|
This article/image is a historical reference page This article/image is obsolete. It is kept for historical reference purposes. |
|
Do not split.[]
Can we come to a consensus before we start splitting it? It seems like it's fairly evenly split at the moment and nobody has given a good reason for why we need two articles even if we count them as multiple episodes (like TNPLH Parts 2&3 currently is). Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 03:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. I would prefer it if all the finales were kept as they were, just counted as two episodes. Not really seeing the sense in splitting S2 but not S1 or S3 right now..--Baker1000 21:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- Good reasons to SPLIT "Through the Looking Glass" now: Some guest credits (such as Sonya Walger) only appear in one part, not both, so the character appearances page is actually incorrect as is. And most importantly, TTLG is split into two parts on the DVD. Thirty years from now, syndication and Blu-Ray/DVD will be how we remember Lost, not how one episode aired on one night in May as a two-hour block. Since the DVD split it up, then TTLG should be split -- no question. The other finales are more curious. But when ABC starts airing commercials for the 100th episode (that's 5x14), people will come here, and wonder why there aren't 99 episodes preceding it. This is our chance to get ahead of the game. Marc604 07:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Continuation of Discussion[]
Please continue the discussions about splitting the articles "Exodus, Part 2", "Live Together, Die Alone, Part 1", "Through the Looking Glass, Part 1" and "There's No Place Like Home, Part 2" here. Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 05:04, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Can we treat this as a technical issue? If the "Lost" splash appears on the screen, the episode has ended; if the splash does not appear, the episode is still running.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 13:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- I say the parts should be treated as individual episodes, at least in terms of characters appearances and guest stars lists. Maybe we don't have to rename and split the episodes (though I am in favor of that myself) but I think there should be something like guest starring (Part 1) : and guest starring (Part 2) : as well as Flashbacks (Part 1) : and Flashback (Part 2) : (if they are different, like Exodus) in the infobox. There should also be a mention, somewhere in the article or the transcript of exactly where the cut-off point is. The episodes should also be listed individually on the season templates, (both linking to the same article, obviously.) Of course ... I still think that spliting them would be easier. We'd just have to add a note saying that it aired together with the next episode on the original airing, in the USA. Did ABC ever rerun them as single-hour episode ? I know most of the other channels do ... so if you think about it they were probably aired more often apart than together. --LeoChris 15:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- You know what I was on the split side of the disscusion but after seeing LTDA split up I changed my mind, it honestly looked ridiculous I agree with LeoChris if we have to leave them together then ok it probably is best to just leave them together but they need to be named properly (ex: LTDA parts 1 and 2)and we need to do something about the character appearances because its a diservice to say michael was only in five episodes of season 5 when he was really in 6 an so on. We should leave the article as is but credit the actors only for the part(s) of which they contributed. I vote for rename and seperate credits but leave the article as one.--Czygan84 21:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- I was one of the original champions of splitting, but I also like what Czygan has to say. If we do split the guest credits and the main credits, especially on the appearances page, and rename the finale pages to say Part 1 and Part 2, then I really don't see a big deal about splitting the episodes themselves. So if the hold-up is me, I'll cave into the no splitting side of things now as long as the above is done. Marc604 23:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Works for me, my main problem was not wanting to split the pages. Although, for the guest casts and such, I would say list everyone amalgamated in the "guest cast" section on the sectionbox (the thingy in the top-right of the articles with a summary of the information) and then someplace in the production notes state something like:
- Although credited for both parts, person X and person Y only appear in part one.
- Although credited for both parts, person A and person B only appear in part two.
So that we don't end up cluttering the sectionbox. Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 00:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Works for me as well. Anyone else have any additional problems? Marc604 00:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- I agree renaming all the finals as part 1 and 2 and adding credits to apply to that, but the season final article page should remain on one page not split the season finals into two separate pages for part 1 and 2. Character appearences should be worked to that, since some characters only appear in one of the 2-hours e.g season 3 final Richard part 1, Penny part 2, Walt part 1, Rose/Bernard both parts and so on. Lostbuffy23 14:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- I notice that someone went to a lot of work on the appearances page -- nice job! But what about the Episodes page? I can't figure out how to change the Episode ## for the S2 finale and S3 finale. (Someone already changed the others). Marc604 22:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- Guess i opened up a can of worms on the suggestion page. My personal opinion is that the finale's should count as one episode but as ABC is counting 5x14 as episode 100 then that isn't the case. Personally at this point i wouldn't split up the articles or have two boxes because it looks silly but i would rename to have it as "part 1 & 2" in the titles for LTDA and TTLG and "part 2 & 3" for Exodus and TNPLH.--Anfield Fox|talk|contributions 23:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
- alright so we got a consensus rename, no split, and aknowledge guest/main credits per hour under production notes--Czygan84 01:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed. Sounds good. Marc604 09:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. It's a mess right now. We have "Exodus, Part 2" with two section boxes, "Live Together, Die Alone, Part 1" with two section boxes, even though we have split the page to make LTDA, Part 2. "Through the Looking Glass, Part 1" with two section boxes, and "There's No Place Like Home, Part 2" with one section box. We need some consistancy here please, we all need to agree on something, not just jump in and change it to what we feel looks best. I haven't seen the concenus reached anywhere for making two section boxes on one page, probably because the discussion is taking place on so many pages (another problem we need to sort out). We need a SysOp to make this decision. It's between splitting the pages, not splitting (and renaming to fit that) and having two section boxes, or not splitting, keeping one section box and just noting the main credit appearances in the production notes. Right now we have a mix of all three, it's a mess. My vote goes to agree with Anfield Fox's idea to not split, keep one section box and rename the pages accordingly.--Baker1000 14:08, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- A user took it upon himself to split these pages up on his own so we need some work to be done i tried to undo it back to original form but thats not happening. If someone could fix these back to the way theve been for years all we would need to do is rename and add seperate credits under production notes. Ill do some work on LTDA but i dont have time to fix all 3. --Czygan84 20:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. It's a mess right now. We have "Exodus, Part 2" with two section boxes, "Live Together, Die Alone, Part 1" with two section boxes, even though we have split the page to make LTDA, Part 2. "Through the Looking Glass, Part 1" with two section boxes, and "There's No Place Like Home, Part 2" with one section box. We need some consistancy here please, we all need to agree on something, not just jump in and change it to what we feel looks best. I haven't seen the concenus reached anywhere for making two section boxes on one page, probably because the discussion is taking place on so many pages (another problem we need to sort out). We need a SysOp to make this decision. It's between splitting the pages, not splitting (and renaming to fit that) and having two section boxes, or not splitting, keeping one section box and just noting the main credit appearances in the production notes. Right now we have a mix of all three, it's a mess. My vote goes to agree with Anfield Fox's idea to not split, keep one section box and rename the pages accordingly.--Baker1000 14:08, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed. Sounds good. Marc604 09:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- I do not think two section boxes is at all necessary. We know that ABC is considering LTDA and TTLG as two separate episodes (Pt. 1 and Pt. 2). Exodus, Part 2 runs as ONE episode, but it counts as TWO episodes. That does not mean we need a separate infobox for Exodus, Part 3 and we do not need to rename that episode to Exodus, Parts 2 & 3. The DVD and the ABC website recognizs this episode as Exodus, Part 2 however, we need to clarify that it counts as two episodes. As for LTDA and TTLG; this is tough to decide since the DVDs and the ABC website count LTDA as ONE episode, and TTLG as TWO episodes. We know that they both count as two episodes, but I think it would be best to use ONE infobox for each of these, but note that there are TWO parts to the episode. That means it would probably be best to rename the pages to Live Together, Die Alone, Parts 1 & 2 and Through the Looking Glass, Parts 1 & 2. -- CTS Talk Contribs 20:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- I also think that we should have {{ep|2x22}} say Live Together, Die Alone, Part 1 and {{ep|2x23}} say Live Together, Die Alone, Part 2 -- both of these would still redirect to the SAME article (Live Together, Die Alone, Parts 1 & 2). Also, we should change {{ep|3x22}} to Through the Looking Glass, Part 1 and {{ep|3x23}} to Through the Looking Glass, Part 2. Another change would be {{ep|4x13}} and {{ep|4x14}} to There's No Place Like Home, Part 2 and There's No Place Like Home, Part 3, respectively. These would all link back to their respective articles, however. This will definitely require a lot of work, as these links are spread throughout the entire wiki. -- CTS Talk Contribs 20:53, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- My two cents. I do not like the idea of two info boxes for each finale. It just looks silly. And I agree with the above poster, that the parts be separated in the top section with all the episode titles, but both parts would link to the same page. Marc604 01:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, but whoever changes it over needs to make sure that it's done properly, as I've reverted several edits where the box got messed up. Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 00:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- Split all finale pages - I think given that 5x14 is the 100th episode of Lost we should have 100 episode pages. And I think two info boxes per page looks messy. --Jamie-0408 18:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- Spilit all finale pages Always thought of them as seperate episdoes and with the whole 100th episode thing. --Ryan76el 18:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- Split all finale pages - I think given that 5x14 is the 100th episode of Lost we should have 100 episode pages. And I think two info boxes per page looks messy. --Jamie-0408 18:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, but whoever changes it over needs to make sure that it's done properly, as I've reverted several edits where the box got messed up. Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 00:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- My two cents. I do not like the idea of two info boxes for each finale. It just looks silly. And I agree with the above poster, that the parts be separated in the top section with all the episode titles, but both parts would link to the same page. Marc604 01:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I dont like the idea of splitting or renaming the articles - it is pointless. Why don't we just put somewhere in the article an information "this episode counts as two"? --Kemot from Poland 10:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)