Talk:Serenity (Firefly episode)

Problems with article content
After I started doing some text tweaking, I began to think that there are two significant problems with the article as it currently stands: Because it's difficult to get other Wikipedians to tolerate TV-episode articles, we should try to ensure that what we produce is much like one would find in a TV-show reference book, not a tell-all fan work. I'll try to put my money where my mouth is in the next few weeks and start creating and revising episode articles along these lines. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 21:53, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm not sure we're serving the encyclopedia nature of Wikipedia by including a blow-by-blow account of everything that happens in a TV episode.
 * 2) Many characters and terms are introduced without any explanation. This is fine for a TV show that unfolds its mysteries over time, but again does not suit an encyclopedia article, which is supposed to inform people not intimately familiar with the subject.
 * did you guys decide anything? I also thought it strange to give it as a blow-by-blow instead of a summary/review/analysisplange 04:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Why not do a separate summary and plot- so those wanting more detail have it?? Aurelius

Bad Spoilers
The comment about Dobson under the heading "Trivia" is a major spoiler for the comic books, not the episode. It should have additional spoiler warnings, if it belongs here at all.


 * I removed some of the spoiler information about Dobson, which didn't seem necessary to make a connection to other parts of the Firefly/Serenity story. I hope this brings this trivia item down to an "acceptable" level of spoilerhood. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 23:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The Tube
The following text was recently added to an item in the Foreshadowing section:
 * In the original rough-cut of the episode (known in Browncoat circles as "The Tube") Mal actually orders Wash to attempt to locate a compression coil.

Do we have a source from which any of this information can be verified? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Comments from an outside reader
My suggestions:
 * I would pare the plot down a bit more if you can. It might be difficult. At least combine some of the shorter paragraphs. I would combine the Synopsis and Plot sections.
 * Trivia sections are more or less universally frowned upon in FAC, because long lists are not considered "brilliant prose". There's some useful out-of-universe information here that could be better organized. The "Special guests" part could be worked into "Production details" and expanded, for example. Is there anything notable about how they got involved?
 * I'd look for more information on critical reception of this episode.
 * Either expand "Arc significance" (if you can) or merge it with Synopsis/Plot.
 * How long is the DVD commentary? If it's as long as the episode, then you should try to provide a more precise location where the comment is made; otherwise, it's hard to go back and verify the comment (I speak from experience here). I've grown to like the idea of splitting Notes (for individual footnoted points) and References (larger works). See Donkey Kong (arcade game) for a FA that splits notes and references. You'd have to adapt a bit for DVD commentary, but the idea is to make it easy for the reader to verify content. — TKD::Talk 23:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback! I'll tackle some more of your suggestions shortly, but I did go ahead and move Special Guests to Production Details (good idea!) and moved Foreshadowing under Arc significance as that seemed to make sense. I also was able to move several of the trivia items into the article body itself, and what was left over I remade into "Cultural and literary allusions" plange 00:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * For marking where it says something in the documentary, should we use a time stamp, or is simply stating the scene when it is said sufficient? plange 00:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If the scene is identified officially (or if the episode is split into tracks), that should probably be sufficient, IMO. — TKD::Talk 01:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment about plot tag
Why are all the episodes tagged as needing maintenance because of their long plot summary. The whole purpose of the episode list is basically to sum up the plot for each of the episodes and give some other relevant information. I see no reason for the other sections to contain as much content as the plot section, given the plot is what it's really all about.129.2.196.238 04:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have to point out that the Plot Summary is not "what it's really all about." Wikipedia articles about TV episodes are not meant to only be large and complex plot summaries. They should, of course, have a plot summary included, common sense and necessity dictates as much, but the articles are meant to be encyclopedia entires. That means more information from outside the episode (Reviews, creator comments, technical explanations, etc.) and less detail in the summary. Now, if you feel that the tag is unnecessary because the plot summary is not too detailed, and I'm actually leaning towards that belief myself (It's approximately 1/5 the size of other plot summaries I've seen on Wikipedia) then the tag can be removed, but not just because you disagree with the spirit of the tag itself. JBK405 05:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Scenes info
I've added descriptions of the two deleted scenes from this episode. I think this is the first description of a deleted scene on Wikipedia. If it's too detailed or not detailed enough, feel free to change it. 218.215.144.146 (talk) 11:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Title of page
Is there a reason this page is located at "Serenity (Firefly episode)" rather than "Serenity (episode)"? It seems like a more natural name, there is no article currently existing at the page, and there is no other episode titled "Serenity" listed on the disambiguation. I see no reason it cannot be located there. 108.41.241.248 (talk) 23:26, 17 August 2014 (UTC)