User talk:Zythe/Archive 8

Jack
That sounds pretty reasonable to me, since too much backstory in the appearances section can read like a biography, and the exposition-heavy second series is making that section look bloated. How would you put it, something like Jack's backstory is developed through exposition and flashback... "Adam" reveals that Jack... in "Fragments", Jack does such and such. The thing is, didn't we try something similar a while back and Bignole said it was unnecessary? This seems better, but it would be nice if we could get some OOU info on Jack's past, why they decided to tell the story the way they did. Maybe TW Declassified?  Paul    730  22:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it sounds like a good plan. What did you make of Saturday's Doctor Who, by the way?     Paul    730  23:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I was a bit confused by the order the info appears in, wasn't sure whether it was supposed to be in-universe or out-of-universe because it seems to flip about a bit, it goes from the Time Agency to his childhood to his post-Torchwood history. Maybe we could tighten that up unless there's a specific reason you ordered it like that.  Otherwise it looks good, I'd put it in the article.     Paul    730  12:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit Summary in Big Brother 9 (U.S.)
Hi, this just kinda confused me a bit "if you're going to write it in a way that presumes it's not genuine, you could at least spell it correctly", exactly what did you mean by that?  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  21:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Whedon
OMG, those covers are pretty damn cool. I'm loving Gunther centre stage! (Aw, look at his little whiskers!) And Drusilla?? Oh the possibilies, I've already heard theories that she was the vampire who escapes the Twilight spell to erase magic, leading to her repopulating the vampires? I wanted Harmony to be that vampire - since she has a habit of escaping and it would be hilarious to have her as a villain in Fray having not matured at all in 200 years. I've always wanted closure for Drusilla though, her disappearance from both shows wasn't good enough. I'm glad Harth is in it again. Not too excited about Angel as usual, the Fredllyria stuff seems interesting but... meh? Someone was commenting that Fred has filled out a little in her absence... I hate when they do that to characters. Blindfold and Pixie are currently being transformed in double-D hookers over in X-Men, it's disgusting. I'm not opposed to T&A in general, but Pixie??? She's like fourteen??!!! >:( It doesn't surpise me that Acker is in Dollhouse, Whedon does love to re-use actors, the entire cast of Firefly were villains in the Buffyverse at some point.    Paul    730  01:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * So what do you make of the latest developments in Buffy and Angel? The last panel of Buffy was brilliantly brutal.     Paul    730  21:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Come on, more details than just "really good". :P What did you make of Renee's apparent death, I know you were fond of her? I really expected her to be Twilight's mole so that was surprising.  I desperately hope they don't de-activate the Slayers, I think that would just shit all over the girl power theme of the series and I doubt Whedon would do that.  I was very surprised, because I loathed the character in the TV series, to think that Kate's brief return has been the best moment of AfF so far.  They managed to give her the sendoff she never really got in the show, develop the character by showing how far she's come since the time she couldn't accept the reality of demons, furthering Connor's character arc via her advice, and reinforcing the entire theme of the series (keep fighting even though it's ultimately futile).  It was brilliant, please take note Gwen.     Paul    730  12:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm sure Kate died, I think that was the point. It felt like a nod to "Not Fade Away" in that sense.  I've seen some people speculating that she'll be back as part of the Connor and the Random Recurring Characters gang but I doubt it.  There's nowhere else for the character to go and it would ruin the poignancy of her one-shot story.  Yeah, the Scoobs' attack on that vamp was cool, I loved the power walk at the end.  I love the panel with Drac's dramatic entrance, and Xander carrying all his bags in the background.  I love their relationship, but that said, I hope it doesn't get any heavier than just comic relief.  God knows we need a token hetero in the cast. ;)
 * I actually knew it was your birthday today (you have a userbox somewhere) but it slipped my mind. Happy birthday.  A friend and I went out to a gay bar for my 18th but it was pretty crap.  Lots of dirty old men looking to pull. :| Hope your night is better.  How have you been enjoying DW, now that you mention it?  I'm offically sick of Martha, she's done nothing but get kidnapped lately, she needs a new schikt (sp?).     Paul    730  13:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Donna's thoroughly impressing me every week, although I loved her to begin with. I find her much more sympathetic and engaging than any other companion, I thought her scenes where she failed to save the little boy from the volcano, and with the Ood circle, really moving.  I've read reviews claiming she's the most well-rounded companion of the entire series, which is great.  Jenny was okay, I liked her in the episode but have no strong opinion of her.  More appearances and a comic book spin-off would be perfectly acceptable in my eyes.  Martha has just done nothing impressive since her initial return in Torchwood.  Davis has a tendancy to bing back characters and then make them stand in the background of an episode with has nothing to do with them.  (Jack!!!)
 * Forgot to reply to part of your previous comment: the Slayer thing in Angel... it was a lot like the Fredllyria thing in that it was an intended dramatic relevation which felt flat because I didn't fully understand it. My friend thought that Slayers were bursting in to save George, while I thought George was reading the vamp's memories of fighting Slayers.  It wasn't clear enough IMO.  With the Fred thing, because we already know Illyria can take her form, it wouldn't even have occurred to me that that was actually Fred if the issue hadn't been hyped so much.
 * Where'd you see the Dollhouse trailer?    Paul    730  13:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's been removed, I'll just have to catch it later. Never mind, I can be patient (still haven't seen Sarah Connor yet!!)  Aren't you a member of SlayAlive as well?  I do a lot of lurking over there and I'm sure I've seen you commenting once or twice.  I'm reluctant to join a Buffy forum because I'd feel obligated to argue against all the criticism and it would just put me in a bad mood.  Whedonesque is good, I've seen quite a few intelligent debates over there.     Paul    730  14:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

That Dollhouse link was dead for a little while but it's working now. The show looks interesting, I'll definitely give it a chance. By the way, looking through your contributions, Electra features a lesbian kiss in it IIRC, so that might be why someone classed it as LGBT, not because "it's gay".  Paul    730  21:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Jenny (Doctor Who)
Please do not redirect an article without first bringing up in Discussion page. --Human.v2.0 (talk) 15:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do not allow editors to dissuade you to from being a confident editor. The worst thing that can possibly happen is that someone will have to hit "undo". This is a better fate than being bogged down in endless discussion.
 * Oh, and the answer to your totally unrelated question is "yes", although such a confirmation on-wiki isn't good reference material. I'm pretty sure IMDb is already cited as a source.
 * Could I trouble you to add a valid e-mail address to your account?
 * Bonus points if you remember your actual, original question.
 * —Adrian~enwiki (talk) 2008-05-21 20:21Z

Billie Joe Armstrong
Hey. I've been un-vandalizing that article for months now. Is it possible to get it locked? And also, since you're on my side (the true one), could you add the bisexual reference? Thanks.

I'm glad some of his fans are open-minded. But maybe they're 14-year-old girls whose parents didn't raise them right. Or maybe they're 14-year-old girls who think there's less chance he'll marry them if he's bi. I'm joking, but they are pretty nasty people.

Thanks again.Sillycucumber (talk) 07:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Billie Joe
exactl what i said to sillycucumber, when was the last time i did anything like that? a while ago.your warning was unnecessary. --Greenday21 (talk) 15:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Greenday21

Buffy S8 Thanks
Thanks for taking the initiative to expand and improve the cast reaction section I started. Jclemens (talk) 14:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Jack
I prefer the comic book image, but I'm not sure about the source... images aren't really my area of expertise. The rationale could also be questioned; does it have any specific critical commentary beyond "here's an image of him in the comic"? You could say the same about the images of Jason Voorhees in comics as well I suppose. I'd say upload it, and if there's any opposition during the FAR then we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Sorry the Jack article has been hanging in limbo for so long by the way, I know I promised to submit it months ago. I've been so busy in real life lately that my Wikipedia activity has suffered a lot.

Yes, I saw the preview and amazing is the word I used as well. It felt so alive, like watching an episode of the show, what with the emotion of Renee's death and the adrenaline of the battle. Dracula vamping out, "he's not alone"... oh my god! Have you seen the uninked artwork that were posted on Whedonesque? Shocking stuff if it's what it looked like.  Paul    730  14:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * How did your birthday go? Isn't Brighton a total party town?  I do enjoy clubbing but I very rarely do because I'm a bit of a loner; all my friends belong to different social groups and I don't really belong to one at all.  I go on the odd work night out, which can be interesting, given some of the oddballs I work with.     Paul    730  15:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * My knowledge of Brighton stems almost totally from Sugar Rush. Dunno, Glasgow apparently has a good club scene but like I said I'm not too familar with it, and the clubs I have been to weren't that great.  I keep planning to go to Polo Lounge (apparently it's a cool gay bar) but it hasn't happened yet.  Oh well... Glad you had a good time.     Paul    730  15:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

More
The merging of the sections is fine in my eyes, I prefer larger sections than lots of stubby little ones. My only problem with that section is sourcing; some statements like the ones about Jack's clothing and Boe's appearances should have episode sources if nothing else. And the "subtly admits attraction to the Doctor" bit is a little OR-y. Do we have a source discussing the two characters' romantic relationship? Yeah, why not upload the first image you linked, the Jason article has a merchandise pic, why not Jack? :) Btw, how awesome does next weeks DW look? I'm guessing Sylvia dies from the trailer.     Paul    730  00:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm worried the finale will turn into X3 what with all these characters returning. I'm sure most of them will be glorifed cameos at best so I'm relucant to get my hopes up too much.  Russel T Davies has promised he can handle the extended cast and that we shouldn't worry.  Gwen and Ianto... why am I so excited that two of my most hated Whoniverse characters are coming into DW, lol?  The final trilogy looks so epic.  I'm making the most of it because I know this will probably be the end of DW as I know it.  What with no proper season next year, and Tennant and Davies rumoured to leave, it'll be the end of an era.  Oh well, at least the last four seasons will be forever remembered as a fantastic run.     Paul    730  00:32, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have the DVDs, I'll check the commentary/Confidential episodes for info when I have the time. I vaguely remember Davies discussing in the "Utopia" commentary how Jack and the Doctor have a heart-to-heart in the middle of a crisis with a metal wall between them, and how that was a metaphor for manly defensiveness or something.  Not sure how relevant that would be to Jack's article though.  The Bond comparison is great, good find!    Paul    730  00:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Cassandra Cain
What is your reason for moving the article back to Batgirl (Cassandra Cain)? I mean it's titled Dick Grayson, not Robin (Dick Grayson), or Stephanie Brown not at Robin (Stephanie Brown). hbdragon88 (talk) 03:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Consensus on reasoning for LGBT Project Articles
A new discussion you may be interested in:Consensus on reasoning for LGBT Project Articles. The Bookkeeper  (of the Occult)  07:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Buffy #15
How have you read it? I thought new comics didn't come out in Britain until Thursday... they don't up here in Glasgow anyway. Did you read it online or something? I'm trying my hardest to remain spoiler free until tomorrow, does the "big twist which blows #12 out of the water" live up to expections? As for Buffy's sexuality... I'm not really looking for a confirmation either way to be honest. I'm of the belief that human sexuality defies definition... it depends on the inidividual and labels don't always reflect how a person feels or acts. Buffy and Willow are both technically bisexual, but lean on the hetereo/homo sides of the spectrum, respectively. Besides, it would be boring if Joss just came down on one specific side of the fence, what would the fans argue about? :P   Paul    730  23:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've seen previews and Willow's relationship with the snake woman (Vesuki or something?) is very intriquing. So people are speculating that Vesuki is the creepy doll thing on that "Grave" temple?  That would be some great continuity.  Lol, how is Buffy "rad"?  :P  My friend and I were speculating that Twilight might be future Xander, and to stop him, Buffy must kill present Xander.  That sounds great - very "Buffy" - to me, but I've always been firmly against the idea of killing Willow or Xander.  The Buffy trinity are a perfect chemical formula, you break that formula and the series dies IMO.  I take it Buffy and Satsu further their relationship in some way, judging from your edits here?     Paul    730  23:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, doesn't "sweet old Dracula" get his head chopped off by Xander? I was really shocked when I saw that and then I remembered Dracula can't be killed (or can he?????).  You've got me all excited I must admit.  The idea of Buffy being forced to kill the ones she loves has been a recurring element in show and Xander of all people would be heartbreaking.  Plus the writers have been gunning for Xander for years - I heard rumours that Xander was going to be Glory instead of Ben in season 5, and that Giles would have murdered Xander in "The Gift".  That would have been horrific. Then he was going to die in "Dirty Girls" and "Chosen"... he's dodged a lot of bullets over the years.     Paul    730  23:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Good luck. What is it?    Paul    730  23:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Grr, I hate when that happens. I hate when you write someone a message and it doesn't save or whatever, so you have to write it again.  The "WatG" conclusion was really great, I thought.  MechaDawn has to be the most ridiculous, jump-the-shark idea ever and yet I still loved her.  What did you make of Angel?  Gunn's story was pretty good I thought, I liked how it literally showed how Angel's mission causes him to neglect the ones he loves.  The civillian story just sucked, I didn't get it at all, what a waste of time.  I continue to be indifferent to Gwen "I'm not a Rogue rip-off, honest" Raiden but her story was allright.     Paul    730  05:24, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, Ianto, how I hate you. Every series needs one character you just love to hate.  Angels crappy characters seem to be redeeming themselves, Kate, Connor... I've decided to start hating Gwen.  She really needs to stop ripping off Rogue an get herself an original storyline.  Her and Nina are my new hate-victims.  Renee was my hate-victim over on Buffy but I guess that ship has sailed... :P  But yeah... Jack sources, I'll stick the Ianto page on my watchlist and help you out with copyediting and stuff.  I meant to thank you for finding that Martha source a few weeks back, I haven't bothered implimenting it yet.     Paul    730  00:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You didn't link anything. :P I'm going to have to go to bed now anyway, I have an early shift tomorrow and I'm pushing my luck staying up as long as I have. I'm going to be dead on my feet tomorrow.  G'night.     Paul    730  01:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #CC9966; text-align: center;" |The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter  {| The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue XV: June 11, 2008
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * colspan="2" valign="middle" style="width: 60%; border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; background: #ffe4e1" |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |

Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! I'm not one to be writing newsletters, but I miss our cruise director, Miss Julie, and our project is drifting along with a few leaking plugs in the bottom of the boat. Hey, it happens. Every group we join goes through changes. If Wikipedia weren't so interesting it wouldn't also be so frustrating sometimes. And vice versa. More than one Wikiproject has tumbleweeds blowing through it, but this is one that can't afford to let that happen. Even if you pop in to the talk page of the project, you can let us know you're still around.

{| style="font-size: 90%;"
 * valign="top" |
 * valign="top" |

WP:LGBT's Role in HIV / AIDS articles
It wouldn't be a proper gay community without a li'l bit o' drama! That's right. If we aren't arguing about something, then we should be asking if we're still queer. Maybe that's for the best, since we know we're still kicking. Our most recent topic is how far the role of our project should go in dipping our toes into HIV/AIDS articles. The main AIDS article was delisted as a Featured Article last month, sadly. (Sending a swift kick to WP:Medicine.) A spirited discussion is available for your entertainment on the WP:LGBT talk page about just how much of HIV and AIDS should we take on. As ever, we'll take your opinions under advisement. We're going to have to, because it doesn't seem to have been settled.

Is Pride POV?
We have a pretty cool sidebar that identifies core LGBT articles. Its symbol is the iconic gay pride flag, much like other Wikiprojects have iconic symbols denoting the topic is a core subject in a series of articles. However, a question recently arose asking if the symbol itself is not neutral. Should a pride flag show up at the top of the article on Conversion therapy? How else would anyone know the article is about queer issues? Is there another symbol that is as widely recognized and that includes all our many splintered facets? At what point do we stop asking ourselves all these questions and just go have a mint julep on the verandah and stop caring?

Harvey Milk and Jim Jones
For the love of all that is holy, no Kool Aid jokes. However, an editor involved in pioneering San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk's article has included a section about the late supervisor's support of Jim Jones and the People's Temple. While it may be accurate, there is a Request for Comment regarding how much emphasis the section places on Milk's support in light of his overall political influence on the city, and indeed the rest of the United States. Milk's article is a sad one in more ways than one. It lacks the detail and heart that honors its subject. Anyone want to do a barter with me? I'll bring Harvey Milk to featured status (give me a month or two so I can read stuff), if you do something of equal value to WP:LGBT?? Make me an offer...

Queer Studies is offensive!
The established branch of study known as Queer studies was brought up as an category for deletion because an editor was offended by the use of "queer" in the title. It was overwhelmingly rejected mostly by the usernames I see here on our Wikiproject page. (A clue that I know you are out there, hiding...biding your time...) So, I wish I could congratulate you, but now I'm all confused by my sympathy for the editor who was offended. So, if you're reading this, Moni has a short memory and can't remember your username. Don't be put off by our demonstrative pushiness. Join us. We can always use involved editors.

Lambda Literary Awards
What can you do to help the project out? Be a wiki-fairy, on many levels. There are all kinds of articles that need help. Why, just this morning I removed those ugly wikify and cleanup tags from four articles at random. If you can put  around stuff, you can clean up articles. There's a list of articles that need attention at the top of the WP:LGBT talk page. Or you can start with the Lambda Literary Awards, where the goddess of my altar received a pioneering award, and was "reduced to rubble" by Katherine V. Forrest's wonderful speech. The 20th ceremony of the Lambda Literary Awards, which celebrates LGBT literature, took place in West Hollywood on May 29th. The page needs to be updated with the new winners, to be found on the official website.


 * valign="top" |

Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Arthur C. Clarke and Bernard Montgomery
Why on earth would someone want to delete material about homosexuality? 'Tis truly a mystery. But these embattled articles have some random evil gnomes removing information that places these folks under our queer umbrella. Help us keep an eye out for the deletions. Take a peek at the articles, familiarize yourselves with the info, and be handy with the undo function in the article history. If tempers flare, take it to the Hall monitors and let them sort it out. Best solution is to make sure your sources are immaculate.

This month's Wiki stars
This is what I get for opening my big fat mouth and suggesting the newsletter should be revived. Here I am writing it. So, to pat self on back (*cough*) Mulholland Dr. became a featured article in May. This is A Good Thing since it is my personal declaration that there is no such thing as lesbian porn. I don't care what Benjiboi says about the video collection at goodvibes. Instead, we have hot women who connect on a deep, personal, soul-touching level, so this film should qualify as some of the skankiest porn available for lesbians. Plus, it's completely confusing and surreal! D'you think Laura Harring would care that the article is featured? I don't think so either... (Call me, Laura!)

Compulsive hoarding of templates
Once I saw a harrowing episode of Animal Planet's Animal Cops where this guy had, like, 250 cats in his house and it freaked me right out. I'm drawing a parallel between 250 cats and, well...three, really, templates in articles involving LGBT issues. Can we stick to one, maybe? In the aforementioned Harvey Milk's article there's a core LGBT template, a link to the LGBT portal, and a sidebar for LGBT rights. Jiminy! You'd think we weren't the folk to set industrial grey carpeting and track lighting in vogue. An LGBT footer was designed to link to articles of interest that aren't the aforementioned core articles. What do you think, can we have either an LGBT template for core articles, a footer for LGBT articles that are high profile but not core, or an LGBT rights template? As ever, anything's up for discussion on the WP:LGBT talk page.

The Violet Quill and magazines
Zigzig20s suggests we create an article on The Violet Quill, as it seems such a milestone in the advancement of gay/queer literature. Members of the Quill all have pages of their own (Edmund White, Christopher Cox, Robert Ferro, Michael Grumley, Andrew Holleran, Felice Picano, and George Whitmore). We need to find more info on the Quill per se to reference the page that we create. Perhaps Google Books - and libraries? - can help.

A number of magazines also need articles, perhaps most notably QW, LGNY, and Lesbian Feminist Liberation.

Mom's nagging for Pride Month
It's June, Pride month. Wear sunscreen, stay hydrated, get a designated driver, then go half-dressed in the streets find a girlfriend or boyfriend, or some homo who's standing there looking lonely and kiss 'em up real good. Remember, it all started 39 years ago when a bunch of drag queens just got fed the f*ck up by the cops raiding the bar and dragging them all out to the pokey again. Rock on, queens! Enjoy your celebrations. My town's is in October, and 200 people attend. I miss Denver.

Fresh faces to brighten our pages
Hey, I've seen you around! Sorry there seem to be so many—it's been a while. But we welcome you all: Cheezisyum21, Taineyah, Dustihowe, Avesta69, RachelSummers77, Vivekgopinathan, AMK1211, Staffwaterboy, Ted Ted, Joe5150, Leahtwosaints, Robapalooza, Arthomure, Confusionball, Affinity likely, PrinceOfCanada, Yobmod, Npd2983, Neagley, Bvlax2005, Bvlax2005, Rhullsf, Textorus, Kieran.casey, Tyciol, Meojive, Sappho'd, Bookkeeperoftheoccult,  Gaywarrior, Aujourd'hui, maman est morte, and Balin42632003.

It looks like we've picked up a lot of talent lately. We have no doubt you'll be making your indelible mark on LGBT knowledge as we know it, here at Wikipedia.

- In the immortal words of Miss Julie, "May all your Wiki days be bright, and may your Love Boat never turn into a Poseidon."
 * }

We miss you, Miss Julie, as well as all the others who have graced our project and are on wiki-breaks or just got fed up with all the nuttiness and went to live their lives. Get your stupid houses built and hurry up and come back. --Moni3 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC) To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * }
 * }

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Forest of the Dead edits
You might want to examine those citations a tad more closely, bud. The first citation that you reinstated (the Fact File, is little more than a blog, and the citation does not connect to Moffat's statements). The second citation that you reinstated comes from the same blog and refers to the series of books by Paul Cornell and makes the comaprison to River Song. I would suggest that perhaps you were snookered into this edit, and might wish to self-revert. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  04:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Fastball Special
You should have known you would not be able to get it deleted. 70.100.90.144 (talk)

A taunt? No. 70.100.90.144 (talk) 20:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Bra
She was removed along with a handful of other less important characters per WP:NN. You might want to ask User:TTN though, I believe he originally took her off. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Deadman Torchwood.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Deadman Torchwood.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:RhysDrugged.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:RhysDrugged.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Stolen Earth/Journey's End
Oh god... I'm speechless. Nooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was absolutely brilliant... but the ending...  Paul    730  19:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I loved the episode for the reasons you just mentioned. The webcam sequences were quite possibly the most enjoyable Doctor Who scenes ever just for sheer fan indulgence... Donna's face regarding Jack was priceless.  Hariett's death made me sad but proud, I never liked how she was written out previously and this gave me the closure I needed for her character.  I liked Rose's dismissive reaction to Martha, that was very funny even though it reminded me why I don't like her.  Jack/Jackie has been a long-time coming, I'd resigned myself to it never happening but "Journey's End" gives me a glimmer of hope.  However, the above-mentioned brilliance was all overshadowed by the ending.  I do NOT want the Tenth Doctor to regenerate in this story and have been in a state of grief-stricken denial since the episode ended.  Do you think he will???  Depriving us of Tennant's interaction with the other characters at this point would be massively disappointing.  A new actor just wouldn't have the sense of history with his companions to do the story it's emotional justice.  IMO of course.     Paul    730  19:30, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm sure it's a fakeout but even the possiblity of losing Tennant at this point has me very upset. I was the same last year when they turned him into Gollum.  I don't like it when they mess with my Doctor!  Which I'm sure was the point, to provoke an emotional reaction and all that.  I wonder how Jackie and Mickey will play into it next week?  Do you think they'll just be cameos?  I didn't like how SJ totally pussied out when the Daleks showed up.  Come on, love, grow a pair. :P And Maria and Alan in bloody Cornwall!     Paul    730  19:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, don't give me your sound logic about Maria! Yes, of course you're right but I still wanted to see her.  At least they mentioned her, and Tosh, Owen, and Rhys, so it's all good.  I loved the "cohesive Whoniverse" aspect of it that you mentioned.  Normally I dimiss crossovers as fan fiction-y, but this one worked really well in making the episode feel truly epic, it was done brilliantly.  The episode had very dense continuity to it though, I imagine anyone but hardcore fans would be slightly confused, I had to do a bit of explaining to my mum.  Oh, and Ianto watching Paul O'Grady got a big laugh out of me.     Paul    730  19:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * What did you think of Doctor Who? And Buffy, for that matter? :)    Paul    730  00:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Criticism??!!?? How dare you! ;)  Yes, the bay scene reeked of fanservice but I can live with that because Doctor Who is an indulgent show.  I liked how it came full circle of Rose ending up with a war-damaged Doctor, as in Series 1.  Honestly, I've watched "The Kiss" on YouTube countless times already because it's just so darn emotional.  And I'm not even a Rose/Doctor shipper!  Why did you loathe HumanDoctor?  DoctorDonna actually annoyed me a little, it was like Tate overload, but the scene between the Doctor, Wilf, and Sylvia at the end made me cry.     Paul    730  01:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, so you didn't like Tennant emulating Tate? I thought you just didn't like the idea of a Doctor-clone thing.  I love Jackie, she's one of my favourite Whoniverse characters, but she was wasted in this episode, I feel.  What did she do?  Except for selfishly saving her own life and leaving the other prisoners to burn.  Mickey, I can forgive, since he's going over to TW, but did Rose even acknowledge his departure?  Martha was pretty forgettable, sadly, but K-9 was a nice surprise.  I loved the montage of all the people who sacrificed themselves over the last four years.  Brought a tear to my eye, it did. :P    Paul    730  01:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

You're right about Rose and Jack, but Jack's pretty much embraced the whole immortality thing now anyway. Limited screen time forbids these things to an extent I suppose, but if they can acknowledge a Gwen/Gwynth relationship, you'd think they'd find the time for Rose and Jack. Oh well, I suppose we could do without another "Jack's immortal because of episode..." cut to obligatory flashback scene. Similarly, Mickey was over Rose by "Doomsday", we don't really need repetition. Lol, who cares about Jake, he was incredibly minor. At least Pete was mentioned though. So how would you rate the episode compared to "Doomsday" and other episodes? I think it's kind of better, but that might be the hype talking.  Paul    730  01:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I enjoyed it, yes, I thought Rose's closure was perfect but was sad about Donna, hopefully she'll have a less brutal finale like Rose in a couple of years. And yay Mickey! Alientraveller (talk) 16:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Introduction of 'C' class articles
Hi. This is a cross-post to members of the Doctor Who assessment committee. Because of the introduction of the 'C' class, the general criteria for assessment has been changed. Please familiarise yourself with the new criteria and help migrate several Start- and B-Class articles into the C-Class category. Thank you! Sceptre (talk) 22:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL
This was just hilariously shallow and unnecessarily cruel. I love it. :P   Paul    730  20:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Can't believe you've not read it yet. IGN complained it was too talky and uneventful but that's what I liked about it.  Moline's artwork has been controversial, but I loved it.  His likenesses are poor, but I don't care about that so long as the characters still feel like the characters, if that makes sense.  One thing I love about Buffy is that it feels like a comic book, unlike Angel which uses stills of the actors in a pathetic attempt to emulate the TV show. Kennedy was great, but her comments to Buffy seemed to come out of nowhere... when was Buffy a "phobe" in S7?  She's best friends with a lez!     Paul    730  20:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'll give it a copyedit, and I have TW interview in a random issue of Doctor Who magazine I bought last year that might make a useful source. One thing that stood out to me though; the bisexual quote in the Ianto article, while lovely, seems out of place.  Perhaps it's better suited to a characterisation section?  Or would that run the risk of being too plot heavy, since it's just a quote from the book?     Paul    730  23:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe you could whack it in a quote box next to the literature section, with the caption "TW lit further explores Ianto's character blah blah"... that might be more suitable than an image, actually. The quote would be lost in translation if you paraphrased it, I feel.  How did you come across it, do you read the TW books?    Paul    730  23:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "Hell no." Lol, that's a little extreme, what have you got against the TW books?  I read TW and DW magazine in Borders when I'm shopping in town but I only own a few issues which I bought before getting the internet.  Magazines are like so over. :P Sometimes I've been tempted to buy them purely as Wiki sources but I'm not made of money.     Paul    730  23:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Likewise, I found the Buffy novels very bland. Hmm, the quote box should really match the ones on Jack's page... should we change Jack's quote box to the one with the big quote marks? It's up to you.  Paul    730  23:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * How do you mean "uglier"? Like I said, this is really just a trivial matter of personal taste, and I'll defer to you for that since you're the primary contributer.  We can have the different boxes if you like, I'm just a bit anal about consistency like that.     Paul    730  00:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it looks fine on Jack's page. In fact, since Jack has so many quote boxes, it might make his page look less crowded to have no borders.  By all means, lets try it, we can change our minds later if it looks crap.     Paul    730  00:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Me too, although Bignole probably doesn't, I know he hates those big quote marks. :P Question: is the last quote in Jack's "Concept" section necessary? We already have a quote for that section and I think the second one could be paraphrased.  We might have discussed this before...  Martha, I'd say two paragraphs but then I like big paragraphs, unlike many editors, who'd have the whole article in bullet points if they could.     Paul    730  00:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * People seem to hate chunky paragraphs and sections, it's like it's too much effort for their lazy asses to read through. I've given up on the Bree Van de Kamp article because they insist on having seperate season sections and I keep getting reverted.     Paul    730  00:59, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you notice you've been accused of homophobia, referred to as a "young gay", and advised to get in touch with your bi side?. Oh the irony. Read Buffy yet, btw?  Paul    730  01:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Didn't you know that having any problem with a gay person, regardless of whether that problem is related to their sexuality or not, makes you homophobic? Get with the program, Zythe!  Buffy was hilarious, so many classic lines.  What do you make of Dawntaur?  Dawn's really treading a fine line this season with how ridiculous she can go without jumping the shark.  She's pulling it off brilliantly though, I love her.  I've seen the Dark Willow cover, I hope she's not Harth's sidekick in the future.  I liked Grant Morrisons' X-Men run but I got the TPBs so I don't know how often his books come out.  He's kind of a weirdo though, his X-Men run was pretty bizarre.     Paul    730  01:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * He might be bizarre, but in a really good creative way. I don't know how much you know of his X-Men run but he basically resurrected the franchise, which had been really bland and repetitive during the 90s.  Not all of his stories worked (and the artwork was awful - why couldn't Frank Quitely draw every issue?) but at least he was doing something inventive instead of the same old toot, you know?  Also, he created one of my favourite superheroes and is the definitive Emma Frost writer (Whedon had nothing on Morrison's Emma!).  So yeah, I hold him in pretty high regard as a writer.  I'd like to see Willow go dark for a little bit just because it'd be cool in the comic; Dark Willow was so cheesy and supervillain-y in the show that she really suits a comic book.  My only concern would be how repetitive it is to turn her evil for a second time.  But I trust the book, I haven't been let down so far.  Btw, some people are seeing a Dawn/Xander vibe emerging, what do you think?     Paul    730  13:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Seconded. I read the "You look amazing" scene more as jealousy.  Of the Scoobs, Dawn was always Xander's peer in that she also had no superpowers (the episode "Potential").  Now of a sudden she's turning into these mystical creatures and all she can do is complain about it.  I think Xander's kind of like "I would love to be a giant or a centaur and have my moment in the spotlight" and it annoys him that Dawn doesn't appreciate it.  I mean, would being a centaur temporarily really be that bad?  Maybe I'm wrong, but it's an interesting way to cause conflict between these two characters.     Paul    730  13:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So you don't see a jealousy vibe? I prefer seeing the characters interact platonicly, it's too easy and slashy to boil it down to just a romantic level.  Like those who automatically assumed Willow fancied Buffy because of her defensive reaction to the Satsu thing.  Lol, note that I did say that being a centaur "temporarily" might be cool.  My friend can't wait for a scene in which Buffy rides Dawntaur into battle, and Dawntaur kicks an enemy with her hind legs.     Paul    730  14:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I bought Spike: AtF today and was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. Both Spike and Fred were far more in character than they are over on Angel and I think Urru suits a Spike book more than Angel for some reason. The smaller cast makes for better character development as well, I think.  Paul    730  20:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops, replied to Bignole instead of you. Sorry... um... is that that thing written by Whedon's brother, with that hot blond guy from How I Met Your Mother?  I skimmed over a Newsarama article but I didn't really give it second thought.     Paul    730  20:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll definitely give it a look, but not tonight. *Yawn* Lol, why is he Neil Patrick fucking Harris? Don't like the guy?     Paul    730  21:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've watched all three parts of Dr. Horrible and thoroughly enjoyed it. Have you seen the ending?     Paul    730  01:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I couldn't believe the ending. Very Joss, I should have expected it.  It felt like such a safe little world as well, I really thought it would have a happy ending.  Not sure what you mean about the Fredllyria thing.  I think it would work fine as "In A:AtF, Fred's personality resurfaces in Illyria.  S:AtF further explores..."  I don't have any immediate plans for those articles anyway, they're fairly far down my list of priorities.  Why, were you planning a rewrite?  What do you make of the Fredllyria story anyway?  I think it's being handled poorly TBH.  Fred doesn't feel like Fred at all, the closest Lynch came to matching her voice was the word "oogly" in Spike. I honestly don't care about Angel: After the Fall anymore, the series just bores me and the art is the most atrocious I've ever seen.     Paul    730  13:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Instead, of Franco, they should have had David Messina from the start. His artwork was the only impressive thing about the non-canon IDW Angel minis, and his brief work on Spike's First Night story was beautiful.  Messina as full-time artist, with Urru doing the Spike First Night story and S:AtF, would have been perfect, consistency all round.  Runge's horrific blend of shameless tracing and messy cartoons makes the series unreadable to me, it really does.  Does he even know the meaning of the word "background"?  Storywise, I'm happy with a short, single arc, but I wish it was more focused and less "Lets bring back every Angel character we can think of and create a few dozen more".  I don't need a whole Gwen arc, but it would be nice if she had a meaningful cameo (like Kate).  Nina is, and always was, unncessary.  She admitted that herself in the last issue.  There's so much potential; human Angel, vampire Gunn, and Fredllyria are all great ideas that are being handled poorly.  With Fred, we have an artist who can't draw her and a writer who can't match her voice, so the character's return doesn't register at all.     Paul    730  04:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that's a great find. The Angel section of that article was always a bit skimpy due to limited DVD sources.  Paul    730  18:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I have a friend who bought it; his name's Paul and he's only mildly offended by your "I of course wouldn't buy it" comment. :P I rarely buy DWM, as you know, but since this was a special issue I thought I'd splash out. I've been meaning to add the info to the Jack article but don't worry, I'm going to because it's a really good source.  Might do it now, actually, since you've prompted me and GTAIV is kicking my ass.  Why do you think Spike is quite good whereas Angel makes part of me die whenever I read it?     Paul    730  22:32, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm writing it out now, but I'm glad you found scans because you can add anything I missed/ignored. I think it helps that Spike is just an optional spin-off; I don't really care about it that much so I can enjoy it more without the same expectations I have (well, had) of Angel.  If that makes sense. :/ Plus, I consider Urru the offical Spike artist, like Moline with Fray.     Paul    730  22:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added the relationships stuff, copyedit to your taste. What did you make of the Charmed burn in Spike?  Lol.  Oh, and have you heard the latest upcoming plot twist in Buffy?     Paul    730  23:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, no no. Scott Allie recently revealed that vampires and the supernatural are going public - they become common knowledge and it messes up the status quo bigtime.  Personally, I'm thrilled about this, although the fans are divided as usual.  There's speculation that it's going to be polical correctness gone mad, with people embracing vampires and condemning the nasty Slayers for hunting down a disadvantaged social minority.  Hilarious! :D    Paul    730  23:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I always wondered what Joss Whedon thought of the new DW. By the kiss joke, I take it he likes it?  Yeah, Joss should stay away from Torchwood, that's way beneath him.  Stay away from Torchwood and start fucking writing Ripper!     Paul    730  23:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh mate, you dissing the writing in Doctor Who? ;) DW isn't as deep as Buffy but it succeeds at what it sets out to do; it's about wish-fulfillment and adrenaline and spirit.  It relies on silly plot devices like sonic screwdrivers and bad science but then Buffy is pretty guilty of that too.  Oh, and lets not kid ourselves, Dr Horrible looked like crap.     Paul    730  23:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * See, I didn't mind the Donna thing because that moment was about her empowerment as a character - the temp who was the most important person in the universe - rather than "how do we defeat the aliens?". Like the UberVamps becoming soft as butter in "Chosen" so even Anya can kill them.  Who cares?  I think that's why "Journey's End" split the fans so much.  You have the classic series fans, who want aliens and science, and the new series fans, who want characterisation and emotion, and "Journey's End" catered to the latter but not the former.  Whatever, I was happy.  I've not seen The Dark Knight.  My friend is a big Batman fan, I'll probably see it with him when he comes back from holiday.  I'm sick of hearing about it though, I'm sure it's great and all but overhyped much?     Paul    730  00:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, whatever. I'm just sick of all the marketing for it.  It doesn't get me excited, it just sickens me of it before I've even seen the movie. Bah humbug.     Paul    730  00:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a thought; if those scans of yours are online, do you fancy sticking the url in the citation? It would be a way for people to check the source if they don't read the magazine.  Not necessary, but potentially helpful?     Paul    730  00:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, you're probably right, otherwise more articles would do it. Darn copyright foils my plans again!  Oh well, good night.  I was going to stay up to watch Re-Animator but I think I'm too tired.     Paul    730  00:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It made me think of that Family Guy joke as well! Honestly, great minds...  And let's not kid ourselves, Charmed is pretty shite.     Paul    730  00:16, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting point brought up on SlayAlive; if vamps go public, could Harmony become a Paris Hilton-style vapid celebrity? I think that's one of the most hilarious ideas I've ever heard.  I'm still kind of hoping Harmony is the mystery character on the cover with Harth; the idea of her surviving 200+ years is brilliant.     Paul    730  00:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Last Appearances tags discussion
Zythe, I created a (hopefully centralize) discussion re: Last appearance tags for Buffyverse characters: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Buffyverse Hope to see you there. Cheers! Jclemens (talk) 16:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Luke Smith
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Luke Smith, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 59.167.59.201 (talk) 13:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Smallville..Buffy..and that rip-off Veronica ;)
Quality wise, maybe not, but more popular...obviously so since it lasted longer. As for the quality of Smallville compared to Veronica Mars, you can't compare because they are starkly different shows. The only thing that have in common is solving a weekly mystery, which both shows eventually abandoned for more serialized storylines. There's plenty of stuff that has been and could be stolen from Smallville. The only reason Heroes is on the air is because of the success of Smallville. If Smallville had not proved that a "generally" well-written show about a super-powered being could gain an audience on televisiion, then Heroes never would have been made. Smallville (and to a degree Buffy and Charmed as well, since they paved the way on the WB for Smallville to come in) is a good reason for Heroes existence. Not to mention, if you watch the credits, many of our writers and directors also work on Heroes as well (not mentioning the fact that Jeoff Loeb (sp) the executive producer over at Heroes was on the writing staff of Smallville for like 3 seasons).

P.S. If I don't respond right a way it's because I've gone to work.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  12:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't doubt it's quality, I'm sure it is a great show. As for the writers, DeKnight's been around the bend. I know he was on Buffy...or Angel (probably both), before he came to Smallville. I can just about go down the List of Smallville episodes page and check off nearly 70% of those writers and directors that have migrated over to Heroes. I wonder if it was because of the larger budget, better working environment, or just better pay that they went there though? Hmm. It could just be the company itself...I mean, it's hard to make a "real" name for yourself if you stay on the WB, UPN or, as they are currently known, the CW.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  16:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  13:28, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Batman
Saw it today, and I begrudgingly admit that it is brilliant. Also, picked up the Superman Allstar HC as well... you're Mr. DC, is it any good?  Paul    730  20:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've read through about half of Superman now and I'm not sure what I make of it. I don't really know any Birds characters so I'm reluctant to go in blind.  Did you like that Birds of Prey TV series or was it as bad as my friend says it was?     Paul    730  12:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Birds seems good, I might give it a shot, I've been feeling experimental lately when it comes to DC. Have you heard the latest from IDW regarding Angel?  Apparently, Angel: Aftermath and Angel: Blood and Trenches (a WWII flashback) will follow AtF.  Frankly, the thought of more Angel from IDW makes me nervous, especially since there's been no mention whatsoever of canon or Joss Whedon's involvement.     Paul    730  12:43, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Will you buy AtF in TPB or HC? I bought the HC because it was beautifully presented (shame about the story itself) and now I'm not sure if I'll continue buying the individual issues.  I probably will, in all honesty, out of morbid curiosity, but I hate the issues because the covers are so inconsistant.  I think you have the right idea about future Angel though; wait and see.  I hope AtF has a satisfying ending because I don't think Aftermath is canon.  If it was, you'd think they'd be shouting it from the rooftops.  It hurts me how little Joss cares about this series anymore.
 * Buy the last Birds TPB? Why come in at the end?    Paul    730  12:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Buffyverse Geekiness
Yeah, I'm muchos excited. I love how Gates(?) the spider-monkey is in it, and the cover better not be lying about Gunther. I love me some Gunther. Did you buy the Angel DVDs or just borrow them? Angel is best watched continuously in a marathon, IMO. And isn't anything produced by DC with the word Crisis in the title usually shit? :P   Paul    730  22:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Zombie? As in Marvel Zombie?  Marvel's events are always heavily criticised as well but they're never that bad.  I loved Civil War.  Didn't think you owned either Buffy or Angel DVDs for some reason.  Gunther is a perverted man-fish and friend/boss of Fray.  I'm pretty sure that Buffy's random dress she's wearing is set up for a Gunther-looking-up-Buffy's-skirt joke.     Paul    730  22:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Garfield? Lol, how random.  I used to love Garfield.  DO you prefer Angel to Buffy, since you bought the DVDs of that first?  Mel says Gates is named after the "last great Watcher, sacrificed himself at the battle of Starbucks"???  Oh, and how come we haven't talked about the awesomeness of that Buffy animated promo??  Talk about fangasm!!    Paul    730  22:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't understand people's problem with dragons and stuff. The rationale seems to be "it would never be on the live-action show, demons are meant to be guys in rubber suits".  Except stuff like that was in the live-action show, we had a dragon flying through Sunnydale in "The Gift".  The show was always ambitious SFX-wise, the comics and cartoon are just allowing them to do what they always wanted.  It's not like Joss banned dragons on the series, and then changed his mind later.  Yeah, the uber-budget of the comics/cartoon doesn't bother me, but I know a lot of people hate it because it detracts realism or something.  I don't understand how people can like Angel more than Buffy.  What does Angel do that Buffy doesn't do better?     Paul    730  23:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I think Gunn is one of the most frustrating characters on Angel because his arc finishes in season 3 and he's basically pointless for the rest of the show. And not even in a tragic "my point is to be pointless" Xander kind of way, he's actually just boring.  Vamp Gunn is potentially interesting, but not being handled particularly well in AfF.  Wesley was pretty one-note until season three, when he suddenly became one of the most tragic and conflicted Buffyverse characters.  Cordelia was great unil season three, when it all went downhill (see that essay I linked in your sandbox, it makes some great points).  Fred is great, I love her little arc at the end of season 4, were it's literally her against the world.  I admire her emotional strength.  I think of the reasons I don't like Angel as much as Buffy are the villains; with the exception of Jasmine, who is terrifying, the villains are all pretty forgettable.  I didn't notice Angel was the only human, that's an interesting inversion of the dynamic in season 1.     Paul    730  23:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * What'd you make of it? I'm conflicted about the Big Revelation... but I trust Joss knows that he's doing.  Oh, and the Dawn/Xander stuff was brilliant, Moline is great at expressions.  Gunther was hilarious, I totally called them on that skirt gag months ago.     Paul    730  21:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Slapper. :P Try to avoid spoilers in the meantime; my friend told me what happened in it and it kind of ruined it for me.  Spike also came out, it was okay.  Not too keen on the new Big Bad.     Paul    730  22:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, mister. You've had all week to have a one-night-stand as an excuse to get Buffy!  What did you think of it? :P    Paul    730  20:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this arc is weaker than the last two (the first was mainly exposition, and although great at the time, isn't as good now). I was reading my "No Future For You" TBP (yes, I re-bought it, I'm sad) and I think that might be my favourite arc so far. The characterization is just perfect in that, a Giles/Faith spin-off wouldn't just be cool, it's the next logical step in their evolution, finding their own purposes away from Buffy. I'm unsure about the Dark Willow thing but we know zero about it, we don't even know if she's going to be the same DW we knew in season 6 (she seems more sad). Am I the only one who finds the Fray-speak a bit offputting? I'm not necessarily complaining, it just seems like it's increased a lot since Fray and you need to kind of translate it in your head.  Paul    730  20:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I can imagine language changing that much. Each generation has it's own slang, imagine 200+ years worth of that.  I like the concept of the weird language (Buffy's remark is very funny), I just think they overdid it a little to make Buffy feel more out-of-place.  Which is fine I guess.  I'm fairly indifferent to Dollhouse, I'll give it a chance but as I was just telling Bignole, I'm not going to love it just cos it's Joss.  I don't get this whole difference between the TV show and the comic book monsters... the TV show had trolls, dragons, not one but four giant snakes, a huge tentacle demon, the list goes on.  But suddenly a Golem isn't realistic enough?  Whatever.  The show was always a comic book in television form.  Dark witches probably ties into the whole "magic is evil" theme.     Paul    730  21:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC
 * What if Saga is the Big Bad and Twilight is just the Spike/Mr. Trick/Prof. Walsh/Dawn/Trio/Caleb Little Bad? I don't think so, but you never know.  I had a far-out theory that Saga was Willow in the future, since Goth VampWitch said she had been following Willow's "acension"... maybe Willow ascended into a snake like the Mayor (would explain her fishy recovery from Warren's lobotomy)!  Guess not though, since future Willow isn't a snake.  The whole Twilight thing is just too vague right now, I prefer not to think about it too much.  My friend is convinced he's future Xander which is a legitimate theory.  Oh, and I noticed that Fray article.  I think we need to get an admin to move it since Melaka Fray already exists.  I wouldn't bother deleting it as of yet, but a re-write is definitely in order.     Paul    730  21:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Infobox for Users You Created
Just wondering what my options are as far as the "color" option goes? --Infero Veritas (talk) 18:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what "name" per say, but I found it on the list when I searched for user box templates. Its on my userpage currently if that helps. --Infero Veritas (talk) 13:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Dr Hollywood
If you haven't yet, I *HIGHLY* recommend Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog (here)!! Neil Patrick Harris and Joss Whedon - hello!!! =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Am I the only one who noticed and is obsessed with Pink Pumeller? He better be in the sequel!    Paul    730  00:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * (I don't know whose page to reply on) I kinda got the implication from the shot we saw him in that perhaps he is in a (secret?) relationship with Moist. Either that or they're just friends, and perhaps one of them is gay, but it seemed like a strange insert of him on the bed.~ZytheTalk to me! 08:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just assumed he was Moist's boyfriend until I saw him again at the supervillain party surrounded by women. I find him really fascinating for some reason, and I don't think I'm the only one.  I think him and the male groupie are my favourite Dr H characters.     Paul    730  18:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We do the kinky things! =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I might just sleep with the same girl twice. I hear you get to do the weird stuff. :P~ZytheTalk to me! 13:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, that might be my favourite line in the film. Hammer's look when the groupies creep up on him is priceless.     Paul    730  13:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Angel
Heh... I didn't even know it was out. Shows how much I care. What happens in it? Feel free to spoil. Yes, Nina is my new most-hated Buffyverse character since Kate and Connor redeemed themselves admirably. I agree that Lynch can't write for Fred, which is a shame because she's one of the quirkiest characters. I really hope they keep Cordy and Harmony away from Lynch, I can only imagine what he'd do to them.  Paul    730  22:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Is that true or are you just commenting on the fact they've moved to SF? Iceman's always seemed a bit gay to me but it would be too retconny and controversial to out him.  I'd rather they focus on developing Anole.     Paul    730  05:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Interesting... do you have a link? (Not that I don't believe you, lol) I'm going to take a crazy guess and say Rockslide, since he has a cute friendship with Anole, tends to overcompensate his heterosexuality, and he's kind of a blank slate. One of the Young X-Men could be a candidate as well.  I can't see them outing one of the classics, I just don't think Marvel would have the balls.
 * Btw, I picked up Angel today... kind of a mixed bag. The artwork continues to hurt my eyes (but the guy who did the Connor First Night story is replacing him... yay!) and some of the dialogue is cringy (I'm looking at you, Nina and Fred!).  However, I liked how the visions were brought back into it, I always felt that was a major part of the mythology that kind of faded away in the show.  I also want to see more Spike/Connor interaction.  I'm completely indifferent to Gwen's betrayal, and her relationship with Connor is borderline disturbing.     Paul    730  13:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, that site posts a not-so-subtle picture of Iceman next to the article. If it's an A-lister, then Iceman is the way to go because his character has had nothing to do since... ever, actually.  I still think they'll go with one of the kids though.  Oh, and I meant it was disturbing because Gwen is like a decade older than Connor, not because they're all over each other.  I like that she's in cahoots with Gunn, and their history isn't being ignored like I thought it would be.     Paul    730  13:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, is that you just catching on that Vi and Violet are the same person? I don't think her hair is meant to be purple, it's just a colouring error probably.  I think it's great that Vi is the leader of New York, she was totally one of the coolest Potentials.  Lol, my friend pointed out that the other Slayers have castles, skyscrapers, and temples as their bases, and Rona is stuck in a crappy little gym in the backarse of Chicago.  Everyone hates Rona, and rightfully so.     Paul    730  14:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Every single thing that came out of Rona's mouth was a moan. She never had anything positive to say ever, she just moaned moaned moaned, and not even in a witty Cordelia/Spike/Anya way.  Also, that line "Ding, dong, the bitch is dead" when Buffy left... who the hell do you think you are, girl?! She was just a miserable little stain on the show.  That said, I do quite like her being around as the hate-victim of the series.  I think Buffy hates her as well, she accuses her of "passing the buck" with regards to Simone, implying that she's a pretty crap Slayer.  Lol.     Paul    730  14:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you completely and it's nice to hear praise for Season 8. The general consensus I get from reading SlayAlive is that After the Fall is much more popular of the two amongst fans, and Season 8 is pretty controversial because it's so different from the show. I honestly don't understand how you could like AtF more than S8; Buffy is really professional and feels completely like the natural continutation of the show, Angel, like you said, feels more like fan fiction. Any theories?  Paul    730  14:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You criticze Lynch for bringing in every character he can, and I agree, but S8 has also been accused of that. Amy, Warren (back from the dead, no less), Ethan, Dracula, and I guess Fray as well.  I refute that all of those characters have had actual roles in Buffy, unlike Angel where Groo and Nina stand about being utterly useless.  Like you said, Buffy seems to get away with a lot of potentially-silly things in my eyes because it's executed so well.  Go Ask Malice... I'd say buy it if you like Faith.  It's sad, but it doesn't quite have the metaphory-depth of the show if you know what I mean.  It's also quite short and easy to read because of Faith's limited vocabulary.  Oh, and Kenny the drummer being Kenny the thricewise might be gross because he was already older than Faith, so he'd be way older than Dawn.     Paul    730  15:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I really really doubt the Kenny's are one and the same. Oh, and Tommy didn't "turn out" gay, he always was.  She had a futile crush on him and he eventually skipped town with his b/f because he was scared of being gaybashed again, and of Faith's unnatural strength.  GAM actually does feel more "adult" than your average Buffy novel.  It's implied Faith has been sexually abused as well.  I've read the Immortal/Twilight theory and the argument is pretty good but there's a good argument for practically every character being Twilight.  I'm even leaning towards Dawn now because of their similar names, and she would certainly be "the closest, the most unexpected".  Who knows?  Maybe her third transformation is a big flying man in a gimp suit?  It was your edit to the Illyria article which led me to that cover; it's good, and the comic medium certainly encourages an appearance by "true" Illyria, but I doubt AfF will do it justice. :/    Paul    730  15:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I prefer Fred to be dead, in all honesty. I loved her character, but the permanence of her death was what made it so emotional. She wasn't floating around in some heaven dimension, she was completely and utterly destroyed, she ceased to exist. That was the tradedy of it, what made Illyria's "then you'll be where I am" so poignant, because you knew it was a lie. To have Magic Cordy whip up a new soul for Fredllyria and have her live happily ever after would be disgusting IMO. I much prefer Illyria being tortured by the memories of the person she essentially murdered in order to exist, that's a better story for me. Is this the cover you mean? I don't really like it, TBH. The concept is fine, just really hate Runge's pencils. Oh, and if we're going by Marvel rules, time is constantly in flux, and any "future" we see is just a potential timeline which may never occur. Old Man Angel might not be set in stone.  Paul    730  15:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It took a while to appreciate Fred's death, for a while, I wanted Willow to come in and reform her soul or something. At this point though, it would just feel like a cheat.  Leave her dead, I say.  I'm also extremely opposed to bringing Tara back, how about yourself?
 * Btw, how amazing is Sarah Connor Chronicles? I bought it last week and have already watched it through twice.  I love the strange little family dynamic the characters have.  The acting is a lot better in it than I expected, Dekker's John is actually pretty likable.  There's so many unanswered questions though... can't wait for season two.     Paul    730  22:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I like the glimpses of future John we see in Dekker; he's more pro-active than Nick Stahl. You'll be happy to know that he shaves off his fringe in season 2, in what I like to interpret as symbolic of his growth as a character ("I'm not emo anymore!"). The episode's stories don't actually interest me as much as the character moments, I sometimes find that I don't pay attention to the plot of certain episode, I'm just caring about the relationships, etc. I guess that's a problem but I think it'll get better. I don't get your problem with Reese being a child in 2007... he states in the original film that he grew up after the war, but T2 changed the timelime so Judgement Day happened later. ...I'm confused now. It's best not to think too much about Terminator continuity. In T3, Sarah died in 1997, but in SCC, she's still kicking in 1999? Then there's Kate Brewster, does she exist in the SCC-verse? I hate T3, I was watching it last night and it actually pains me to watch it, some of the horrible slapstick comedy and the bad acting... *shudders*   Paul    730  23:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm hoping Salvation lives up to it's name and breathes some life into the Terminator film series. Lol, I saw a clip of Dekker playing a little gay kid on some 90s soap opera.  It was pretty funny. I heard he apologised on his MySpace to those who thought he was homophobic for not playing Zach on Heroes.  That whole situation is so messy, I don't know what to think.  What can I say, I like him as John for some reason.     Paul    730  23:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cass 2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Cass 2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sid 4.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Sid 4.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)