Talk:Shego/Archive 2

TALK PAGES

 * For the umpteenth time, Wikipedia talk pages are NOT, repeat, NOT forums for general discussion of topics connected to their parent pages. The talk pages are for discussing the article and ways to improve it.  Please stop using them as a standard message board.  There are plenty of messageboards out there for discussing Kim Possible; I'd suggest you try starting with the forum linked on Ron Stoppable's Really Neat Page.  Rdfox 76 20:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Could we update the talk pages? Is there any way to ban those people? Could we archive some of the old stuff on here? Also, how about the garbage at the top? Let's clean this up. =CJK= 22:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Leave it to me.--Alexlayer 22:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Very cool, alex, but don't archive the GOOD, SHORT QUESTIONS or else people will ask them over and over again --=CJK= 22:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What do you mean with "Good, short questions"? I'm planning to just archive all that isn't "actual" anymore or that anyone won't touch anymore. --Alexlayer 22:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, don't you think they'll ask the good, short questions over and over again if they get archived? Also, I don't know what you mean by "actual" =CJK= 22:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't think it's worthy to keep those things around just to prevent someone asking them, and by "actual" I mean what is not old. I'm planing to take "Future Shego or Supreme One?" and everything that came before it, since I don't believe anyone would contribute to any of those anymore. --Alexlayer 22:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Allright! It's done! --Alexlayer 22:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Cool, cool. Can you do anything about the hooha at the top? It takes up a large amount of space and it's, well, ugly. =CJK= 22:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * hooha? If you mean the templates, sorry, but though anyone can remove them, I don't think it would be right, since they help us to track the article's progress.
 * If anything, we can work to promote the article into the GA criteria and then I think we could have a bit less of templates.--Alexlayer 22:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

What's the problem?
I'm out of the internet for a few days and this is what I found. WHAT was exactly the reason for the article to get protected? The fights for the images?

If there is ANY dispute around, let's solve it now so we can remove the protection and try to keep improving the articles. I'm still not sure why the images where deleted nor if it was for a right cause, but I'll make sure to check on this.

So, I call for everyone who cares about this page to express their opinion. The sooner we get this problem solved, the better. --Alexlayer 04:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Personally, I'm dubious as to the appropriateness of an admin protecting a page when he's one of the people involved in the edit war. &mdash; Red XIV (talk) 05:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess the article isn't protected anymore, but it still lacks pictures. What kind of pictures can we have? Did we just have too many? What was the specific problem with the images? I'm going to find some picture that makes sense to have on the page, and if it's deleted I would want to know why! --=CJK= 13:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It is protected right now, just lack the tag that should be on the top of the article, but right now, we can't edit. I already requested its unprotection, but haven't got much so far.


 * The admin said we broke rules about the fair-use usage, but I don't know if he is right, since he never explained clearly WHICH rule were we breaking. --Alexlayer 15:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I told you on my talk page once; the pictures you had were for decoration use only and had no context in the article about the image. What is so special about the image? Why do we need to show it ? That is what I been trying to get at. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm telling you, the pictures DOES have context. Everyone was used to graphycally express the subject explained in each section. It's NOT just decoration. How many times do I have to tell you that?


 * And besides, you still haven't answered how does WP:FUC justifies your actions since all the images I uploaded where under all the fair-use policy. So can you tell me WHICH rule are we breaking by adding the images to the article? --Alexlayer 02:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Rule 8 "Significance. Non-free media is not used unless it contributes significantly to an article. It needs to significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way that words alone cannot. The use of non-free media in lists, galleries, and navigational and user-interface elements is normally regarded as merely decorative, and is thus unacceptable." User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Um, none of those were the context in which the images were used. As Alexlayer said, the images were used for SPECIFIC purposes in illustrating SPECIFIC passages of the text. You can't get much more context than that. Did you even read the article? Joylock 19:40, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

All right. I just can't believe you. Of all the rules, the one you say we are breaking is the Significance? When all this time I've been telling you that the images were there for a reason and NOT just decoration? If anything, this just proves that you didn't even check the article at all, just ereased the images and that's that.

Let's check the images that were added, and see if you can understand for once and for all:


 * The first image appearing as a thump was a visual demostration of Shego's powers, placed right beside the section talking about her powers and abilities. The image clearly helps as it shows how Shego powers are, which cannot be totally described by words.

Next, in the Relationships Section.
 * The image of Shego and Drakken, right beside the subsection talking about her relationship with Drakken. It express what the text says, as the images shows what could be interpreted as Drakken thinking too high of himself while Shego looks him and thinks that he is stupid (That's actually what you can understand from the scene from which the screenshot was taken).
 * The image of Shego and Junior, right beside the subsection talking about her relationship with Junior. This picture shows, as the label said, Shego congratulating Junior for his work, as she was his trainer, as is told in the text.
 * Two images of Kim and Shego in the section about her relationship with Kim. The first one can be either the first fight between them (First chapter) or the most violent fight between them (in the movie), and another one showing the extreme opposite side, Shego and Kim as close friends as it happened in one certain chapter that seemed to be really important for the character.
 * An image of Shego with her brothers, right in the section of her family relationship, important as the chapters in which they appeared are indeed important for the character and also for preseting four characters at once, showing that they care for her sister. If anything, this is probably the most important image in the relationship section.

The images in the Relationship section does not only work to express Shego's relationship with these characters, but also to present said characters. This way, the article becomes informative in such a way that even someone who doesn't watch the shows can easily get the idea of it.


 * And then there is the images in the Alternative Version section, which are TOTALLY significant. Since this version of the character looks significantly different from the original and the text doesn't make a description of said changes. It would be actually nonsense to try to describe these differences when you can actually insert an image of this version and make it much easier for the readers to know about it.

This images covers both the significance and the context. Maybe the images of the comet that hitted Shego and the one of Shego experiencing regret, though they still work with the context, aren't needed. But the rest of these images undeniably improve the article.

Now, how about unprotect it for once and for all? So we can go back to improve it, with both images and text. I want to add some finishing touches so we can finally promote this article to the good article criteria. --Alexlayer 03:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Unlocked, but still watching. As it will be the final protect, I cannot say. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * So you agree with these pictures? Please make it clear 'cause the last thing I need is to put them and you deleting them and protecting the article again. --Alexlayer 09:59, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Zscout370, with regards to what you said in the history section: you didn't make ANY suggestions, you just put down a broad sweeping condemnation as a reason to lock the article. Trying to make yourself sound good instead of being truthful in your posts only reduces your credibility. Joylock 20:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Alexlayer did a fantastic job explaining the pictures, but is this zscout person just going to lock the article again? Can he just lock articles up for no reason like he did before? This picture deleting thing is absolutely ridiculous, who does he answer to? Can zscout just do whatever he wants? What are the rules for you people? --=CJK= 12:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If zscout was going to protect the article again, they'd have done it now. There *IS* a rule regarding this; zscout locked the article down because of the edit war that was starting.  While I agree that it's questionable for an admin to protect an article to stop an edit war that they're party to, it's within the admin rules and regulations.  If you feel there's a problem with it, you're within your rights to start following the Wikipedia dispute resolution process to determine the limits.  But if you do, please, please, PLEASE read the page fully before you start it; not following the procedures correctly will just get your complaints shrugged off and ignored, and that'll just make you angrier.  Rdfox 76 13:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Too much overlapping, superfluous detail
Quite a few paragraphical topics tend to overlap each other. There is content about Shego's emotional growth in three sections, her origin and relationship with her brothers twice, and her impatience with Drakken twice. These topics need to be triaged and given single homes.

The "Miss Go (Stop Team Go)" and "The Supreme One" subsections sections recap their respective episodes. Basically, if it does not directly describe the character in question, it's superfluous.
 * I think I just took care of that.--Alexlayer 02:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

With a little hard work and merciless editing this can be a great section. It deserves to be. Sbgdcom 01:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I guess you're right. I'll see what I can do. --Alexlayer 01:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, are =CJK= and I missing something? --Alexlayer 03:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow! Excellent, focused efforts, you two! Gimme a minute to read through...
 * ... Got it! Much, much better. Suggested edits get a bit tougher from here on...


 * HISTORY: Better, but THIS is where the updates outlining Shego's emerging Season 4 worldview goes. I'll hit the end of this section (I gots an idea).


 * POWERS: Starts great, but gets shaggy. Needs to be rebuilt. Cut and fit para. 2 into para. 1, drop para. 3 (It's a cartoon: everyone is super-durable). Paras. 4 & 5 are the same idea, and need to be combined.


 * KIM POSSIBLE: some ideas repeat, like "personal rivalry" and speculation of friendship. Second to last para. would go better in HISTORY.


 * DRAKKEN: I see some overlap with PERSONALITY. It should focused tightly on her relationship with her employer, like the way the KIM POSSIBLE subsection is voiced. I disagree that Shego treats Drakken like a "little brother:" It's more like professional contempt and even a fatalistic pessimism about his schemes (Shego: "Should I go ahead and put this plan in the 'failed' column?"). This subsection would be a good place to detail Shego's increasingly acrimonious relationship with Dr. D. A bit about WHY she keeps coming back to him over and over would also be illuminating (theory: Shego likes the fact she can push Drakken around. She likes cruising through life and Dr. D provides a steady job with low expectations.)


 * FAMILY: Shorter!


 * MISS GO (Stop Team Go): Much improved. A few clunker lines here and there, though.


 * If I didn't mention this before: the section and subsection structure of this article is excellent! A solid foundation for upcoming improvements. Sbgdcom 06:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the structure, that was moi. I just edited the KP Relationship slightly guys, check it out. --=CJK= 14:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Your Drakken theory is interesting and worthy of putting into the article. However, there's no reason their relationship isn't familial either. If she likes being lazy and she likes violence, she could find another employer or job. But that's not the point: I'll clean up the Drakken rel part if I can. --=CJK= 14:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The Drakken part has been shortened. I wanted to make sure there was very little WP:OR in there, so I tried to skip the theories. I'll try working on the family sec --=CJK= 15:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Theories have no place in the article: That's why it's mentioned here. Really, The theory is a hypothetical starting point about how to define her relationship with him. The top-down look, at least the way I see it, casts her as a surly but indespensible employee. I cannot cite an instance where Shego uses family metaphors to describe her gig with Dr. D., which makes that approach conjectural. Drakken does several times, which is where the concept may have originated. BTW, nice work all down the line, CJK! Sbgdcom 17:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The family part had an easily identifiable problem: it was badly written. I rewrote the longest section of it. I think that covers everything: Alex will probably look over my edits and go over the miss go sections. --=CJK= 15:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I edited the family section a bit, because the edits made only mentioned (again) that Shego left Team Go. That part is supposed to focus on Shego's relationship with her brothers, which I tried to describe the best I could, and I think it is important to notice that, overall, Shego probably still cares for them.


 * Also, there's this thing I've been wondering:

"Even when she was a heroine she had, in her brothers’ words, a tendency to be smart-mouthed and prone to violence with a cranky personality."


 * This phrase, which I deleted from the section, doesn't exactly refers to her relationship with her brothers, but as a trait of her personality. But I'm not sure whenever this should go into Personality or History and Evolution. Personally, I vote for the second one, but what do you guys think? --Alexlayer 00:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Unless it SPECIFICALLY refers to her development, all statements referring to a general trait of Shego's should be put in the personality section. The history section should be kept small and not be filled with personality traits. That's my opinion anyway. --=CJK= 01:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

History section redone. It was too long basically: and still is I think. However, I'm not sure what to do with it. (Personal note to Alex: I don't need you yelling at me when you edit something. When you edited that template all you needed to say was a simple explanation that's all. Please calm down, ok?) --=CJK= 01:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * How 'bout that change to History? It's still mostly yours, CJK. Wanted to emphasize that history is change: Origin, through evolution, to current state. In that respect it's OK to be open-ended. Oh, and while I'm here, I'm seeing some nice work being done on the article! It's chugging along well, getting more readable, and is starting to hew to WP style. Sbgdcom 09:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

those weird edits by that guy w/o a username were NOT by me, by the way. --=CJK= 04:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

German Information
Now, while searching for Information about Shego's character creation, I came with this video that DOES have information about the character's creation, and I'm sure something was mentioned about Shego at about 3:30 time of the video, even something about her colors (Something like "black and green... are all considered bad colors"). The BIG problem is that the video is in German. >_<

Here you have it.

Now, if you listen carefully, you can tell that the video was dubbed in German while the English voices are still on the background, yet I haven't been able to find a totally English version of this video. So... we either need to find the English version, OR we need a German translator. So far, I haven't been able to find neither, so I wondered if anyone could help to drag this information, which was requested to nominate Shego's article as a Good Article.

If obtained, you can either start a section or post the translation here, and so I can handle it. I already have some information about Shego's character, but it's definitely not enough to make a section out of it. --Alexlayer 01:00, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Characteristics or not?
I want to gather opinions about this. The Characteristic section, which reunited Personality, Appearance and Powers, was taken away and its inner section were scattered around the article.

Now, the point is that I believe that the Characteristic section should prevail as its former sub-sections were all about, as the title said, characteristics of Shego. While Relationships, Alternative Versions, Other Appearances and History and Evolution are something else, the rest of the sections are indeed for describing Shego’s traits and that’s what I think they should be reunited in one section, specially because sections as Appearance are not much relevant for an article by themselves.

So I propose to restore the Characteristic section. Agree or disagree? Cast your votes. --Alexlayer 04:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, what is the definition of "characteristics"? Isn't the entire article about Shego's characteristics? In the previous version, "history and development" was not only third in the table of contents, but was a subcategory of "characteristics". It doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. I do want the article to be well structured. If someone could propose a good organization of the article that included characteristics, that would be fine. Let me reiterate: isn't the entire article about Shego's characteristics? I vote disagree: it's just a category. Maybe if we put appearance and powers under the header characteristics I would agree to that if it followed the personality and history sections. --=CJK= 05:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hope I solved this issue. Characteristics is now the title of two subcategories: Appearance and powers --=CJK= 16:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not really sure about this, since I really think that Personality should go in Characteristics, but since no one else seems to be willing to comment, I'll leave it like that for now. I still got some research to do. --Alexlayer 03:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Now, this is what I meant. When I made the Total Update on Shego's page, I based it on Featured Articles of other fictional characters, like Link, or rather, the version of back then.

Having a Characteristics section is for reuniting all that consist on the common traits of the characters, and Personality does go in there. This way, the article starts defining everything that should be known of the character, and then it goes for other things like it's history or relationships with other characters, etc. Do you see what I mean now? --Alexlayer 02:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Seriously, Alex, (A) I don't understand what would not go under a header called "Characteristics", and (B) I don't see what the big flipping deal is! Isn't the ENTIRE article about Shego's characteristics? I think it looks best the way it is: nothing personal, okay? By the way, Link IS NOT arranged the way Shego was arranged: It has "Characeristics" instead of "Personality" and "History" which for Shego would be very confusing! --=CJK= 12:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I know this is nothing personal, it just that this keeps bugging me. And for answering A and B, I really don't think that the WHOLE article is precisely about characteristic. History is another kind of information rather than a characteristic of a person, while the Relationship are directly linked to other characters, and I don't think the last two sections need to be explained.


 * Basically, in Characteristic would go what are Shego's basic and typical traits, so we have all that compose the character as we know her and see her in every episode she appears. That's why I feel that these sections should go together as parts of one.


 * And about Link's article, its Characteristics section does not have sub-sections now, but it did have back then, when I used it as a model for remaking Shego's article. It started describing the personality and then other traits of him as the appearance and his skills, just like I did to Shego, and Link's article already was a Featured Article back then.


 * Another reason for the Characteristic Heading is that I feel like, the less main section for the article, the better. That way we can divide the information in fewer parts, which would make the article easier to explore for whoever reads it.


 * Well, those are my reasons. --Alexlayer 16:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I just remembered one last reason, and it is that, after finishing raising Shego to a GA article, I was planing to keep the work with other KP characters using Shego's article as a model, and I already have some ideas in mind about how the "Characteristics" sections for those articles could be made. This way, we can keep a similar style for the articles. --Alexlayer 03:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay Alex, let me make it easy for you. Here are the questions you have to answer: --=CJK= 04:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Why would it make more sense for history/personality to go under char than any other group of headers? (why not Characteristics-appearance?)
 * Because the way a character should be known is by learning all about its traits and present state, after that you can go to learn about it's past and other things.


 * Why "characteristics" and not anything else?
 * Do you have a better idea? "Traits"? Nah, I don't think so. Characteristics fits right. Besides, it wouldn't be the first article about a fictional character using it.


 * How would adding a category make navigation easier?
 * Because it reunites three other sections.


 * Isn't the Shego article a list of her characteristics to begin with?
 * No, it is about all the information about Shego, but not every kind of information is specifically a characteristic. You can't say a person's past is exactly a present trait.


 * What other articles are you planning to use this with?
 * For now, Kim and Ron (This last one really needs a LOT of clean up). After that, I'll see about others.


 * Which other KP articles have the same game plan as Shego's layout?
 * Didn't I already answer that?


 * What is the basic layout of Shego? Isn't char already a part of it?
 * Her characteristics are explained in the article, but in three separated sections. That's the problem, they should go together.


 * On my computer, at least, the table of contents fits neatly. How would making the TOC spill over be better?
 * I don't think that the TOC could be really a problem. Specially considering that a lot of articles have inmense TOCs. Besides, you can always just move the page a bit down or change the resolution, right?

Well, I hope I answered all the questions satisfactorily. Any more doubts? --Alexlayer 05:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Good job, but there are serious problems. First, I have no idea what "characteristics" means in your description. Also, "uniting other sections" doesn't unite like you think: it just adds a header to the TOC. I would agree that "relationships" is a suitable header because (A) it has a distinct definition, and (B) it is separate from the rest of the article, while "characteristics" is, at it's base, superfluous. --=CJK= 05:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * With Characteristics, I mean the traits, features and attributes for which Shego is known, what makes Shego the character she is. And basically, as I said before, the article should start describing a character's traits and then move to it's history. So it's not just adding a header to the TOC, it's improving the article by organizing the information, which makes it not superfluous.


 * And by the way, can someone else give an opinion about this? It shouldn't be a matter of only two persons. --Alexlayer 16:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Alex! "The traits, features, and attributes for which Shego is known" includes everything in the article! Including history! --=CJK= 18:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * But that's another kind of information. The creators could have given Shego a totally different background and still retain her personality, appearence and powers. "Characteristics" is, in short, what you see of Shego in every chapter she appears.


 * Besides, take in count that, when I proposed Shego to be a GA and we recieved a review about the article, there was no complaining on the organization used back then, which means that it was totally acceptable.


 * So far, I think I've given enough reasons for the meaning of the Characteristics heading, while explaining the controversies. Yet, I really don't see any good reason for not doing it.--Alexlayer 20:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I just don't get it. It will make the article clunky, and nobody else has said anything about it's removal. In fact, Sbg even said that the article is better organized now than before, so maybe we should consider him a nay vote. --=CJK= 20:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'd also like Sbgdcom opinion. But how could it be possibly clunky? It would organize the information. The TOC would look like this, while the Characteristics section like this . What could be possibly clunky about it? ---Alexlayer 03:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll weigh in!


 * "Characteristics" as a top-level category to include the first four sections makes fine sense, but it is NOT necessary by any means. The first four sections are well-delineated and need no overall category. About the only real reason to have a Characteristics top-level category is if "Shego" the article was part of a larger, contiguous article-- In other words, if "Shego" was part of even higher organizational structure. For instance, if there was a mega-article called "Kim Possible Villains," and it included other characters, then having a "Characteristics" top category would make organizational sense.


 * But that is not how WP is structured-- Every major character gets an article. An article structure should be approached from the reader's perspective: They come in and find our character described in neat "glances" the way any of us would: General introduction, what she's like, where she's from, what she looks like, and what she can do. This is top-level info, and these self-contained sections need no higher structure.


 * (BTW: I just found a big, obvious typo in the article. Category six says "Alternative versions:" It should say "Alternate versions" as in "versions of Shego that are different or substitute." What it now implies is "One or the other of only two versions of Shego." I'll fix.)Sbgdcom 07:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Citation
Right now, in the fan reception section, the citation for Kigo being popular is not up to the standards of a good article. It's a link to a message board and some pictures or something. I'll cave in if there is another GA that uses something very similar to those. --=CJK= 18:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think you'll find what you're searching for, but that won't mean that it shouldn't be here either. Wikipedia has no policy against Fanfiction or Fancruft, and what the article says is nothing not-neutral. That Kigo has it's popularity, it's true and any good fan that's into fanfiction knows it. The source works as proper evidence of how wide it's existant is, even if it's not precisly accurate. Besides, what kind of source can you expect? This one works, so let it be. The last thing we need now is an edit-war, which would kill the chances for raising Shego's article to the GA criteria. --Alexlayer 19:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay listen carefully: you need to find some kind of evidence for what your saying. Let's not have a revert war. There is not going to be a GA article that cites a message board!! Here's the fundamental problem with Kigo: IT'S ALL WP:OR! --=CJK= 19:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Technically, Original Research is when there is no source at all, and the article itself it's trying to prove something on itself. So that's not the case of Kigo, as there is proof of it in some other websites. As I said before, just because there is no other article stating something like this, doesn't mean that Shego can't, specially considering that Shego's case is kinda unique.


 * But the point here is that, believe me, nobodody is going to be questioning that source. If you read the Analysis in the source, you'll see that this source can prove it to anyone. And at any rate, it would be preferible to leave that phrase alone rather than with the "citation needed" thing, as we know it's true, and it's not like we're questioning the fact.--Alexlayer 19:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

All right, check this out. There are Articles in Wikipedia that refer to Fancruft and pairings, most notably Slash fiction, but most importantly of all is the Harry Potter fandom article, which is a GA and cites to Fansites and other things like that.

While we can't get as much sources for Kim Possible as for Harry Potter, since the fandom is not as big, there is nothing wrong with what it is stating, as WP:FAN states: "As with most of the issues of What Wikipedia is not in Wikipedia, there is no firm policy on the inclusion of obscure branches of popular culture subjects." And in any case, "It is true that things labeled fancruft are often deleted from Wikipedia. This is primarily due to the fact that things labeled as fancruft are often poorly written, unreferenced, unwikified, and non-neutral - all valid reasons for deletion." None of this is the case here.

I'm going to state the Analysis as source. If you think that there is a real reason for not doing so, please state it here.--Alexlayer 20:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. I surrender. --=CJK= 20:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Remember this argument though, as I'm going to revisit it when Shego is a candidate for an A-Class article. (as far as Kigo goes, I don't like it but I surrender. I like the idea of Shego and Kim being friends, though.) --=CJK= 20:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Notes on latest article changes
I came back to Shego after a few days off-line and the many changes made to the article are glaringly apparent. I do not think these changes are, as a whole, generally positive.

I know it's easy to criticize, and I know these changes are well-intentioned, but the article is getting harder to read and it's voice is drifting away from WP style. There was good progress being made the last couple of weeks, but the last few days sort of set that progress back. For the most part most of the good stuff in the article is still there, but I'd hate to see it regress further.

I know you guys are pretty good with CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, so here goes.

It is unknown what happened with Shego right after leaving her family, but from the beginning of the series Shego has been, for the most part, in the employ of Dr. Drakken as his sidekick and enforcer. It is during this stage of her life in which the series mostly resolve, leading her and Drakken to multiple confrontations against Kim Possible, '''with whom Shego usually fights in almost every case. Though Kim usually defeats them, they rarely get imprisoned, and even if they do, they eventually come back.'''
 * Overexplaination. This is in practically every new or remodeled section. Here's an example, with the excess verbiage in bold:

Trust your readers: You only have to describe once as long as it's done well, and information gaps (like what Shego did before she met Drakken) do not need to be described ''at all. ''
 * Overgeneralization: A lot of episode-specific examples of particular character traits and such seem to have been rewritten into short, cited references. Dropping a stark fact, then propping it up with a citation, does not make informative or compelling reading. People come to this article to learn about Shego: Show them, don't send them away!


 * Grammar and Syntax. There are hanging participles, odd verbiage, subject and tense confusion and soft syntax throughout the article as well. Another example:

Despite how much Shego avows to dislike her siblings and although she would never admit it, it was highly hinted that Shego still has a sense of familial love for them that both Kim and Drakken pointed out.

Subject: Shego-- Or is it Familial Love? Who highly hints, Kim and Drakken? Past or present tense-- One per sentence, please. There are lots of other sentences just like this.


 * New section: "Creation and reception." This is, frankly, a misfire. I can see what the section was trying to do, sorta: give a "Top-Down" description of Shego the character: her creation, her popularity, and her out-of-series appearances. As a section it doesn't hang together: the common thread is... well, threadbare.

The section's paragraphs read better as individual sections. The first one (creation) probably should be worked into the intro. The second one (reaction) could be put there as well, but would be better as a carefully worded "Fan Reaction" section. The third was better as it was originally: "Outside appearances."

This all boils down to one thing: Better writing and self-editing. Get topic ideas distilled down as far as they'll go, but describe important details fully. Check the champion TV articles in WP for examples of good voicing and paragraph organization. An easy first start to this end I can recommend is to take one section or paragraph at a time, re-write it in Microsoft Word with grammar checking on, then dump it back in.

The major contribs for this article are good writers-- I've seen it. You can do this. We can do this. Sbgdcom 08:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I redid the history section. You were right, it was convoluted and had unnecessary parts to it. Check it out. I'm going to take a look at Drakken/Shego rel section now. --=CJK= 14:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Alright, Mr. English teacher, check it: The Drakken-Shego rel section wasn't that bad, but I removed the excess stuff (the history says that I fixed syntax and grammar, but that's not really true). It seems fairly accurate, actually. We've been having a debate since the beginning about what Dr. D's and S's relationship is really like, and we've settled on this interpretation: (1) that they don't love each other, but they don't hate each other, (2) that Shego is closer to Drakken than she would let on, and (3) that she is fairly annoyed by him anyway. This section tries to verify those three points without WP:OR, but before I rewrote it, it had a lot of "excess verbiage". --=CJK= 15:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * CJK: Your fixes to "History" are just fine, and are going in the right direction. I hope I didn't overreact with the above entry. It really looked to me that some folks had gone on a tear in this article and started digging up the petunias. Tell ya what: I may start re-doing sections starting from the top one down-- not changing content, just cleaning up writing. I'm beginning to think it's not such a good idea to change content, because so much of it is apparently hard-fought consensus that changing it would be a dumb move. 'Bout one section a day or so: That's all there's time for these days, and it'll give time for peer review and such. Sbgdcom 06:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"That's all there's time for these days"? You mean you aren't dedicating your life to Shego? ;) =CJK= 14:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Sbgdcom 23:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow-- Think she'd notice if I did? :) "I love that green magic! Yeaaah!" --Motor Ed

Shego In Other Mediums
Alex, or anyone who knows... in building up the new sections of Shego, this has been suggested as one of the most important questions: What is Shego like in the video games or in the crossover L&S episode? Is she somewhat different? Are parts of her history brought forward that weren't there before? What are the differences? --=CJK= 23:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think she is much different in the L&S episode (I'll have to download it and watch it, anyway), but one thing I'm going to point out is her appearence in the KP:WTS videogame, in which, for some reason, her powers are portrayed as electromagnetical rather than termal (In case you ask, yes, I already beat that game), her personality wasn't much different, but the game didn't have much plot anyway. --Alexlayer 23:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * In regards to What's the Switch, Wade said that he was able to manipulate Shego's powers into a grappling beam for her. He never mentioned the other two, but, seeing as how Shego doesn't even HAVE the grappling beam until she get a Kimmunicator, it's safe to assume that Wade was responsible for ALL of her game-only powers. Maetch 23:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Shego Concept & Design
What was shego like when Schooly and McCorkle first came up with the concept? Ya know the original sketches. And was Nicole Sullivan the first person to try out for Shego. We know that both creators worked on Buzzligghtyear of Star Command and Nicole did a voice on that. Is that simply coincidental? If you know tell me. And if you do I think we should add it to the Shego page :) --KPprincess 23:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Excellent! People are learning how to use the talk pages for intelligent questions! Alex and maybe me are going to add whatever we can find about her concept and design to the main page. Use this topic for any additional info. --=CJK= 00:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Now, that is some interesting information, KPprincess, which could be very useful, even to track down more, but we'll need the source of that information in order to publish it into the article. Could you tell us where you got that info if you can, please? --Alexlayer 01:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

About 2 years ago I was interested in the 'behind the scenes' aspect of Kim Possible. I did some research on the internet and found a very old interview with Schooly and McCorkle about Kim Possible.It had all sorts of AWSOME KP stuff. Stuff I didn't even know. Unfortunatly I don't remember what it was called and I'm having a hard time finding it :( But I know it's around here somewhere. If we keep looking I'm sure we'll find something. The web is... it's big place :) But this kind of stuff is what Wikipedia needs. People are using it to fantisize about what they "wish" would happen on KP. Na! No more. People don't put made up definitions of word in the dictionary! So everyone keep looking for this interview with the 2 creators of Kim p. Trust me it's got all the great stuff. And in the mean time I'll keep looking..........--KPprincess 02:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Tidying up the Talk Page
I kinda redid the entire thing. Luckily, if you have a major qualm, it was done all in just 4 or 5 edits. However, I think you will see the value in arranging the talk page in this way. Article related topics are the first half, Shego related the second. What do you think? --=CJK= 21:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem with this is that, whenever someones clicks on the Plus + Symbol at the top of the page to start a new topic, that one is going to appear at the bottom of the page. --Alexlayer 21:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Technically, I believe, talk pages are supposed to be done with topics in chronological order. While I'm not complaining, you probably oughta keep it in mind.  Rdfox 76 22:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I like it! It's organized! Sbgdcom 23:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, there's going to be some bloopers with the +, but they're fixable. As far as chronological topics were concerned, it started to get messy. There were about 20 topics! The only problem I see is that it's conceivable that there would be a topic that might go in both sections... The upside is that it's easier to archive the useless stuff now (which will usually be the second half of the page), and easier to tell who's a wikinoob by how they use the new "filing system". It could be arranged any number of ways, if someone else would like to try. --=CJK= 23:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Personality Comparison
I'm worried about the newest paragraphs of the Personality section (The third one). Though it is well written, it does not tells anything about Shego that it's not already mentioned in the other three paragraphs. Practically, all that it does is to compare Shego with Kim and Ron, and I honestly don't think that that's really needed. --Alexlayer 22:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It's probably a good idea to mention how her personality is shaped by others somehow. Also, since she's a main character, it might be good to put her beside the other people who are also main characters. What would the article gain by leaving out that paragraph? Also, it's an interesting thing to note anyway. --=CJK= 23:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

GA comment
Before somebody reviews this article to determine if it meets the GA criteria, make sure that all inline citations go directly after the punctuation with no spaces in between. --Nehrams2020 17:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Quotes
I was wondering if it would be okay if I made a part on the Shego Article for quotes. People could just write Shego quotes from various episodes. Can I?Bracelet 19:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No. This is what WikiQuotes is for.  There's a link to the Shego section there in the article already.  Rdfox 76 21:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Isn't she similar to Madame Hydra
Anyone else see the obvious similarity?


 * Didn't we have this section before? Other than a green suit, I see no similarity. --=CJK= 13:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Drakken & Shego... read my comments first!
I know that they don't wuv each other, but how close are they? It's true that they are from different generations (Drakken = K's dad, Shego is closer to K's age), and Shego is repulsed by the idea, so romance is definitely OUT of the question. Wouldn't it be correct to say that they have a familial relationship? Shego does keep working with him, and Drakken is somewhat possessive of her. Would it be correct to say that they consider each other siblings?

REMINDER: We've decided that they are not romantically involved so keep your strange ideas to a messageboard somewhere else. It would almost be as creepy as Kigo, but not quite. --=CJK= 14:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I think I know what you mean, and I'm also one of the fans that think that Shego cares more for Drakken that what she would admit. Still, this point of view of mine is only an expeculation, and adding it to the article would be braking the neutral point of view and adding original research. That's why I limit my aditions to stated facts and things we can clearly see in the show. --Alexlayer 15:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it is something that Shego keeps working for Drakken. But of course, if it gets in the way of her doing something she wants, then too bad for him. Like in a ASiT when she stole the time monkey from him. But other then that, I agree that they care for eachother but not in a romantic way. Drakken also calls them an evil family in a few episodes.Shegofan 22:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Relationship with Kim.
Just because someone asked about the changes I did, well, let me explain.

Overall, it was just summarizing the fact stated in the article. Part of what I did was to join different lines of some paragraphs into one, mostly because it was like Shego saving Kim's life was mentioned more than once.

I added something into this, and it is the fact that the relationship between them has been evolving. At first, Shego didn't take Kim much serious, but eventually started to grew a respect and, later, began to take it too personal.

Also, I think it's important to avoid mentioning specific episodes’ names to put as an example, and that it's better to add those chapters just as source of the stated facts. The only exception I did was to Stop Team Go, since it's like this chapter was the most important to Shego's development.

And I took out some of the mentions of Kim's relationship with Bonnie, since those doesn't have much to do with Kim's relationship with Shego. Sure, it's comparable, but it's not like we have to mention another relationship into one.

Anyway, if someone feels like I did something wrong with this section, please feel free to mention it and we can discuss it. --Alexlayer 15:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Why don't you want to mention episode names? In what way does Shego show respect for Kim? To tell the truth, I don't think you could really use Stop Team Go for an example since Shego was under mind control, although I would like to hear what She was gonna tell Kim considering she said she couldn't tell her when she was evil.Shegofan


 * Well, it's better not repeating episode names all around the article since it makes unnecesary longer. Just citing the chapters as sources and references is enought.


 * And about Shego showing respect for Kim, "Stop Team Go" is not the reason for what that's said. She's always mocking, but she clearly has some regonition for her abilities. In "Mad Dogs and Aliens", she said "I'm just sticking around to see the cheerleader kick your great blue-" and then was interrupted, but I guess you see the point.--Alexlayer 02:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't think of "Mad Dogs and Aliens",you make a good point.I've never thought that Shego had any respect for Kim, but when you use that episode, it makes a bit more since. She also helped Kim by getting rid of Warmonga in that episode; I think that "Mad Dogs and Aliens" opens up a whole other side of Shego and Kim's relationship.Shegofan

I actually thnk the only reason Shego said "I'm just sticking around to see the cheerleader kick your great blue-" was because she was angry at Drakken and was trying to annoy him. (What else is new?)Bracelet 19:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Even if that is the case, it shows that she has more respect for Kim's fighting abilities than Drakken's. =CJK= 20:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Will Shego turn GOOD in the last episode?
I've heard rumors that Warmonga is coming back in the 4th season finaly. Also we saw hints in "Stop Go Team" that she may care about Kim. Lot's of people think Drakken will replace Shego and she will become a goodguy in the end. DO ANY OF YOU THINK THIS IS TRUE???????? Let me know!
 * Maybe, maybe not. But one way or the other nothing is to be mentioned on the article until it is shown. --Alexlayer 15:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * When you say "rumors", I take it that you mean fans saying that this is what they want on message boards rather than the creators making cryptic comments in interviews as a taster for fans? - perfectblue 20:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Why would she turn good? And how could Drakken replace shego? Also, in what way do you mean replace? Do you mean that he would get popular all of a sudden? If that is what you mean, I'm gonna have to say no about drakken replacing her; that'd change his personality too much.Shegofan 19:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know who Shego's parents are????
We've seen the Go Team. Which (I guess) are all her brothers. But we've never heard or seen anything about her 'rents. I wanted to know if somebody on here knew anything about that.
 * So far, there is absolutely no mention of Shego's parents. --=CJK= 19:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If there was anything about Shego's parent, we would have add it to the articles already. So far, Shego's parents only appears in fanfictions and fanarts, but there's nothing oficially canon. --Alexlayer 22:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I read a fan fiction where her parents died when the comet hit, that's some what logical.

Powers & Abilities
First off: Nice, nice work, Alexlayer! The condensation of topic in this section was well executed. I did some minor work on it, and made one cut. Points for discussion:


 * Glad to know that, and thanks for adding your touch.--Alexlayer 00:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

--The last paragraph, the "super-durability" topic. I've mentioned this before, but ALL of the action-driven characters in the KP universe are super-durable. (If I recall, Motor Ed, Drakken and Shego all survive unscathed when the "Doom-Vee" they're in explodes. Okay, Shego's hair gets messed up.) If this is going to be pointed out, what makes Shego exceptional in comparison?


 * I think that that is worthy of mentioning, since in the source I just published, this was mentioned:

''Q: Was it an ambulance?  Steve: No it was a paddy wagon…. ''Mark: She was just sitting there, her hair was smoking… ''Steve: … hair was smoking… ''Q: She survived? ''Steve: Yeah, she’s tough. She could survive that… she survived that huge fall in Sitch in Time. Nicole: She had Go Team power goin’ on…


 * That's why.--Alexlayer 00:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That puts Shego's constitution on par with Team Go. And admittedly, that was a pretty amazing thing to survive. But there's also a similar mention of extreme durability in Motor Ed. The point is there are character shields on everybody in KP. Eh, I made my point.Sbgdcom 01:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but we don't see Kim or Ron being thrown to an electrified tower and surviving.--Alexlayer 01:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Aaah! I just figured out what I was trying to say (always a good idea to take a break from the ol' computer once and a while: it clears the head).
 * "...Shego possesses superhuman durability that allows her to survive significant injuries that would normally kill an ordinary human."
 * This is an invalid comparison: It compares Shego the animated character to intrinsic reality. In the KP universe, nobody kills and nobody dies (except off-screen at a ripe old age). Maybe it can be worked into the first paragraph...Sbgdcom 01:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Then how about:

"...Shego possesses superhuman durability that allows her to survive significant injuries that would probably kill other characters." uh?--Alexlayer 01:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Works for me! Needs to go at the end of the 1st paragraph, which will make this section two neat paragraphs. On second thought, no it doesn't. Sbgdcom 06:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

-- "Retconned" is jargon, which is why it's in quotes. I don't quite know an elegant and understandable way to express "retcon," But for the sake of non-fan types consider changing it.


 * I'm sure how to handle that.


 * I assume you mean the opposite, and left out "not." I'll hack at it and leave the link.

--The topic of exactly HOW powerful her energy blasts are is not really addressed. I'd love to see some examples, like "the blasts are controllable in power, large enough to (something something) yet can be applied finely enough to (something something)." Give the reader a feel for what she's capable of.


 * Mmm... now that's interesting, though I'm not sure which would be the limits. In So The Drama, Shego's power portrayed as immensely destructive, reason for which I added that particularly image, but with how many "precision" has Shego come to use her powers? I remember her using small-precise blast in Stop Team Go against her brothers, but there might be a better example to mention.--Alexlayer 00:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * How 'bout this: In Emotion Sickness Shego uses it to write "DD+SG" on the wall of the lair. I seem to remember her melting open a lock or some such with a single finger, but I can't place the recollection.Sbgdcom 01:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I just added "fired as a ranged energy attack, from either laser precision to a destructive blast". What do you think?--Alexlayer 01:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think it's good.Sbgdcom 06:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't want to come off like the new edit was wrong: It's great, it just needs some tweaking. :) Sbgdcom 00:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I got your point. Let's see what we can do.--Alexlayer 00:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The latest edit structures this section thusly:

Para. 1: Abilities described

Para. 2: Primary Power described

Para. 3: Origin of powers described

Para. 4: Durability (secondary power) described --Sbgdcom 06:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey guys... didn't she also put a guard to sleep using her glow? I think that was in the twin factor --=CJK= 16:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, she did, but I'm not sure if that's worthy of mentioning. For once, we don't know exactly what she did. She could have knocked him out out of only shock, or not, but at any rate, and as two, Shego has never displayed the ability to put someone to sleep besides that ocassion. If anything, she had done that by brutal force rather than her powers.


 * The point is that it's impossible to confirm, and I don't think that something that happened only in one old episode and never used again should be given much importance. --Alexlayer 17:26, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Here's something that I've wondered ever since I saw "Go Team Go". Shego's brothers seem to have the same glow as her, but also other powers such as super strength, shrinking, and making copies of them selves; but Shego only has the glow, does her brother's glow function the same as her's or just make light? __ Yma

Her brothers have the glow like Shego does, but it's Go Glow, and they all have it. That doesnt mean They can actually shoot (what ever Shego does shoot) out of their hands too. They all have their own powers. (Hego Super Strengh, Mego Shrinking, The Wegos Duplicating, and Shego fire. Or something like fire.)Bracelet 19:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Shego's past
Does any one want to know any more about Shego's past than what's in Go Team Go? Is there any way to find out more? I know this probably seems like a boring page, but I really do wonder about Shego's past. Any comments?


 * I don't want to come off as dismissive, but your line of questioning indicates to me that the creators and writers of KP are doing their jobs right. Believe me, EVERYONE involved in these pages wants the same answers you do, uh, whoever you are (think about signing next time). Vivid, well-drawn characters, when put into interesting conflicts and intriguing character arcs, have the effect of creating intense audience interest and curiosity. That's why you're here.


 * There is a massive amount of fan fiction out there about Shego, and you might find some of the interpretations in them to your liking, but the creators of KP have offered little more than the facts you can find on these pages. Sbgdcom 05:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

This is just like the question about Shego's parents. If there was anything about that, we would have already add it here. So far, I think we're not missing anything relevant about Shego. --Alexlayer 05:26, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

In fact, I think we might have added too much. The evidence given by Shego's brothers of her personality is less than hearsay, it's probably a misinterpretation. Her brothers are basically uncoordinated, and their testimony as to her basic personality is probably questionable. The only things that they have agreed on in unison are two things: --=CJK= 05:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That Shego was angry during the Team Go time and
 * That Shego was the reason that Team Go "got anything done", which in itself is ambiguous.


 * Well, I think the first paragraph of the History section needs some re-write, I'm just not sure how yet. --Alexlayer 05:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I still think this article is improving. That impartial WP tone is starting to predominate, and the I cannot cite any glaring examples of heresay or imposition of viewpoint, just some rough parts and some gushy fan-style writing here and there.


 * As long as we're all here, I'll defend that last line of "SSR:" Shego grabs Martin Smarty and demands her billion dollars. Junior protests, something to the effect that "hey, my dad is happy, you don't have to do that!" Shego gets a big close-up-- The message is: I don't care, I want mine. Then Ron grabs her ankle, she falls into the gator pit, etc. etc. etc. I actually think it was sloppy writing and ignores to what has been established between Shego and SSJ, but it's right up there. Hm? Sbgdcom 06:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that the gist of SSJ's message was "you don't have to go overboard", not "please for my sake don't do this". Therefore, in Shego's act, she is denying that she doesn't have to go overboard, not that she is betraying SSJ. How about that reasoning SBG? --=CJK= 06:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Quite frankly, it's shaky reasoning. She acts. He protests. She defies his protest, for selfish reasons. SSJ is a pretty simple kid, and his reaction is equally simple: "Don't do that, Shego." It's not a big, "moo-ha-ha" betrayal, but she definitely disrespects him. Like I said, IMO it's just a sloppy, punch-out ending written to get the antagonist out of the scene. These things happen sometimes. Sbgdcom 07:30, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

How about the line I just added? It's more neutral and states what happened in that chapter as only a possibility. On the other hand, what was between brackets wasn't much relevant for that section in particular. --Alexlayer 06:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not a bad fix, Alexlayer, but without specific context (mentioning the end of the episode) it sort of hangs there in space, looking odd. Oh, I thought the parenthetical you cut in that section was sorta iffy-- and I wrote it! Sbgdcom 07:30, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right, SSJ is a "simple kid". His meaning was also simple, in that he wasn't indicating that if Shego did actually kidnap someone that that would be betrayal. He was mostly meaning "that's bad", like you said. Shego doesn't betray him, but she definitely doesn't respect him (again, like you said). However, the big difference is that she does like him as a friend, and that's why that sentence was taken out. Betrayal would indicate that they aren't friends, which isn't true. --=CJK= 07:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If Shego and SSJ are friends, why doesn't she respect him in this scene? Why didn't Shego simply say "It's been a blast, Junior" and exit stage left? (helpless laughter) See what bad writing can do? It spreads confusion at the very least!


 * What I'm saying is that events at the end of the episode DO NOT negate all that comes before it. Rather, it QUALIFIES it. What I was saying was "Shego and SSJ are pals, but on at least one occasion Shego left him out to dry, which means she's ultimately only out for herself." Sbgdcom 07:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

How did you guys start talking about that episode?! This part of discussion is to talk about Shego's past, not about the big job. Or is there a connection between the two that I'm not thinking of? __Yma

Look of Regret
I read in the article that Shego had a look of regret that implied that She was regretful of the way things turned out. Is everyone completly sure we should have put that? I think that when it was said that it implied that she might regret turning bad again, that is a matter of opinion. I believe that if the episode itself didn't say that she was regretful, then she probably wasn't regretful. Because Kim Possible is a fictional show, the only things that happen in the KP Universe is what is on the show. (You have no clue how hard that was to put into words!) My point is i think we should delete the part on Miss Go that says she was regretful. It didn't say she was regretful on the show, so it didn't happen. Before I deleted it, I wanted to run it through everyone. So what do you think?Bracelet 19:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, she obviously is showing regret about something. What that "something" is is unclear, but it probably pertains to her relationship with Kim. The episode doesn't have to spell everything out for us, we can deduce the obvious by ourselves. That look that she has is obviously regretful, there's no other emotion that captures that look quite as well. She might have been regretful that she turned evil again, but all we can say for sure is that she's regretful about that aspect of her time as a good guy. --=CJK= 19:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Shego's Fall
In A Sitch in Time Future Kim and Ron were about to time travel back to present, but then Shego jumped up and said "No way!" Then Kim kicked her and it looked like she fell over the side of the building. Did she die? It was a pretty tall building. If so, I think that should be added to the article.Bracelet 22:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * She didn't die, she survived because she has enhanced resistence. It's already stated in the article.
 * "In addition to her energy attack, Shego possesses superhuman durability that allows her to survive situations of calamitous destruction that would probably kill other characters."
 * See?--Alexlayer 22:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That time stream was destroyed, so that universe probably disappeared altogether, right? --=CJK= 01:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, probably. But what does that have to do with the question? --Alexlayer 01:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Shego didn't die or live. She disappeared. --=CJK= 02:10, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Go Team Go
In Go Team Go why did Shego go with her brothers and Kim and Ron before Kim threatened to tell everyone she used to be a good guy?Bracelet 21:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What? Didn't Kim threaten first, and then Shego went with them? --=CJK= 03:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Remember this?: First Drakken and Shego were in there lair, then Kim, Ron, Hego, and Mego all burst into the lair, and Shego started asking them why they were all there, and Kim said "Avearious.". The next scene it showed was Shego, her brother's and Kim and Ron all in an airplane together. Then it shows them all in Kim's kitchen. When Shego was about to leave she said "Five minutes with my brothers and I'm ready to claw my own eyes out!". That was when Kim threatened to tell everyone that Shego used to be a good guy. Any comments?Bracelet 21:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Probably because she wanted to know what the heck was going on, or maybe because she actually wanted to help her brothers, but found them too much to bear. Overall, it's all speculation.--Alexlayer 03:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)