Talk:List of Caprica episodes
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Pilot Numbering
editHold up! The pilot episode is DEFIANTLY not "episode 0", whose idea was that? It is at least episode 1 if not episodes 1 and 2. --Myles Trundle (talk) 07:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Every website, except this, says that Rebirth it's episode 1, to air on 29 January. So Pilot it's episode 0. Can anyone check this? --156.35.192.2 (talk) 23:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the pilot was released on DVD on April 21, 2009 as a movie (Amazon), that would make it a more or less standalone movie and like some other series the numbering starts with the first episode that airs on TV that is not that movie. Xeworlebi (t•c) 00:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
- The pilot will be re-aired in two parts from now on, so numbering it as either 0 or 1 doesn't make any sense. It should be 1+2, with Rebirth as 3 (and so on) DigiFluid (talk) 03:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it is sold as a movie, sold as two episodes online and Syfy indicates it as a single episode on their website, so I don't know. Anything to back up that "will be re-aired in two parts from now on"? Xeworlebi (t•c) 20:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- You're right, there aren't any sources out there right now which can be used to cite it as 1+2. But I think it's pretty clear that, barring special occasions, Syfy & Space (et al) have no intention of giving it a 2hr slot every time they decide to re-air it. Like the re-runs of TNG's "All Good Things", DS9's "The Way of the Warrior", or BSG's introductory miniseries, or even BSG's final episode--which re-airs as 3 episodes rather than either one long one or one regular and a 2-hr final. DigiFluid (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- The BSG miniseries originally aired as two parts, on two different days. And the series finale is seen as two episodes, just like it aired. Assuming that is will re-air as two episodes is speculation. Besides how the show re-airs or is shown in different countries is of little to no importance. The numbering is supposed to represent the way the show was made not necessarily how it aired, but until a DVD comes out the only sources are; how the show is sold online, how the network presents them, how they initially aired and in this case that the pilot was sold a s a movie half a year before the series started, which would indicate a single episode rather than two episodes. Xeworlebi (t•c) 18:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- The SyFy channel website (in it's podcasts) clearly refers to the pilot as episode 101 as Rebirth is episode 102 (see http://www.syfy.com/caprica/podcasts.php). Although i originally thought the pilot would take up 2 episodes of the production order, the production codes do not reflect that. Also, the Caprica Pilot has NEVER aired in a proper broken form and nor will it (with the exception of it being broken for Internet viewing). I do understand that when lost has double length episodes, it does count as 2 episodes but the production order says different, like the series finale of BSG, daybreak Part 2. That went for over 2 hours and although it can be seen/bought on the Internet as being broken in 2 halves yet it still only counts as 1 episode. We thoroughly believe that we MUST follow the production order and the SyFy site as close as possible in order to make sure this doesn't get out of hand. --Myles Trundle (talk) 03:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- But the thing is, Caprica was originally given a 20 episode order. Two of these were used in the production of the pilot, and after the fact it was reduced by one--making the season order for 19 episodes. If the pilot is listed only as 1, the Wikipedia numbering will incorrectly indicate an 18 episode season. I also note that someone has edited the page to reflect the view that I hold on this. I want to just put it out there that it was not my doing. DigiFluid (talk) 22:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- The episode was, however, broken into two parts in its Sky One broadcast. Also, I added "1/2" near the Pilot because it makes sense, if Lost season articles use this for their two-hour season finales and "LA X", then why not here? -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 00:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- We aren't doing it because Caprica is not Lost! As we did with Battlestar Galactica, we should keep to the production numbers and if they say rebirth is ep 102 then we should keep it that way! Also, we don't really have any AUTHORITATIVE source to say that the pilot is actually the first 2 eps of season 1, it is more of an assumption than actual fact. the only thing that is KNOWN is that the production numbers shown on the SyFy site say rebirth is ep 102. We CANNOT rely on what other sites say as it seems every single sight that is either reviewing or talking about Caprica seems to have adopted their own numbering system, for example IMDb counts the pilot as episode 0 whilst others say it is episode 1 or sometimes, indeed, even episodes 1 AND 2. We have to stick with SyFy until we hear otherwise from the producers/writers etc. --Myles Trundle (talk) 03:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- The way a network decides to air and episode should not influence how we number it. As users above have noted our numbering should be based on how the episodes were filmed. The exec producer David Eick describe the pilot as episode 101 and rebirth as 102 in the podcasts so surely that is an authoritative source? Also the main Wikipedia Caprica page currently contradicts this one because it says there are three episodes. This page as it stands says there are 4. --Dant84 (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- We aren't doing it because Caprica is not Lost! As we did with Battlestar Galactica, we should keep to the production numbers and if they say rebirth is ep 102 then we should keep it that way! Also, we don't really have any AUTHORITATIVE source to say that the pilot is actually the first 2 eps of season 1, it is more of an assumption than actual fact. the only thing that is KNOWN is that the production numbers shown on the SyFy site say rebirth is ep 102. We CANNOT rely on what other sites say as it seems every single sight that is either reviewing or talking about Caprica seems to have adopted their own numbering system, for example IMDb counts the pilot as episode 0 whilst others say it is episode 1 or sometimes, indeed, even episodes 1 AND 2. We have to stick with SyFy until we hear otherwise from the producers/writers etc. --Myles Trundle (talk) 03:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- The episode was, however, broken into two parts in its Sky One broadcast. Also, I added "1/2" near the Pilot because it makes sense, if Lost season articles use this for their two-hour season finales and "LA X", then why not here? -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 00:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- But the thing is, Caprica was originally given a 20 episode order. Two of these were used in the production of the pilot, and after the fact it was reduced by one--making the season order for 19 episodes. If the pilot is listed only as 1, the Wikipedia numbering will incorrectly indicate an 18 episode season. I also note that someone has edited the page to reflect the view that I hold on this. I want to just put it out there that it was not my doing. DigiFluid (talk) 22:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- The SyFy channel website (in it's podcasts) clearly refers to the pilot as episode 101 as Rebirth is episode 102 (see http://www.syfy.com/caprica/podcasts.php). Although i originally thought the pilot would take up 2 episodes of the production order, the production codes do not reflect that. Also, the Caprica Pilot has NEVER aired in a proper broken form and nor will it (with the exception of it being broken for Internet viewing). I do understand that when lost has double length episodes, it does count as 2 episodes but the production order says different, like the series finale of BSG, daybreak Part 2. That went for over 2 hours and although it can be seen/bought on the Internet as being broken in 2 halves yet it still only counts as 1 episode. We thoroughly believe that we MUST follow the production order and the SyFy site as close as possible in order to make sure this doesn't get out of hand. --Myles Trundle (talk) 03:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- The BSG miniseries originally aired as two parts, on two different days. And the series finale is seen as two episodes, just like it aired. Assuming that is will re-air as two episodes is speculation. Besides how the show re-airs or is shown in different countries is of little to no importance. The numbering is supposed to represent the way the show was made not necessarily how it aired, but until a DVD comes out the only sources are; how the show is sold online, how the network presents them, how they initially aired and in this case that the pilot was sold a s a movie half a year before the series started, which would indicate a single episode rather than two episodes. Xeworlebi (t•c) 18:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- You're right, there aren't any sources out there right now which can be used to cite it as 1+2. But I think it's pretty clear that, barring special occasions, Syfy & Space (et al) have no intention of giving it a 2hr slot every time they decide to re-air it. Like the re-runs of TNG's "All Good Things", DS9's "The Way of the Warrior", or BSG's introductory miniseries, or even BSG's final episode--which re-airs as 3 episodes rather than either one long one or one regular and a 2-hr final. DigiFluid (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it is sold as a movie, sold as two episodes online and Syfy indicates it as a single episode on their website, so I don't know. Anything to back up that "will be re-aired in two parts from now on"? Xeworlebi (t•c) 20:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- The pilot will be re-aired in two parts from now on, so numbering it as either 0 or 1 doesn't make any sense. It should be 1+2, with Rebirth as 3 (and so on) DigiFluid (talk) 03:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Online availability
editNo suggestion was given as to why online availability is notable. No explanation was given why the service "SyFy Rewind" is any more notable than online availability on iTunes or Amazon. Please discuss before adding it back. -- Horkana (talk) 05:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- I guess it was because it was an extended version, but I don't know if it was different from the one on iTunes or Amazon, anyway should be on the man page and not here. Xeworlebi (t•c) 10:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
monotheism propagated?
editin the description of the first episode it says "...radical teachings, which were secretly propagated by her school's headmistress, Sister Clarice Willow. " Isn't that a bit strong? Or is it something that wasn't in the pilot dual-episode (I haven't seen the 2009 release, is it somehow extended?) Because she was only seen as one of secret worshippers, not really a propaganda person --Tartaros (talk) 19:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- From the limited number of episodes I have seen there seems to be a lot of parallels to Ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome where multiple gods were worshipped and the idea that there was but one god (therefor all other gods being fake) was "radical". Kind of like telling your neighbor that their political party leaders are all crazy and your political leader is the only sane one. :) 66.97.213.202 (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Episode Spoilers for Unaired Episodes + Episode Summary Contents
editI really do not think it is appropriate to put synopses for episodes which have not even aired. --Myles Trundle (talk) 03:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- As long as these are simple; what is seen in the promo video's, what's on the networks website, in the tvguide, …; I don't see a problem with them. They should not contain any rumors or info that is not spread by the network itself. For some shows there are plotlines known half a season before, and some consider these spoilers, but some people also consider promo video's and episode titles spoilers. As long as the info about the episode is spread by official sources they should be included, and not barred just because they might contain spoilers. Xeworlebi (t•c) 04:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, so long as they remain simple and only reflect that episode's premise and NOT it's ending, i don't have any problems with them any more. BUT there is another issue that's seemed to cause a bit of friction with me and some other's who edit the plot summaries. I know that a "summary" by definition is about simply stating what happened in the episode but I do not think that everything that happened to every single character has to be put in there. For example, in Rebirth i really do not think lacy and Willow's meeting was eventful nor important enough in the episode to warrant a mention in the summary and for that matter, willy's trip out with his uncle is probably pushing it a bit for me too. For me, a plot summary should deal with the MOST important or maybe even 2nd and, on occasion, 3rd most important plot threads but 4? They summaries have to remain true to the spinal structure of the episode and not become too fussed with the more fluffy stuff that goes on around it. Any comments on what people think on plot summaries?--Myles Trundle (talk) 04:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- A summary of the episode should be, I would say a loose max of about 600–700 characters (this is what most shows rarely go over), if an episode can be decently summarized in less than it should be. But if the important parts can't be formulated then by all means go longer. If a show has multiple major plot-lines than all should be told no matter how much there are, in this case I do agree that the invitation stuff has no real importance to the episode, and as of yet neither to the shows-plot. I wouldn't call the description of Rebirth "ridiculously long", if you wan't to see some fairly long summaries take a look at the second season of Dollhouse. I would say that the length of the summaries here is quite good. But the ending is a, if not the biggest part about the episode. It should definitely not be kept out of the episode summary as per WP:SPOILER, these are summaries and not teasers after-all. For unaired episodes on the other hand they should not contain any info not spread by official sources, meaning rumors etc. Some promo video's these days show (especially movie trailers) basically the entire plot. If it is shown/released like that (officially) it should not be kept out even if some believe that it contains spoilers. Xeworlebi (t•c) 05:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- You raised some fairly good points. I suppose the thing I am most hung up about is not being used to such long plot summaries after working a fair bit on the BSG episode list page the last couple of years. It seems that the largest summary on that page is half the size of any of these on the Caprica summaries and it doesn't sit right with me. I do believe I am to get over how long they are but my main worry is the succinctly. I honestly believe these summaries could convey more meaning in less words. Yes, it probably isn't a really crucial issue but it's an area which has room for improvement.--Myles Trundle (talk) 04:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
- A summary of the episode should be, I would say a loose max of about 600–700 characters (this is what most shows rarely go over), if an episode can be decently summarized in less than it should be. But if the important parts can't be formulated then by all means go longer. If a show has multiple major plot-lines than all should be told no matter how much there are, in this case I do agree that the invitation stuff has no real importance to the episode, and as of yet neither to the shows-plot. I wouldn't call the description of Rebirth "ridiculously long", if you wan't to see some fairly long summaries take a look at the second season of Dollhouse. I would say that the length of the summaries here is quite good. But the ending is a, if not the biggest part about the episode. It should definitely not be kept out of the episode summary as per WP:SPOILER, these are summaries and not teasers after-all. For unaired episodes on the other hand they should not contain any info not spread by official sources, meaning rumors etc. Some promo video's these days show (especially movie trailers) basically the entire plot. If it is shown/released like that (officially) it should not be kept out even if some believe that it contains spoilers. Xeworlebi (t•c) 05:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Alright, so long as they remain simple and only reflect that episode's premise and NOT it's ending, i don't have any problems with them any more. BUT there is another issue that's seemed to cause a bit of friction with me and some other's who edit the plot summaries. I know that a "summary" by definition is about simply stating what happened in the episode but I do not think that everything that happened to every single character has to be put in there. For example, in Rebirth i really do not think lacy and Willow's meeting was eventful nor important enough in the episode to warrant a mention in the summary and for that matter, willy's trip out with his uncle is probably pushing it a bit for me too. For me, a plot summary should deal with the MOST important or maybe even 2nd and, on occasion, 3rd most important plot threads but 4? They summaries have to remain true to the spinal structure of the episode and not become too fussed with the more fluffy stuff that goes on around it. Any comments on what people think on plot summaries?--Myles Trundle (talk) 04:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- There might be verifiable sources for summaries, but the episode which is aired will tell its own story. There have been TV shows whose content was kept secret before being aired, as well as alterations being made shortly before being aired (ie, the second explosion in "24"). -- SEWilco (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
People, there's got to be a policy against these fan novels we call "summaries" over here. It's really gone beyond any reason. Somebody should notify people who know what the proper Wikipedia format is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omulurimaru (talk • contribs) 15:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Citation Needed for Air-Date of Season 1.5
editLocated here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0799862/episodes
It states that episode 1.9 (actually 10 if you count the pilot) is airing on Sept 17th. I'm not sure if imdb is a credible source, but it could be a possible citation. (where they get their data is unknown to me at this time)
NPOV?
editI'm new to 'editing' Wikipedia, but isn't the last part of Episode 18's description considered violation of NPOV? The last sentence bothers me: "The potential for a story line where the deceased William Adama is scanned and becomes an avatar to later become a skin-job and later command the Battlestar Galactica goes in a less interesting direction in one of the very final scenes." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.187.129.183 (talk) 03:55, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
137.186.212.222 (talk) 03:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- Removed it and thank you for noticing it. The whole page needs a prune. Millahnna (talk) 04:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Episode 17 error
editIt says:
- "William Adama is fatally wounded with a gunshot wound through his hand and into his abdomen."
Is that a magic bullet theory? Cause I'm watching it right now and I see William has his hand right next to his head when it shows it being shot. Inquiring minds want to know. Simanos (talk) 03:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Apotheosis
editFirst, this episode summary is waaaaaaaaaaaay too detailed to be legitimately called a summary.
Second, I find it odd that one of the major scenes, the V-Heaven scene, in this episode was completely skipped in such a detailed description. I have to wonder if some kind of religious bias affected the section although I will AGF and consider it simply a major oversight. 66.97.213.202 (talk) 07:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
End of Line - Episode 9 Name
editThe current title is "End of the Line", however imbd lists this episode as "End of Line" , and so does tv.com . I'm going to change it, unless there is a reason not to.
71.202.36.15 (talk) 07:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- Even though IMDb and TV.com can't be used as reliable sources, I have corrected the title, as "End of Line" is the correct title. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:21, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Caprica episodes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110812073328/http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/10/28/tuesday-cable-ratings-heatceltics-slam-dunk-%E2%80%98sons-of-anarchy%E2%80%99-steady-16-pregnant-caprica-stargate-universe-millionaire-matchmaker-more/69945/ to http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/10/28/tuesday-cable-ratings-heatceltics-slam-dunk-%E2%80%98sons-of-anarchy%E2%80%99-steady-16-pregnant-caprica-stargate-universe-millionaire-matchmaker-more/69945/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:04, 17 May 2017 (UTC)