Talk:List of Supergirl episodes

White Black Green Red does it really matter
This is getting out of hand this has been changed way too many times already. After all this is just SciFi fantasy show. All websites that have reviewed Monday's show state that Megan turned into a White Martian. Can it be proved that she is a Green Martian! I don't see a citation for it. Maybe she is not even a Martian LOL. --ecto~enwiki (talk) 22:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * No, I think she's a white martian, as we've already seen one in the series before; that said, it was long ago enough that new visitors to the article should be told, so long as its cited to a reliable source. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 22:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * TV Line has been used for other Citations so is it considered reliable? "we learned that the Last Daughter of Mars is still harboring a big ol’ secret: She’s a White Martian!" --ecto~enwiki (talk) 00:05, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Just add that to the summary and we're golden. :) - Jack Sebastian (talk) 23:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

First of all here's a reference from IGN. Apart from that, this seems a rather silly discussion. I don't see any other points in any summary of any other episode referenced. She's a White Martian because we saw her change into a White Martian. If on Animorphs let's say you saw Jake turn into a tiger, would you request people referencing a source saying it's a tiger? --SuperJew (talk) 23:42, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's another reference, this time AV Club. All the reviews I've read write that M'gann is a White Martian. --SuperJew (talk) 23:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't watch Animorphs, so the comparison is lost on me. That said, tigers are usually tigers. Not having seen a white martian before (or any martian, for that matter), I don;t think its out of bounds to ask for a reference. WP:V says pretty clearly that if material is likely to be contested, you cite it. To you, it seems like nit-picking. To me, its making a more durable article. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:22, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * My thoughts on this issue, are that we only need third-party sources for plot information that has been interpreted, meaning anything that is not apparent to anyone paying attention but without more knowledge than the property has presented. Since the series has already shown us what a White Martian looks like (see the summary for episode 111 at this page), and this one looks pretty much the same as the last one, I think it is reasonable to assume that a source is not needed to verify that she does turn into a White Martian at the end of the episode. The fact that everyone else who watched the episode (as in critics) knew that she was a White Martian as well is just bonus. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:10, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course you've seen a White Martian before Jack Sebastian! As said above, they appeared in episode 1.11, which is also mentioned in the episode summary of that episode. You yourself wrote in this discussion "I think she's a white martian, as we've already seen one in the series before." There have also been appearances of other Martians - the Green Martians. --SuperJew (talk) 10:06, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The point i was making was that I had to go to a review to make sure that it was a whit eMartian I had seen in the episode. You will recall that the last few eps have been filled with aliens of all shapes sizes and hues, so, I wasn't sure. And if I, as someone who watches the series, wasn't sure, then its was a pretty safe bet that the ordinary reader (likely unfamiliar with the series) would not know. Therefore, referencing the race seemed prudent. I find it startling that the approach I am being confronted with is both in-universe and fanboy scoffing at my lack of recognizing a cgi character from an episode that aired almost a year ago. You guys do get that not everyone who reads these articles isn't a fanboy, right? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 19:47, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

season 1 episode 4 and 5
i changed the episodes in Nov 2015 and had it quickly undid. i explained that i did it to reflect the eventual DVD release. i was told i was wrong with a undo. now you have to have excessive notes to explain your idiocy.
 * Please read the discussion in this talk page's archives, and you'll understand the reasoning behind the dating. Enjoy editing here. Alex&#124;The&#124;Whovian ? 08:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's the discussion. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft for Supergirl (season 1)
This is just a notice that there is a draft for the season 1 article at Draft:Supergirl (season 1) until it is time to move it to the mainspace at Supergirl (season 1) (which redirects to this article for now). All are welcome to come help nurture the article's development there. - Brojam (talk) 02:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Draft for Supergirl (season 2)
This is just a notice that there is a draft for the season 2 article at Draft:Supergirl (season 2) until it is time to move it to the mainspace at Supergirl (season 2) (which redirects to this article for now). All are welcome to come help nurture the article's development there. - Brojam (talk) 02:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)


 * As it happens, I have been waiting for season articles to be started for a while now. I welcome this expansion of the TV series. Jdavi333 (talk) 17:57, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Summarizing epsiodes
I hope tha tpeople realize that episode summaries are meant to be broad strokes of articles, not a blow-by-blow of every sendondary and tertiary subplot within the episode (unless it is later discovered that one of the season's subplots was part of the primary season arc). For that reason, a budding romance between Lena and Jimmy is pretty inconsequential. We have external links for other wikia and fan pages that go into exhaustive detail about that cruft. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:48, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Arrowverse
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Arrowverse. - Brojam (talk) 19:07, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Supergirl (season 2)
, gave the following comment on that draft: This draft is mostly a copy of List of Supergirl episodes, with a limited amount of content added. The decision as to whether to split the Supergirl episodes into separate articles should be discussed on the talk page of the main article, Talk:List of Supergirl episodes. I am deferring judgment on accepting this draft because it should be decided by discussion. Do you think otherwise? Or can additional content be added to make the draft worthy for mainspace? If you have sources, please share with me. -- Kailash29792 (talk)  15:44, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Definitely not ready yet. The Production section needs a great deal of expanding. Some of those sections are one, two, maybe three lines long. Critical response as well. No home media dates given for other regions, and it really ought to be in prose. Broadcast has one sentence. --  Alex TW 15:48, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with Alex. I also didn't think the first season article was really ready since it's pretty much copied most things from the main Supergirl article, but it was accepted through AfC. - Brojam (talk) 17:38, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Just noting that the episode table itself is somewhat different to the current version of this article with a cople of overlength summaries, links to redirects and lacking some of the fixes that have been made here. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 18:04, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I do agree that the season articles don't look GA-worthy (yet), but I did not consider that to be an obstacle to bringing them to the mainspace. Alright can someone please leave sources I could use to further expand the production section of season 2? Please, no outdated sources. Kailash29792 (talk)  09:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I see no-one helped me; hence I myself added some more content to bring the source count to more than 100 refs. Now I know the season is worth entering the mainspace; it may not be FL-worthy, but at least all the facts are right and sourced, and based on this I'll bring the draft to the mainspace using G6. Please don't try to stop me since I'm only doing the right thing legitimately. But if one thinks a draft isn't worth entering the mainspace even with 100+ refs, just remember I have brought quite a few articles like Kalidas to GA/FA without even touching the 100-ref mark. Kailash29792 (talk)  06:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * You might want to look into that tone; the WP:OWN is strong with this one! I see no-one helped me Out apologies that we have other things on- and off-site to focus on. Please don't try to stop me If other editors believe it's not valid yet, then why must your voice be above all others? And 100+? Take away all the viewer refs and you're left with less than half of them. References isn't the sole determination of whether an article is valid or not. Other than editing refs and a paragraph or two, I'm not sure how the article is different between then and now? --  Alex TW 06:21, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I didn't say I own the article (if I implied this through my edits, I apologise). I just felt it could be expanded further, though I was not sure what else to add; that's why I asked for help here with editors who are more skilled than me. I am also not trying to be unruly, start an edit war or take Wiki into my own hands. List of Supergirl episodes is too large and convoluted (as are Arrow and Flash episodes). But unlike some guys, I cannot solve this with a snap of my fingers. That's why separate articles for seasons are needed for balance. Coming to season 2, the "Production" has been substantially expanded, only the "Release" section is small because I don't know what else to add there. But in its current state is the draft good to move to the mainspace? Can I perform the move using G6? Kailash29792 (talk)  08:12, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * , you recently nominated The Simpsons (season 30) for deletion, but see how it turned out (cheers to the comment made there by ). The AfD ended with the consensus to keep, despite the article being mainly an episode list. However, Draft:Supergirl (season 2) is more than just that, and it is definitely not sketchy. In fact, it has substantially developed after meticulous work since 20 September 2018, just look at the difference between revisions. and, what do you think? Can the draft be moved to the mainspace? Kailash29792  (talk)  11:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * User:Kailash29792, User:AlexTheWhovian - There seems to be some confusion about G6. G6 is not a method of accepting an article.  G6 is only a criterion for the speedy deletion of certain pages including redirects.  It is not a basis for gaming the system in order to split an article.  The question is whether to split the article, not whether to use G6.  Robert McClenon (talk) 12:16, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * User:Kailash29792 - Please read the G6 criterion two more times, since one seems not to be enough. G6 is a criterion for uncontroversial technical deletions, not for moves or splits or adds.  Trying to use G6 in order to split an article is gaming the system and is disruptive.  Robert McClenon (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * User:Kailash29792 - The real issue is whether there is consensus to split the article. I don't see consensus, and I haven't seen anything that has looked to me like an effort to establish consensus through collaborative discussion, only a restatement of views.  So:  Can there be real discussion?  Robert McClenon (talk) 12:16, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. --  Alex TW 12:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * What exactly is the opposition to bringing this article to mainspace? I don't really see any issues. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 17:38, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright, going for G6 is a bad idea, and I'm sorry for suggesting that. But then are you saying the draft is not ready to go to the mainspace, even after all my hard work? I hope not. Can we please try and establish a consensus now at least?, Alex earlier opposed bringing the draft to the mainspace because he felt it was too sketchy and half-baked. I partially agreed with that, and further expanded the draft (production, broadcast and accolades sections). But he hasn't found the time to review the revamped draft, and hasn't yet changed his earlier view. Kailash29792  (talk)  17:43, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm now good with moving it to mainspace. - Brojam (talk) 13:02, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. Seems like Alex is the only other editor to oppose the article move into mainspace. Matt14451 (talk) 13:45, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm back. It's good to see we have now a consensus to move the draft to mainspace, and with this I'm up to performing the move. Someone could just re-arrange the guest actors in order of appearance, but that can be done even after the move. Kailash29792 (talk)  13:25, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. - Brojam (talk) 22:47, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Supergirl (season 3)
Is there being a proposal to advance the list of Season 3 episodes to mainspace? If so, it should be discussed. If not, I will decline the draft, which will leave it in draft space for future work. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:11, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Seems like it would be useful for the season to have its own article to decrease the size of this article but there's some more work to be done before it should be moved. Matt14451 (talk) 07:16, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I decided to work on Season 3  I'm through with season 2. -- Kailash29792 (talk)  07:27, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Understandable. Matt14451 (talk) 07:35, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Ratings graph
The ratings graph has been removed recent years for either not "contribut[ing] to any worthwhile trend" or being "redundant to the Ratings tables and Ratings column on the Episodes tables". Since it has been added and removed mutliple times; it seems we do not have consensus on it's inclusion or exclusion. Please reply with support for keeping the table or support for removing the graph.

I support keeping the graph as: LegoK9 (talk) 14:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) All other Arrowverse shows a ratings graph on their episodes pages.
 * 2) For Supergirl in particular, it gives a stunning visual for how the show's popularity dropped after season 1.
 * 3) One can also see how crossover episodes had more viewers.


 * Remove: The ratings graph is redundant to ratings columns on episode tables and ratings tables. It causes accessibility problems as you need to scroll horizontally and wasting space on the article.
 * — Young Forever <sup style="color: #2D68C4F">(talk)   21:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)


 * 1. The graph is not redundant. One cannot look at a six seasons-worth of numbers and visualize how those numbers look.
 * 2. There are no longer any accessibly problems. I fixed that by changing the width to 882 pixels. LegoK9 (talk) 22:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * What notability does the change in ratings in those six seasons have? -- Alex_ 21 TALK 09:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * It's extremely notable that the first season got ~6-9 million views an episode on CBS, with a high of 13 million. But when the show moved to The CW, that dropped to 3 million, then 2 million, then 1 million, then 0.5 million. That's an notable trend to see across 6 seasons. It is also notable that the crossover episodes had higher viewing figures.
 * One might not notice any of this from numbers in a column, but the graph shows it instantly. The whole point of a graph is to make data visually understandable. LegoK9 (talk) 20:10, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * If you think this graph isn't notable, can you show me a TV ratings graph that is notable? And what about it makes it notable for inclusion? LegoK9 (talk) 20:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Do you have sources that discuss this notability? Or is it simply just noting a trend on a visual graph? -- Alex_ 21 TALK 22:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * "Compare those figures to CBS’ freshman run, which averaged a 2.8/9 and 11.2 million total viewers at this point last year. In other words, the show has more than halved itself in the key demo, losing 57.1 percent of adults 18-49 from Year 1. The drop-off looks even worse among overall eyeballs, where “Supergirl” has shed more than two-thirds of its CBS tune-in."
 * "The precipitous drop in the Supergirl ratings has been going on for some time now and shows a series in serious decline. It all started out great in the first season with almost 10 million people tuning in for the show’s premiere [..] the show moved to The CW. The expectation was that moving to a new, smaller network would of course impact ratings but the show still managed more than three million viewers per episode for that season."
 * "Things were looking up as the last Supergirl episode had almost 1 million fans tuning in, which passed Batwoman for the first time. Then Sunday’s outing, titled “Back From the Future- Part Two,” arrived with an audience consisting of a dismal 654,000. That’s a loss of 32%, or around 316,000 viewers. "
 * "With Supergirl soaring further into Season 5, the DCTV series has hit an all-time low at 900,000 total viewers and a key demographic rating of .2 for its third episode"
 * LegoK9 (talk) 18:23, 5 December 2022 (UTC)