Plagiarism[]
Pardon a stickler for the rules, but this looks like (for the most part) a duplicate of the Fox.com summary. This should be fixed. OneWeirdDude 23:34, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
Eddie Goines[]
Since you asked, Blue Rook, it wasn't spelled wrong in the credits. It was spelled "Goines", but the article already had it spelled as "Goins" when I came here. I fixed it when I created the guys article, but I don't know why Pyramidhead changed it back to "Goins". Thief12 02:04, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Ah gotcha. Pyramidhead, why did ya change it back? And regarding the names, when actor names have been spelled wrong, we correct the name and then add in parentheses the mistaken way in which it was spelled, before going on to the character name. Something like Beatrice Battleaxe (as Beatrice Battleax) as Woman with Axe. I just can't find the example when this was used, but I recall Proudhug's excellent explanation for it: our job isn't to reproduce the mistakes of the credits list. It's good to know we don't need to do it in this case though, thanks Thief. Blue Rook talk contribs 03:23, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
Speaking of... not necessarily related, but in sorta the same line. What's the precise policy here when a character appears unnamed in the credits, but whose name we know? Ever since I started editing here, I've seen it done the way it's done here and here, for example. However, when I did the link to Fredericks in this article the same way I've been doing it, Pyramidhead changed it to the way it is now with an "ugh". What's the right way to do it then? Thief12 03:34, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
- Short answer: there is no policy about that, just precedent. If I remember correctly, Pyramidhead started doing it the new way not long ago. The only difference between the old way and his way is that the extra verbiage (the stuff quoted verbatim from the credits) is now unlinked and italicized. Frankly, I like the way the new style looks and I haven't been changing it to the old way intentionally. If you want to revert his changes to the old style, you can make the argument from precedent. But again I believe it's more refined the way he started doing it, and I'd probably support an effort of going back and updating the old pages to this style rather than vice versa. Blue Rook talk contribs 05:04, May 18, 2010 (UTC)
I really don't mind either way. Actually, I kinda agree that the new way looks better. I was just doing it the other way because I thought that way was the supposed one. Anyway, it's just that Pyramidhead's "ugh" on the comment line threw me off and made me feel as if I was doing something wrong whereas I was just doing it the way I'd seen it being done. It's okay then. Thief12 00:49, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Mmm yeah, everybody always needs to stay on top of their etiquette in the edit summaries, myself and the other admins included. And in summary, regarding the new method, I think it's a good new precedent for all the guides. Blue Rook talk contribs 01:02, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
Day 8 date[]
At the end of the episode, when Jack dials the number, the date of Pavel's last phone call (whick took place during the episode) is 02/28, maybe that could be added to the background informations section?
"This is for my friend."[]
I'm guessing it's far too trivial to say that Jack takes matters into his own hands again, for I notice he kills Pavel "for Renee", but in the past he's told others, "There's nothing more you can do for him/her". Otherwise I would—oh well. OneWeirdDude 18:07, August 23, 2010 (UTC)