Talk:24: One Shot

I've rolled back most of StBacchus's revision.


 * "2004 productions" is part of an in-progress project of mine to document the production timeline.
 * Plot summaries are written in present progressive tense, not past.
 * Characters are characters, no need to discriminate between comics-only and those from the TV show.

That said, I appreciate the cleaning up of much of the synopsis. --Proudhug 02:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I was under the impression, that due to the Article Policy, we wrote things in the past tense. I don't do much editing for episode guides, but most of the character guides are in the past tense. If we're going to write them in a different tense, perhaps we should reflect that in the article policy? - Xtreme680 02:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * It's my understanding that when writing an article about a television show, film, or novel... the article should be written in the present tense. I can't remember the exact explanation I've been given in class about it, but it's kind of like the events of books and movies are always happening, so we discuss them in the present tense.  Now, as for actors... I think that if an actor is still active in their role on 24, they should be discussed in the present tense, but someone like Penny Johnson Jerald would be discussed in the past tense.  Characters are the same way.  I've written my guides in present tense, and actors/characters based on their status on the show as it is today.  Here's a website that lists the times for a special use of the present tense: http://www.englishonline.net/writing/tips/tense.html  --Kapoli 02:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I guess I wouldn't really mind, I just thought that the site was meant to explain all of the events as though they had already happened, and it seems kind of odd to change the tense between character pages and episode/video game/novel pages. The website only seemed to indicate the kind of tense you used when talking about a show or movie in general, like saying "Blade Runner has lots of religious symbolism", and is the sort of tone we might use when talking about the show in general, like saying "24 uses real-time", and not "Teri walks down the hall". But I'm no english professor, nor do I care much, I just sort of want a policy. - Xtreme680 03:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hold it! I found another website... http://www.cofc.edu/~rogersa/gldnnugt.html (see "nugget 2").  Apparently, if we want to be grammatically correct, we should write about the characters in present tense also.  That seems weird, especially if a character's status is "Deceased", but I guess it works.  I suppose that some actors can be written about in past tense, since actors exist in real life and the characters/episode guides exist only in the literary world.  I don't know, what do you guys think? -Kapoli 03:10, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Woah, sorry guys, I didn't mean for this to become a huge discussion (as everything seems to do, lately). Yes, in-universe articles should be written in the past tense. Real world articles are written in the present or past, depending on what the topic is. However, plot synopses are written in the present progressive. Read any of our episode guides for an example (Day 5 3:00am-4:00am). Paragraphs about the episode are written in the past tense, but I'm just talking about the actual synopsis. --Proudhug 03:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

That Article Policy really needs to be rewritten, or at least expanded. Of course, so do many of our meta-pages. So much to do, so little time! --Proudhug 03:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll see if I can't get on it. - Xtreme680 04:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Oops, sorry! Okay, plot synopses are present tense, got it. Since we're talking about the article, though, what's with all the links at the bottom? It is necessary to reproduce the whole cast list or include links to things referenced only in passing, like Sinn Fein? The only thing we could write about Sinn Fein without using the dreaded real world info would be that Michael Donovan used to support them. Does that warrant more than a note on the Michael Donovan page? --StBacchus 07:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Good question, StBacchus. I'm not familiar with One Shot, so anyone can feel free to put me in my place if necessary, but shouldn't this kind of be set up in a way similar to episode guide?  I don't think we need the huge "reference" section at the bottom.  Couldn't we change "Notes" to "Background Information and Notes" and put any relevant trivia or notes there?  I think that having a huge paragraph of one-word links that are (for the most part) already linked in the article, is redundant.  Come to think of it, if there's something listed in that reference section - like Sinn Fein - that isn't linked in the actual article, then do we really need it linked as a 'reference'?  --Kapoli 07:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The References section is something that I really like that Memory Alpha uses. No one has added it to the Episode articles yet, but I'd planned on doing so eventually. Basically, the idea behind it is to list all of the in-universe articles that have information derived from this particular comic/episode/novel/etc. I find it to be a handy tool to quickly see which people, places and things have had their articles affected by this episode. I mean, we've established that other people have thier need to quickly identify if a character is alive or not. I think this is just as redundant as that, only more practical. Feel free to ignore it and leave the project to me if you don't like it, however if everyone absolutely hates it and thinks it clutters the article, I'm sure I can be persuaded to nix the concept.

As for Sinn Fein, yeah basically that's the only information we'd be able to provide from the comic, but it's still part of our effort to archive everything. If I'm not mistaken Sinn Fein is also referred to in Operation Hell Gate, but even if it's not, we still make articles for every little thing whether or not it contains any original information. Mainly for consistency. --Proudhug 08:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I can't imagine how I would use such a thing, but if you would, that's good enough for me. Like I said, I don't think any of us should be guessing at or judging how other people use the wiki, only trying to make it easier to do so. I do think it would be better to leave out the cast, since they're all linked twice already. Also, if there's going to be a whole article on Sinn Fein, wouldn't it be appropriate to include some real-life information, so that readers know why it was referenced? --StBacchus 08:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, I wish I'd known that the idea was to include that section in the episode guides. I've actually removed it from some because I think, well, I think it's kind of an eyesore.  I feel like having a huge block of blue links made up of anything affected in the article/guide is not only redundant, but also very similar to the Research Files.  Weren't we trying to delete the research file links that led to articles about stuff just mentioned in passing?  It was my understanding that we wanted to keep stuff that was really mentioned in the show, not just concepts that might lend to a better understanding of the episode.  If something like "Sinn Fein" isn't even major enough to be listed in the article itself, then do we need a separate page for it?  --Kapoli 09:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Or Sahara, which is there because of the following quote: "Expecting a full report from Langley is like expecting snow in the Sahara." I guess I could see explaining the joke as a note (although again, that involves the dreaded real-life information), but I don't see why it means the Sahara needs a page. --StBacchus 09:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)