Talk:Pilot (Supernatural)

This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

The proper name of the episode is "Pilot". It is true that the episode is also the pilot episode of the series, but the usual convention of Wikipedia articles is to start with the actual name of the subject of the article, not a descriptive phrase. I see that Pilot (Smallville) does not do this, but I believe it is wrong.

Please see:

Pilot (House) (a featured article);

Premiere (The O.C.) (a featured article);

Pilot (Parks and Recreation) (a featured article);

Pilot (Numb3rs)

(a good article);

Pilot (Glee) (a good article);

Pilot (The Office) (a good article); and

Pilot (Will & Grace) (a good article). Rreagan007 (talk) 18:57, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I concede then. :) Ωphois 20:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Nice work. Some comments.

"numerous drastic revisions to correct issues." is vague and sounds funny.

Changed to "numerous revisions". Ωphois 01:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"having varying views of the lead actors' performances." sounds funny. I couldn't think of a better way to word it off the top of my head, though.

Changed "views" to "opinions". Ωphois 01:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe link LSAT?

Done. Ωphois 01:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"He had been investigating the disappearances of young men along the same stretch of road over ten years." - Same stretch makes it sound like it's the same as some previously mentioned part of a road. Or at least that's what I though for a second when I read it.

Changed to "along a single stretch of road" Ωphois 01:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I might mention is that I was looking at an episode GAN, Hush (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), and the prose is very impressive (Moni3 is the author, and she has brilliant prose flying out of her...whatever. One thing I like that you might copy is how she begins the second paragraph of the lead.

"The premise of Buffy the Vampire Slayer involves an adolescent girl named Buffy Summers who is chosen by mystical forces to have superhuman powers to defeat vampires, demons, and other evils in the fictional town of Sunnydale. She accomplishes this with the assistance of a close circle of friends and family."

It's a good job of orienting the reader, who may know nothing of the show. You can probably just copy something like that from the main Supernatural article. Anyways, your prose is improving with every article you submit. Good job. That's it for now. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 22:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The lead describes what the brothers do, which is basically the plot of the series. Ωphois 01:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Their car then suddenly starts on its own, and briefly chases them along the bridge. Sam and Dean later check into a local motel" - Too abrupt. Maybe you can get rid of "briefly", and add that they escape?

Added that it comes to a halt. Ωphois 23:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"he is arrested by police" - "the police"?

Fixed. Ωphois 23:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are about 10 instances of "to be" in the article. Not sure if that's a problem, so I'm mentioning it to remind myself to look at it later.

"Dean saves him just in time, and Sam crashes the car into her old home." - How does Dean do this?

Reworded the scene. Ωphois 23:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"They embrace their mother, and disappear." - Sounds like it could be just the kids who dissapear, but I think it includes the mother. Not sure.

added "the family" Ωphois 23:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Sam lies in bed, and sees Jess pinned to the ceiling with a slash across her stomach." - Abrupt. Is he lying in bed with Jess? Where did Jess come from.

Fixed. Ωphois 23:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More later. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 03:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going out of town starting tomorrow, so remind me in a week (7 days) if you want me to continue. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 02:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still trying to remember (and have it added to the article for readers who didn't see the ep) where Jess came from. Does he awaken to find her on the ceiling, and she wasn't there before?

She was already on the ceiling, but he just didn't see her until after he laid on the bed. Ωphois 17:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"used the opportunity for Supernatural" - Maybe should be "on Supernatural", not sure.

I think it works fine with "for". Ωphois 17:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be cool to know a little bit more about the Route 66 TV show, if the source says anymore. Would the source support "Supernatural is partly based on Route 66" or "Supernatural was influenced by Route 66"?

It was always supposed to be a road show, so I don't know. The source just says that it was similar to Route 66 (having two guys traveling the country and solving stuff). Ωphois 17:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My internet is acting up. I'll save these comments if I can. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 05:06, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Luckily, Warner Bros. president Peter Roth suggested" - "Luckily" doesn't sound encyclopedic. Probably just remove that word.

Changed to "To rememedy the situation, Warner Bros. president..." Do you think that works? Ωphois 17:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 18:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"and was surprised when he was later asked to reprise the role" - Maybe "and was surprised when he was later asked to reprise the role in later episodes"?

The first part of the sentence mentions later episodes, so I think it would be repetitive. Ωphois 17:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"production set out to find the perfect actress" - Should it be "producers set out"? Also, "perfect actress" would be better in quotes, if that's what they said. I doesn't sound encyclopedic. Or it could be toned down. Same with "Seeking a great actor". The adjectives are too strong to just be in wikipedia's voice.

I think it was more than just the producers looking. I can't remember the exact quote. I will have to check later. Ωphois 17:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Don't forget to decide if you want to keep "perfect" and "great" or change them. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 18:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They were quotes, so added in quote marks. As for the actress, the director was the one who cast her, so it was not just the producers. Ωphois 20:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"He noticed that she was "really sharp"" - Probably should be "felt" or something instead of "noticed" because that kind of thing can only be opinion.

Fixed. Ωphois 17:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"mantha Smith randomly" - "randomly" in quotes? Doesn't sound 'pedic.

Removed. Ωphois 17:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"and felt she landed the part after joking around with director David Nutter during the audition." - "due to joking around"? or "and landed the part"? Depends on the source.

What do you mean? Ωphois 17:34, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did she feel she got the part because of the joking around? Right now it's like she may have already been chosen for the role before the joking around, but she feels she didn't have the role until after the joking around. So "and felt she landed the part due to joking around" if she thinks that's what got her the part, or "and landed the part after joking around with director" if she just got it after the joking around, and the source isn't clear. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 18:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to "felt she landed the part due to her joking around with director". Ωphois 20:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More later. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 17:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"In the revised script, Sam and Dean Winchester were raised by their aunt and uncle instead of their father." - Should it be "In the original script..."?

No, it was a later script. Ωphois 17:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"reworked it with co-executive Peter Johnson" - co-executive producer?

Fixed. Ωphois 17:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"conning" is borderline informal. Maybe cheat, deceive, or swindle?

Changed to "swindling". Ωphois 17:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The gas station scene..." - What gas station scene? Is this mentioned earlier?

Changed to "A gas-station scene within the episode was meant to establish what the brothers..." Ωphois 17:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"In order to depict the supernatural aspects of the show, the series makes use of visual, special, and make-up effects, as well as stuntwork. Businesses such as visual effects company Entity FX[22] were contracted for production of the pilot episode, although subsequent episodes being filmed in Vancouver required a new crew that works exclusively for the show.[23]" - The present and past tenses are little funky in this section, maybe because you're using refs that are about the show and not the episode. Anyways, look into it, and remind me to take another look if you make any adjustments.

It is only a couple of sentences, and unless you are really opposed to it, I think it works okay like it is. Ωphois 17:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to go fix it, but I don't know what the second reference says. The first one doesn't seem to say anything about Entity FX working on the pilot. How do you know they worked on it? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 19:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the link. Ωphois 20:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Japanese horror also had an influence in the scene, such as the school uniforms worn by the ghost children, water cascading down the stairs, and the Dark Water elements.[11]" - Sounds funny. I can't think of an easy way to reword right now, though.

How about: "The school uniforms worn by the ghost children, water cascading down the stairs, and the Dark Water elements were borrowed from Japanese horror". Ωphois 17:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, although I think there should a "the" in front of "water". - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 19:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More later. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 16:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Ωphois 20:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"estimated 5.69 viewers" - Million?

Fixed. Ωphois 17:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the rest of reception looks pretty good. That's about it. Some refs need to be formatted, but I'm sure you're aware of that. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 17:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

Please explain why the reference fill-out was undone yet again. 90% of the references make no sense now. "Knight p.26" [?] it says nothing to anyone, every reference should stand on its own and be properly filled out. The reference section wholly fails FAC. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 00:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is incorrect. Check out my FA Jackie Robinson. You'll see over 100 refs like that. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 00:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's just horrible, how is anyone supposed to know what you're talking about. A last name and a page number how is that informative to anyone? And better yet why would you undo an improvement? _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 00:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't undo it. I think User:Ophois did. Anyways, it's one of the standard ways that FAs are allowed to referenced. On Jackie Robinson, I added a little feature where you can click on the last name, page number dealy, and it will take you to the full citation for the book. Check it out. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 00:30, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the reason is so that there isn't a big full reference repeated a bunch of times, with only the page number changing each time. You've seen the full book reference, right? It's above the other refs. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know Ophois undid it, I asked why you would undo that if that were the case. When clicking a linked name you expect to go to the wiki page of that person, not another ref, it's borderline fake hidden linking.

I've seen the full reference, but what's the point of having a clickable inline reference if the person viewing it has to go and search the page for the full ref in the end anyway? And how do you expect anyone to go and look for an actual reference when normally when you click a ref it takes you to the actual ref. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 08:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pretty standard referencing style that I would assume most readers would be familiar with. And even if a reader is not familiar with it, it really isn't that hard to figure it out. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you don't like it, that's fine. You should probably start a discussion at

WP:V if you really care, instead of worrying about just one article, since it's used so frequently and allowed in FAs. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 16:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply

]