prior" or some such subtle hint. - Eldar

Season Ten Episode 7. The description is a total spoiler, and skips ahead past the whole first half of the episode. These should not be spoilers, the main page for an episode can provide a full summary, these descriptions should not. Horkana

Individual Episode Pages
Everyone of the episode pages needs work. There are no cites, extended plots, and information that is best left out all together. Whoever is monitoring this page and those pages should read this Centralized discussion/Television episodes. This is the policy created to establish guidelines for episode pages. If you do not have well referenced material try developing Seasonal pages until you do. Bignole 12:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * ...this might have more bite if it wasn't a generic message that you just cut and pasted to multiple talk pages. If you try to force your view on the whole episode article thing you'll just end up looking like a dick. Also, Centralized discussion/Television episodes is a guideline, not a policy. Policy pages are clearly marked as policy, this one is clearly marked with the message "A consensus was reached to accept the guidelines below." I'm not going to say that episode pages are a good thing or not, that's a debate that many feel very strongly about, but to accuse the editors here of not knowing what they're doing and basically belittling them is not how you should go about things. -- Ned Scott 13:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Most editors don't know what they are doing, and even if I didn't copy and paste my message it would have read the same minus a couple words. We are all ignorant of policy, guidelines, rules, etc, because most of us don't read everything that we should (me included). I don't mean to belittle just enlighten as to the proper way to create an episode article. Bignole 13:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * And because you've basically called everyone ignorant, your suggestion will pretty much be ignored. And this is not the same situation as List of Smallville episodes. These articles are actually a lot more referenced than most articles on TV shows, and there's a good deal more information. Personally, I would avoid an episode-per-article format like the plague, but not everyone feels that way. Episode articles for Stargate SG-1 pretty much meet the guidelines for the TV ep discussion. -- Ned Scott 13:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Being ignorant of a rule does not make you an ignorant person, it merely means that you are unaware that it existed. These episodes don't meet the guidelines. They have external links, yes, but there are not citations for things that need them. Simply putting a source at the bottom of the page doesn't excuse it from citation. Also, have you read the plots, most need to be trimmed dramatically. So, again I'm not calling ANYONE ignorant, I'm saying it's ignorance of rules. People always jump back in disgust when the word is used, but it isn't an insult if you use it correctly. And I am not putting myself above anyone else, because when I first came I was putting in scene for scene plots for films, which was wrong. Episode-per-article format would be great if we actually had the information to support it, and not just a scene-by-scene of the show. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. The Lists page is already featured and with work it wouldn't be an off shoot to think that the episode pages could at the very least be Good Articles. Bignole 13:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * What rule are you refering to? What needs citing? It's pretty obvious the episode pages them selves do not need citeing as the title its self cites the episode. thanks/User:MatthewFenton (talk • contribs) 13:35, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Again, I'm not saying I'm pro-episode article, but Matthew is right. If all that is covered in the episode article are things that happened in the episode.. then the episode itself is proper citation. And I'm a bit confused when you say that a source at the bottom of a page is not a citation.. Sources are what we cite... to cite is to recall / reference something.. -- Ned Scott 13:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Here's an example from "The Enemy Within" (the two in bold):