Talk:Not Fade Away (Angel)

Duplicate article

The options here are quite clear. There are two entries about the exact same subject, "disambiguated" by a missing parenthesis in one of the titles (a typo that would have to be corrected anyways). Merging here would mainly be putting the information on both articles together in just one (without doubling anything). Once this is done, we'll need to merge the Histories of both articles, to preserve an accurate record of contribution. Alternatively, it may be deemed that one of the articles is expendable and simply deleted it — notice, however, that this would implicate a blunt deletion, without using any of the information contained in the article that is to be deleted. If information is to be transferred, then we'll need to merge the histories. And this needs to be done ASAP. We cannot have a double entry like this. Regards, Redux 16:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I vote to delete the one with the missing parenthesis. When I wrote the synopsis, I found that there were two of the article, and I simply copy/pasted into the one with the missing parenthesis. The one with both parenthesis is the only one that's had important work done on it in the time since, so the other is expendable. Thanks! Ghola8

Somebody who is familiar with the episode should go through them both and merge them if neccessary, although from Ghola8's comment it would appear it is not neccessary. Then either the person who merges them should add an infobox, or I'll do it, as I'm adding infoboxes to all the episodes at the moment.--Cooksey 18:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, the "article without the parenthesis" is merely a copy of this one; and it was created after this one as well, by what Ghola8 has said. In this case, I'll delete it in, say, 24 hours, unless someone protests — I don't see what about though, it's a simple copy of this article, there's nothing new that can be taken from it (in fact, it would be best to delete it soon, before someone inadvertedly edits it, instead of this one, with the accurate title). Regards, Redux 22:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I have added the infobox and put all the correct subheadings etc. --Cooksey 14:10, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Images

Usually, we don't have seven images in the infobox. Actually, it would be more like one. Than maybe some of the other images could be distributed in the article. Regards, Redux 14:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh right, OK. I only added so many because it's the last episode, I'll distribute them through the rest of the article. Sorry. --Cooksey 16:34, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
EDIT - I moved the pictures, but it looks sort of rubbish. I'm not very good at this sort of thing, if you or someone else thinks they could do a better job then please, feel free. --Cooksey 16:41, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I've given it a whirl. As you will notice, I moved one of the images that was in the infobox to the "Plot" section (thus leaving only one image there, which was the I thought would be the best one to be there — I also changed its caption); I adjusted the size of three of the images (one from 270px to 220, and two others from 270px to 250), which was done in order to "fit" them better in the text: since the objective was to keep them next to the text that's describing the scene, I reduced them in order to keep them from being too close together. A very important note: I removed the image Senator Axe.jpg from the article, since that section was already "clogged" with images (those two that were too close together), and the image did not appear to be illustrative of anything special, or particularly important for the article (it was a woman with an axe in her head). By doing that, however, the image has become what we call an orphaned image, that is, a usable image (fair use) that is not being used on any article (the image description page showed that this one was the only article to which it was linked). As such, the image has become a candidade for speedy deletion, in accordance with our speedy deletion policy (criterion #5 for Images/Media). So you might want to look into that, if you would want to preserve the image on our servers. I hope this was helpful. Regards, Redux 17:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Redux, it looks a lot better now. I'm not very good at that sort of thing, as you could tell from my attempt :) Plus, don't worry about the image being removed, that's ok, I have it saved on my computer if it is ever needed again. And the 'See Also' link, we have it at the top in every episode done so far, so we should make a decision about where it should go; top or bottom. --Cooksey 18:21, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Glad to help. So, about the image Senator Axe.jpg, do I have your consent (as the uploader) to delete it? Remember that the image is usable under the Fair Use provision, and it would be deleted only because it is not being used in any article. I've noticed that the character that appears being "axed" in it has her own article on Wikipedia, so even though the image was expendable here, it could be used there (and then it wouldn't be orphaned anymore). Btw, this article call her "Bruckner", whereas her specific article is titled "Brucker", so which one is right?
And about the "See also" section: I'm afraid in this case the correct format is the "See also" section. Since it's not a navigational aid in the text to be linked freely (as in "(...)Illyria killed Cyrus Vail (...)") and it's not pertaining to a specific section of the article, the Manual of Style says When the See also refers to the entire article, not just a section, it should be a heading of level 2 so that it appears in the table of contents. Place it at the bottom of the article, before External links. This is how it should be done in all articles, we don't use the sentence "see also article" as a sentence in the opening paragraph. So, if this is how it looks currently in the other Angel episode articles, I suppose the change would be needed. Besides, a "See also" section is usually quite useful in an article, since it provides a list of related topics that may be of interest. Regards, Redux 22:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

You have my permission to delete the picture, if it is needed I will upload it again. Luckily the identifying top line and spoiler are part of the infobox template, so to delete it will just require changing the template, but it will still need to be added to each See Also subsection on each page. I'll do that later, and when I do future episodes I'll add it in the correct place. And I'll look into the Senator Brucker/Bruckner thing. --Cooksey 00:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Headers

There are four headers completely empty in the article right now. Is there any perspective of inputing content there any time soon? If not, they should be removed (we can always re-implement if ever it is decided to input the information). Especifically, about the "Quotes and Trivia", the "quotes" part is usually best placed at our sister project, Wikiquote. Once it's there, we can link it here with a simple template: {{Wikiquote|articlename}}. Regards, Redux 21:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

The headers are part of the template/outline used on every Angel and Buffy episode, they will eventually be filled in, but until then we thought they should be present; otherwise if people submit info to an episode, then each episode would have different headers and it would be a mess. --Cooksey 22:01, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

But perhaps the template could be amended to exclude the "quotes" part? It would be a lot better if the information went straight to Wikiquote, duely linked here, as I mentioned. Regards, Redux 22:10, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Although that may be preferred; the problem is that it is not an actual template, so would require going through every single episode of Angel and Buffy to remove it. Which is a pretty big job. --Cooksey 22:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

That being the case, we can just leave it as it is, and only perform the change in the articles where quotes happen to actually be added. In such case, we just remove the info to Wikiquote and place a link in the article — although if it's just one or two quotes in one or two articles, there have been instances where the data wasn't moved to Wikiquote. In fact, we should check if there isn't already an article for Angel quotes on Wikiquote. Sometimes, the contributors over there, especially when they are anons, forget to link the Wikiquote article to the Wikipedia article, and vice-versa. Regards, Redux 16:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, we'll do that from now on then. --Cooksey 17:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Plot synopsis

The plot synopsis here is too long -- dangerously on the brink of copyright infringement. It needs to be reined in. If someone here working on the ep doesn't want to do it, I'll put it up for grabs at WP Buffy - Che Nuevara: ^{Join the Revolution} 11:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really much of a writer; really I'm just updating all the Angel episode pages so they fit this format, I usually just use the existing synopsis and whatnot. That's what I did here, I just used the existing plot synopsis, added the infobox template and the pictures. So I would say put it up at WikiProject Buffy, let someone have a go at improving it. Just so I know, why is it almost infringing on copyright? Just so I don't accidentally do the same thing on another episode. --Cooksey 16:32, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

If you didn't write the synopsis, then you've got nothing to worry about.

An overly detailed plot synopsis can cause copyright issues, especially if it uses many quotes in context. I know you're relatively new here -- are you familiar with GNU Free Documentation License? There isn't any problem with your pictures, don't worry about that, although some of them might have to be cut when the summary is cut just for balance's sake.

A plot summary -- that is, a description of the events -- is completely acceptable under GNU. A retelling, however, is not. This sort of scene-by-scene action description -- as well written as it is -- is against the GNU rules. You really don't want more than 6 or 700 words in a summary of a 42-minute show. This one's got almost 2000.

I'm gonna put it on the WPB to-do page later today. - Che Nuevara: ^{Join the Revolution} 15:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Cyvus vs Cyrus

Why did someone revert the edit I did to correct Cyrus Vail to Cyvus Vail, I don't think it has ever been an disputed that his name is Cyvus Vail, all the official sources I have ever seen have spelled it that way, Cyrus is a common and easy mis-hearing but it is still wrong and it should be changed accordingly.

Whether they survive the Final battle...

I confess to causing a slight problem. I'm the fool who wrote the blasted "However, it is down to the viewers whether or not..." sentance. Said sentance has since led to numerous changes to that part of the page, the latest of which being something along the lines of "non-canonical comics have since confirmed these characters survival". I suggest we leave it as it is now, considering that those comics are,(while being official merchandise approved by Fox and Joss Whedon),generally regarded as non-canon.

The comics are not "non-canon", at least not the 17 "After The Fall" issues. They were written in part by Joss Whedon himself as a canonical continuation of the series. The continuation after these 17 issues are where the canon debate rages, but with the publisher that writes the canonical "Buffy Season 8" getting the license back for Angel, it looks like the follow up comics are going to be made canon by bridging the Angel comics to the Buffy comics. So, it should be noted that in the canon continuation that these characters do not die (except for Gunn, but he gets better).

Last day helping Anne?

Last day? It wasn't Gunn who croaked...he was just badly hurt. He's survived worse. Lots42 02:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Not fade away Angel.png

Image:Not fade away Angel.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Dozens?

Gunn was corned by dozens of vampires? I counted ten at most. Lots42 (talk) 05:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)