![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Ok, we seem to be going back and forth on this. The part in the lead that says, "or simply Legends of Tomorrow is completely unnecessary. The only thing missing is "DC's". This removal doesn't really simplify the name to a point that we need to actually address this to readers like they come to the wrong page (especially when the title of the article doesn't have "DC's" in it). Yes, I'm aware that AoS does that and other pages, but they probably should not. We're not talking about Dr. Strangelove or Borat, where we have significant name reduction. We're talking about a small removal. Per WP:LEAD, only "significant alternative titles" are placed in the lead. I don't think that the removal of "DC's" makes the change significant enough to mention. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:29, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
HOW MANY TIMES IS THIS PAGE GONNA BE RENAMED BEFORE WE AGREE ON A NAME?!?!?!?!?!?! The Ouroboros, the Undying, the Immortal ( talk) 19:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Even when talking about unfilmed roles, "expected" means fan speculation, not that the studio "expects" him to be on there. The studio knows whether or not he will be on there, so for now he's unconfirmed and I believe Wikipedia policy would say that makes it not worthy of being on here as though it's fact. Go ahead and add "expected" Amell appearance to the production section or somewhere else, but until he is confirmed to appear, let's leave him out of the casting section. NTC TNT ( talk) 04:24, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
If and when you find a news source that says "Stephen Amell to appear on Legends of Tomorrow", please let me know and I'll add it on the page. AdamDeanHall ( talk) 20:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
In an interview with IGN ( http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/08/12/arrow-constantine-will-help-bring-sara-lance-back?%20hub%20page%20%28front%20page%29 Arrow producer Wendy Mericle has said that the version of Constantine appearing on Arrow is the same version and character from the Constantine show, thus making the events of Constantine canon to this universe, and should therefore be on the list of related shows. Ttll213 ( talk) 23:50, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm just wanting to check this. He's under the recurring cast section but I'm just wanting to check this is accurate. I came across this article:
http://www.franchiseherald.com/articles/36765/20150827/legends-of-tomorrow-cast-characters.htm
in this it mentions Vandal Savage as a main character. It's sourcing it to a press event. I'm wondering if anyone has any more information on it. Their quote only mentions these characters appearing in every episode which isn't quite the same as "main cast" but I'm wanting to make sure what is being stated is accurate. Ruffice98 ( talk) 19:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Can someone please enlighten me on what qualifies as a fansite and what doesn't. I keep getting reverted when adding from DC'sLegendsTV, which is a offshoot of KSITE (which is reliable). I know that even fansites are acceptable when reporting exclusives, and the director information I keep adding is an exclusive, because it is the only site reporting the info. Insight greatly appreciated. LLArrow ( talk) 19:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Does the wording of the Australian release shed light to this, here: "The series[...] will screen Express from the US on FOX8, which is a nice change from new titles that are often later in their first season." @ Whats new?:, since you added this to the article, are you able to shed more light on this wording. Does "screen Express" mean it airs on the same day as the US premiere? - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 06:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
The article is now stating that the premiere is on January 21, 2016, but the source is based on an article with the headline "Legends of Tomorrow Premiere Date Possibly Revealed". How can a statement that so qualifies its information be considered sufficiently reliable to turn it into a definitive statement in the article? I'm going to remove both source and all exact date claims; if you have anything better to reference, I'd be happy to see it. BlueMoonset ( talk) 07:31, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Will this poster fit in the infobox? Kailash29792 ( talk) 13:51, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 17:57, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Legends of Tomorrow →
DC's Legends of Tomorrow – The initial title is not entirely a match to the network's. Need to add "DC's".
NeoBatfreak (
talk)
20:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
There is some useful production info in this ref. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 21:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Info on the 15th episode of the season has just been posted, including the director. We also have a piece of information placed below the episode table, stating that Rachel Talalay will be directing the penultimate episode of the season. So, as this is a 16-episode season, you'd expect the penultimate episode (one before the last) to be directed by Talalay, but it isn't; it's directed by someone else.
At this point, Guggenheim has given two conflicting statements: one, from back in January, and the other, an official document from the title page of the episode script that started production today. I think we have to go with the latest information—things do change—and drop the older (and clearly out of date) information. Talalay did direct episode 12; perhaps Guggenheim was forgetting that this was a 16-episde season, not a 13-episode season, when he said that. But whatever the explanation, it's time to remove that earlier statement. BlueMoonset ( talk) 22:42, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I see that a season article and episode list have been proposed, and I don't think either should happen, at least not yet. There isn't enough season 1 specific production information to make a season article. If season 2 ends up being completely separate, like in an anthological way, then it may become appropriate then. But for now it seems way too early. As for a list of episodes, we generally don't create those until we have a separate table for season 2, and even then we may not need one straight away since this season is shorter than usual. So, that's a no to either of those splits at the moment, though if people think the article is getting a bit long and want to split off the cast list, then we could discuss that. - adamstom97 ( talk) 21:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 13:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm puzzled by the idea that we should favor an old promotional blurb from when the program was in its early development, over the actual content of the series. That old "premise" is what DC said they were planning, a year ago. The monologue presented at the beginning of every episode is what DC finally decided to produce, what the series actually is about. Evidently they dropped Savage's plan to "destroy the world" (he just conquered it) and to destroy "time itself". We don't document intentions or plans, we document verifiable facts, and primary sources are the best source for facts about the content of a TV program itself. As WP:USEPRIMARY says: "The film itself is an acceptable primary source for information about the plot and the names of the characters." (Arguing that this doesn't apply because this isn't a "film" is nonsense; the same guidance is given for a novel or painting, as other examples.) Especially compared to a press release, which is inherently unreliable. (If DC had described it as "the most thrilling adventure of all time" would we parrot that as part of the premise?) If you think that the original premise is noteworthy enough to put into the Production section, to describe how it changed between greenlight and debut, fine. But it's historical, not actual. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 13:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
This is my first contribution to the site, so I hope I'm doing this right. The Premise as it now stands gives too much away. I've watched about half the episodes which have aired so far, and everything after the first two sentences of the Premise is a spoiler for me. Events that happen later on in the series aren't part of the show's premise, surely. I prefer the idea of using the monologue as suggested above, or something like it. 165.120.129.38 ( talk) 18:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
An editor recently went through the Arrowverse articles removing all the airdates that were released by The CW today for upcoming episodes. I'm assuming they did so, because they believe there is no conclusive evidence that the episode will air on said date, I disagree. Episodes that will be repeats are listed as so, episodes that will not be are listed as, "TBA", I believe this is probable cause to place the next chronological episode as that given airdate. Obviously other editors do too, because I've seen it done here before. If you agree, I'd like to reach a consensus to place the dates. LLArrow ( talk) 01:20, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
While the main characters travel through time, all the events are shown as linear from their perspective. Therefore, I'm removing it from the nonlinear category. JDDJS ( talk) 21:23, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
I know it was reported back in the summer that Snart was joining the Legion of Doom in the second season, but we're more than halfway through the season, and there has been no hint whatsoever that it is going to happen. The reports could have been wrong, or that story line could have been dropped. It might still happen on the show, but until it does, or recent reliable sources confirm that this is still the plot that they are going with, it should not be included in the article. JDDJS ( talk) 22:09, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
I created a draft for the list of episodes since the main article is getting long with the episodes summaries and ratings. Draft:List of Legends of Tomorrow episodes — Brojam 21:14, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Pinging Vilnisr in this discussion, given their recent move to the separate episodes article again; not sure if this discussion is now outdated or still relevant. Alex|The|Whovian ? 12:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Again, how is this a mess? It literally doesn't look any different on this page than it does on a separate LoE page. I'm confused by this idea that visually it is going to look so much better in one location than another, when nothing has changed but said location. The table is the same. The content is the same. We're not talking about 10 years of a show crammed on this page. If anything looks "a mess", it would be a ratings table that duplicates that episode tables, but I don't see you clamoring to separate that table out to its own page. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Length of a page is not determined by your eye, it's determined by WP:SIZE (this page isn't anywhere near as long as Arrow (TV series) or Smallville and they don't even have episode tables on their pages). No one is saying that we won't split it, just that nothing has actually changed for this show other than knowing a 3rd season will happen. There isn't actually new information to put anywhere. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Joeyconnick – the 'Episodes' section of this page is long past long enough where it should now be split off. I suggest the spinoff be done now, post haste. There's no reason to put it off any longer. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 13:37, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
< 40 kB Length alone does not justify division(emphasis mine). The key words are "size alone" – the fact that splitting at this point is common practice around this Project would actually qualify as a justification for splitting. Oh, and back to WP:SIZESPLIT:
> 100 kB Almost certainly should be divided– guess what? This article is now 121 kB! Guess it's time for a split after all!! -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 14:38, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
It doesn't show up, but if you organize it differently (basically just remove the asterick) it would. That's why I did the other way, just to say with everything it is not quite there. Again, I just go back to the idea that there isn't a rush to split it, as the page is not harmed by it being here. And we seemingly all agreed (meaning the people that are saying not to split right this second) that once the season ends and we get season three info to go ahead and split it. I don't know why waiting a few more months is somehow going to damage this page or make it hard on readers. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:02, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Actually, I think that the consensus was that we would split when we actually got season three information. I just wanted to confirm this. I wouldn't have an issue with splitting it either. (I mean, I'd prefer to split now as well, given that pushing content to its limit as much as possible before taking action is probably more counter-productive, but that's just my opinion; won't be pushing this discussion to its limit either). -- Alex TW 08:23, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I feel like people who are opposing the split are stalling the inevitable, and they seem to know it. Right now, seems just an argument for argument's sake and to prove they're right. A point which is important though, which seems to have been ignored here (full disclosure: I only skimmed through the previous parts of the discussion) is where an average reader would expect the episode list to be. Seeing as most of the more famous series, which would have more readers, have 2 seasons or more and have a separate page for their list of episodes, most readers imo would expect to see the episode list at a separate page "List of X episodes". -- SuperJew ( talk) 17:51, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Ok, we seem to be going back and forth on this. The part in the lead that says, "or simply Legends of Tomorrow is completely unnecessary. The only thing missing is "DC's". This removal doesn't really simplify the name to a point that we need to actually address this to readers like they come to the wrong page (especially when the title of the article doesn't have "DC's" in it). Yes, I'm aware that AoS does that and other pages, but they probably should not. We're not talking about Dr. Strangelove or Borat, where we have significant name reduction. We're talking about a small removal. Per WP:LEAD, only "significant alternative titles" are placed in the lead. I don't think that the removal of "DC's" makes the change significant enough to mention. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:29, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
HOW MANY TIMES IS THIS PAGE GONNA BE RENAMED BEFORE WE AGREE ON A NAME?!?!?!?!?!?! The Ouroboros, the Undying, the Immortal ( talk) 19:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Even when talking about unfilmed roles, "expected" means fan speculation, not that the studio "expects" him to be on there. The studio knows whether or not he will be on there, so for now he's unconfirmed and I believe Wikipedia policy would say that makes it not worthy of being on here as though it's fact. Go ahead and add "expected" Amell appearance to the production section or somewhere else, but until he is confirmed to appear, let's leave him out of the casting section. NTC TNT ( talk) 04:24, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
If and when you find a news source that says "Stephen Amell to appear on Legends of Tomorrow", please let me know and I'll add it on the page. AdamDeanHall ( talk) 20:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
In an interview with IGN ( http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/08/12/arrow-constantine-will-help-bring-sara-lance-back?%20hub%20page%20%28front%20page%29 Arrow producer Wendy Mericle has said that the version of Constantine appearing on Arrow is the same version and character from the Constantine show, thus making the events of Constantine canon to this universe, and should therefore be on the list of related shows. Ttll213 ( talk) 23:50, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm just wanting to check this. He's under the recurring cast section but I'm just wanting to check this is accurate. I came across this article:
http://www.franchiseherald.com/articles/36765/20150827/legends-of-tomorrow-cast-characters.htm
in this it mentions Vandal Savage as a main character. It's sourcing it to a press event. I'm wondering if anyone has any more information on it. Their quote only mentions these characters appearing in every episode which isn't quite the same as "main cast" but I'm wanting to make sure what is being stated is accurate. Ruffice98 ( talk) 19:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Can someone please enlighten me on what qualifies as a fansite and what doesn't. I keep getting reverted when adding from DC'sLegendsTV, which is a offshoot of KSITE (which is reliable). I know that even fansites are acceptable when reporting exclusives, and the director information I keep adding is an exclusive, because it is the only site reporting the info. Insight greatly appreciated. LLArrow ( talk) 19:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Does the wording of the Australian release shed light to this, here: "The series[...] will screen Express from the US on FOX8, which is a nice change from new titles that are often later in their first season." @ Whats new?:, since you added this to the article, are you able to shed more light on this wording. Does "screen Express" mean it airs on the same day as the US premiere? - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 06:56, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
The article is now stating that the premiere is on January 21, 2016, but the source is based on an article with the headline "Legends of Tomorrow Premiere Date Possibly Revealed". How can a statement that so qualifies its information be considered sufficiently reliable to turn it into a definitive statement in the article? I'm going to remove both source and all exact date claims; if you have anything better to reference, I'd be happy to see it. BlueMoonset ( talk) 07:31, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Will this poster fit in the infobox? Kailash29792 ( talk) 13:51, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. ( non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 17:57, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Legends of Tomorrow →
DC's Legends of Tomorrow – The initial title is not entirely a match to the network's. Need to add "DC's".
NeoBatfreak (
talk)
20:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
There is some useful production info in this ref. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 21:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Info on the 15th episode of the season has just been posted, including the director. We also have a piece of information placed below the episode table, stating that Rachel Talalay will be directing the penultimate episode of the season. So, as this is a 16-episode season, you'd expect the penultimate episode (one before the last) to be directed by Talalay, but it isn't; it's directed by someone else.
At this point, Guggenheim has given two conflicting statements: one, from back in January, and the other, an official document from the title page of the episode script that started production today. I think we have to go with the latest information—things do change—and drop the older (and clearly out of date) information. Talalay did direct episode 12; perhaps Guggenheim was forgetting that this was a 16-episde season, not a 13-episode season, when he said that. But whatever the explanation, it's time to remove that earlier statement. BlueMoonset ( talk) 22:42, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
I see that a season article and episode list have been proposed, and I don't think either should happen, at least not yet. There isn't enough season 1 specific production information to make a season article. If season 2 ends up being completely separate, like in an anthological way, then it may become appropriate then. But for now it seems way too early. As for a list of episodes, we generally don't create those until we have a separate table for season 2, and even then we may not need one straight away since this season is shorter than usual. So, that's a no to either of those splits at the moment, though if people think the article is getting a bit long and want to split off the cast list, then we could discuss that. - adamstom97 ( talk) 21:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 13:45, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm puzzled by the idea that we should favor an old promotional blurb from when the program was in its early development, over the actual content of the series. That old "premise" is what DC said they were planning, a year ago. The monologue presented at the beginning of every episode is what DC finally decided to produce, what the series actually is about. Evidently they dropped Savage's plan to "destroy the world" (he just conquered it) and to destroy "time itself". We don't document intentions or plans, we document verifiable facts, and primary sources are the best source for facts about the content of a TV program itself. As WP:USEPRIMARY says: "The film itself is an acceptable primary source for information about the plot and the names of the characters." (Arguing that this doesn't apply because this isn't a "film" is nonsense; the same guidance is given for a novel or painting, as other examples.) Especially compared to a press release, which is inherently unreliable. (If DC had described it as "the most thrilling adventure of all time" would we parrot that as part of the premise?) If you think that the original premise is noteworthy enough to put into the Production section, to describe how it changed between greenlight and debut, fine. But it's historical, not actual. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 13:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
This is my first contribution to the site, so I hope I'm doing this right. The Premise as it now stands gives too much away. I've watched about half the episodes which have aired so far, and everything after the first two sentences of the Premise is a spoiler for me. Events that happen later on in the series aren't part of the show's premise, surely. I prefer the idea of using the monologue as suggested above, or something like it. 165.120.129.38 ( talk) 18:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
An editor recently went through the Arrowverse articles removing all the airdates that were released by The CW today for upcoming episodes. I'm assuming they did so, because they believe there is no conclusive evidence that the episode will air on said date, I disagree. Episodes that will be repeats are listed as so, episodes that will not be are listed as, "TBA", I believe this is probable cause to place the next chronological episode as that given airdate. Obviously other editors do too, because I've seen it done here before. If you agree, I'd like to reach a consensus to place the dates. LLArrow ( talk) 01:20, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
While the main characters travel through time, all the events are shown as linear from their perspective. Therefore, I'm removing it from the nonlinear category. JDDJS ( talk) 21:23, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
I know it was reported back in the summer that Snart was joining the Legion of Doom in the second season, but we're more than halfway through the season, and there has been no hint whatsoever that it is going to happen. The reports could have been wrong, or that story line could have been dropped. It might still happen on the show, but until it does, or recent reliable sources confirm that this is still the plot that they are going with, it should not be included in the article. JDDJS ( talk) 22:09, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
I created a draft for the list of episodes since the main article is getting long with the episodes summaries and ratings. Draft:List of Legends of Tomorrow episodes — Brojam 21:14, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Pinging Vilnisr in this discussion, given their recent move to the separate episodes article again; not sure if this discussion is now outdated or still relevant. Alex|The|Whovian ? 12:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Again, how is this a mess? It literally doesn't look any different on this page than it does on a separate LoE page. I'm confused by this idea that visually it is going to look so much better in one location than another, when nothing has changed but said location. The table is the same. The content is the same. We're not talking about 10 years of a show crammed on this page. If anything looks "a mess", it would be a ratings table that duplicates that episode tables, but I don't see you clamoring to separate that table out to its own page. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Length of a page is not determined by your eye, it's determined by WP:SIZE (this page isn't anywhere near as long as Arrow (TV series) or Smallville and they don't even have episode tables on their pages). No one is saying that we won't split it, just that nothing has actually changed for this show other than knowing a 3rd season will happen. There isn't actually new information to put anywhere. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Joeyconnick – the 'Episodes' section of this page is long past long enough where it should now be split off. I suggest the spinoff be done now, post haste. There's no reason to put it off any longer. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 13:37, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
< 40 kB Length alone does not justify division(emphasis mine). The key words are "size alone" – the fact that splitting at this point is common practice around this Project would actually qualify as a justification for splitting. Oh, and back to WP:SIZESPLIT:
> 100 kB Almost certainly should be divided– guess what? This article is now 121 kB! Guess it's time for a split after all!! -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 14:38, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
It doesn't show up, but if you organize it differently (basically just remove the asterick) it would. That's why I did the other way, just to say with everything it is not quite there. Again, I just go back to the idea that there isn't a rush to split it, as the page is not harmed by it being here. And we seemingly all agreed (meaning the people that are saying not to split right this second) that once the season ends and we get season three info to go ahead and split it. I don't know why waiting a few more months is somehow going to damage this page or make it hard on readers. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 19:02, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Actually, I think that the consensus was that we would split when we actually got season three information. I just wanted to confirm this. I wouldn't have an issue with splitting it either. (I mean, I'd prefer to split now as well, given that pushing content to its limit as much as possible before taking action is probably more counter-productive, but that's just my opinion; won't be pushing this discussion to its limit either). -- Alex TW 08:23, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I feel like people who are opposing the split are stalling the inevitable, and they seem to know it. Right now, seems just an argument for argument's sake and to prove they're right. A point which is important though, which seems to have been ignored here (full disclosure: I only skimmed through the previous parts of the discussion) is where an average reader would expect the episode list to be. Seeing as most of the more famous series, which would have more readers, have 2 seasons or more and have a separate page for their list of episodes, most readers imo would expect to see the episode list at a separate page "List of X episodes". -- SuperJew ( talk) 17:51, 6 June 2017 (UTC)