Talk:Legion Broadcast History

First thoughts

We should probably change the structure a bit to highlight the name of the series within the entries. The DCAU entries dont currently reflect that. With the current episodes listed, we could do that with a section header, although should there ever be an occasion when two series are overlapping, we'll have to re-think that. -- Gopher 06:32, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

• Option 1
• Option 2

Fairly simple - the first one is just to prefix the series title to the episode title, the other is a h3 header, ala the month headers in the LPH.

Disadvantages - 1 isn't that prominent, 2 breaks the link between the column headers and the columns to an extent.

Advantages - if intermixing becomes necessary, 1 is easier to work with, while 2 is clearly more prominient. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 12:04, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

Not sure I like Option 2. As you mention, I think it breaks up the page too much, and if we ever do have to intersperse series, I think it would be overload. I've added a couple more options. Sorry, I really need to see them side by side, so I put examples of all of them here.

• Option 3 restructures the table rows a bit, allowing a longer series title without squeezing the other cells in that row.
• Option 4 should look very familiar. At the risk of bringing too much sameness, it does provide internal consistency within the wiki and would be a heck of a lot easier to maintain. Much less table structure to stumble over, and we also wouldn't need the second header row for column labels. I realize now that after adding 20 or so episodes of the Legion cartoon, the latter ones will be so far away from the header that it won't be helpful. Works very well on the DVD pages, not so much on a long page of entries.

By bringing the series title into the individual entries, it might be more appropriate to add section headers for years, rather than the Series/Era mishmash I currently have. We could still color these by era, shading any individual entries that dont match the era.

-- Gopher 17:56, 19 October 2007 (PDT)

I liked Option 2 until I saw Option 4, which I like due to its internal consistency with other entries. I disagree with section header by year, though, since that would lump the second half of season 1 with the first half of season 2 of the Legion series, and other than being broadcast in the same calendar year, they really shouldn't get lumped together like that. This is one exception where it makes sense to put the section header by series and season. -- Omnicom 20:42, 21 October 2007 (PDT)

See /Formats#Option 4 expanded below, where I've sketched out a couple more - is that what you meant?

Basically, I'd be fine with that. My only concerns are fairly minor:

1. The airing vs. production order thing, since you'd be listing 6, 5, 4, 9, 8 on the most prominent line.
2. Linking the second line rather than the first if we're going for consistancy.

Primarily though, go for it. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 22:00, 21 October 2007 (PDT)

Close, I added something closer to what I was thinking of (/Formats#Option 4 expanded even more). In the main LPH list you have a break point by year. In this case, a breakpoint by season for the LSH show makes more sense. I deleted the series designators for the DCAU episodes since we list the series along with the episode number. As for airing order vs production order, well, it's the broadcast history. We can't help that they aired episodes out of production (and continuity) order. -- Omnicom 23:40, 21 October 2007 (PDT)

I like Omnicom's Expanded Even More version the best. If we have two series within the same season, we can simply list each series in its own section without having to figure out ways to intersperse individual episodes. Since each series/season section is clearly labeled and ordered chronologically, I also think that gives us leeway to order episodes within the season either in production order or broadcast order (I would prefer production).

On that note, I've been giving the page name some thought, and I'm wondering if Legion Visual Media History or something of the sort would be better. This would more rightly include DVD releases, feature films (I wish), webisodes, podcasts, etc. We might even want to consider including trailers, season teasers, interstitials or the like. I'm thinking that DVDs would be included at the end of the season section to which they correspond. Taking the word Broadcast out of the page name also reduces the pressure to list things in broadcast order.

As for linking the second line rather than the first, I agree with Reboot - it would be more consistent and more logical to a completely new user to have the first line contain the link. We can easily link the first line to the existing episode page and unlink the episode title. Although it would entail more work, I would actually prefer that we rename the episode pages to a more standard format (New Kids in Town becomes Superman: The Animated Series 3.03). This would parallel the way we present individual comic issue pages, and also eliminates the need for some of the disambiguation we have already utilized (Timber Wolf). I can live with it if we don't, but I think as there are more and more episodes and more pages that link to those episodes it will become increasingly more convenient to use a standard format. -- Gopher 07:31, 22 October 2007 (PDT)

I'll leave the second paragraph aside for the moment until MG replies.

On the first... ummm... aren't comics "Visual Media"? - all that really excludes are radio plays and (ironically, since you mention them) podcasts. Like I said back here, I'm less than certain that "Broadcast History" is the best name for the page - even if I'm not sure what we *should* call it - but "Visual Media History" is a horrid name. And do you really want to include every trailer and (if "interstitial" means what I think it does, it's not a commonly used word in the UK) break bumper? It would reduce the signal-to-noise value a lot for someone looking for an episode list. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 17:27, 22 October 2007 (PDT)

Perhaps its also a regional usage, but at least on the marketing side of companies that I have worked in, there is distinction drawn between print media and what is referred to as visual media. Yes, print media is also "visual" media, but the term visual media as I've heard it used refers to moving images. However, I'm drawing on the world of marketing and not entertainment product, and I'll grant that its usage may not best apply here. If Reboot can't get past a literal interpretation of the term then others will probably stumble on it as well. My main objective in proposing the new page name is to remove the word Broadcast. (Yes, Reboot, I remember that you brought this up a month ago - don't you know that I cherish every one of your posts?) In general I think we should divorce ourselves from feeling tied to broadcast order just because that word is in a less-than-desirable page name.

As for what should be included, the delivery of visual product is rapidly changing, and its very possible that over the next couple of years we will see more original content in the form of webisodes and video podcasts (ironically, since Reboot implies podcasts can't have visual content). I'm not suggesting that any scrap of video that happens to include the Legion should be included, but if new content is created featuring Legion characters or about Legion products, it may be of interest. For instance, special features added to a DVD release might be of interest, particularly if there are deleted scenes or shots of animation in unfinished form. A good example of this is a short piece that was included on one of the Batman: TAS DVDs - a couple of minutes of animation that was developed as a proof of concept to sell the series to the network. It was never broadcast, but its very obvious that the opening credits of the series were derived from this piece, and it predates the series by about a year or so. Maybe something like that will surface, maybe not, but if it does it should at least be considered for inclusion in the LBH. If after debate we determine not to include an item, so be it, but I don't think we should exclude anything just because it doesn't fit a page's current "definition". Either it should be excluded, or the concept of the page should be expanded - but if we eliminate possibilities before we even know what content will present itself, the wiki will always be less than its full potential.

Interstitials - Cartoon Network has developed some very clever 30 second spots that basically advertise the network. These often depict characters from one series interacting with characters from another, or very short stories about the characters (these are not simply clips from an existing episode). There's a great one of the Powerpuff Girls saving the Super Friends from the Legion of Doom. I realize that the Legion episodes are not from Cartoon Network, but if something like that is ever produced with Legion-related content, I think its worth mentioning. Break bumpers ("stay tuned for more Legion of Super Heroes") are not really what I had in mind. Whether something like a season trailer is worth including really depends upon the content. The LPH has several examples of advertising flyers that contain a page or two of story content that is not included in the comic advertised. If a teaser trailer had such content, its worth considering for inclusion. If all it contains is clips of scenes from the coming season, then no, not really worth listing.

Teaser trailers that do not contain unique content, while perhaps not appropriate for the historical listing, might be of interest elsewhere in the wiki. It would be cool if we could include short video clips of the episodes themselves - might be some copyright issues, but I doubt anyone would object to the trailers themselves. Have extensions to allow video content ever been added to the wiki? I pull YouTube content into one of my own wikis, and once the code is installed all it takes is a single line in a page to display video. Great part is, you dont even have to upload the video file to the wiki - its stored on YouTube's servers. Would be great if we could display the opening credits/theme from the Legion cartoon. Reboot, I'm sure you can think of dozens of reasons why adding video content might bring about utter devastation to the world, so I'm just asking hypothetically - if we wanted to add a video clip, are we currently set up to do it? If not, can we consider adding the code? If for some reason that's not possible, my life will go on, I just wanted test the waters and gain some insight into where our boundaries lie. -- Gopher 00:51, 23 October 2007 (PDT)

Would I be right in thinking you got a teensy-bit annoyed at that post'o'mine? I feel like I've been blackjacked...

Since it's after 2:30am as I type this and I'm tired as hell, I'll be quick and bullet out replies to just the stuff aimed directly at me for now:

• I have never heard the term "visual media" used in the way you've been using it (actually, I've rarely heard it, ever, but the instances I have don't draw a distinction between print & other). Whether I'm unique in that or not, I don't like it as a page name.
• I had no expectation that you would remember I brought it up a month ago. If I did, I wouldn't have linked it..
• I use the term "vodcast" for "video podcast" - "podcast" without the qualifier is audio-exclusive to me. YMMV.
• I have absolutely no idea, either copyritably or technically, whether we're set up to embed videos or not. If extensions are required to do so, however, we don't have them.
• I wasn't setting out to have a go at you in the previous post. Sorry if it came across that way. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 18:45, 23 October 2007 (PDT)

More

Too many indents.

Anyway, my preference would be to have the following:

• Broadcast History, listed in chronological broadcast order. It's not a production order history, though the production numbers would be listed.
  • I would add podcasts and webisodes (like Battlestar Galactica has done), vodcasts, webcasts, etc. of official new content here, should they ever be produced.
  • Broadcasting here would refer to the transmission of new content via appropriate media (since all those -casts have "broadcast" as a root, and webisodes are episodes broadcast on the web).
• Video Publishing History, listing the "reprinting" of anything broadcast (using the above definition) in the form of DVDs or other purchaseable media, in release order.
  • This is analogous to the (paper) Publishing History, but would also cover the first date of availability of any downloadable media that has been previously broadcast.
• New material for the DVD is already covered on the DVD page (e.g., the "We Are Legion" segment on the first LSH cartoon DVD). There's no reason it couldn't get its own page, though, if there's something worthwhile to it.
• Commercials, interstitials, and the like should reasonably go either on the main page for whatever series is being promoted (if generic) or on the page for the episode that the media refers to.

And I don't have a problem with renaming the episode titles to go with the series and production number, but I'd certainly like to keep redirects from the title itself. -- Omnicom 23:06, 24 October 2007 (PDT)

Have some more comments to add, but before it gets lost in the larger conversation, I wanted to note that it looks like we have consensus on the format for the individual entries. I have placed one last example up at the end of the list (See /Formats#Consensus format? above). If there are still any dissenting opinions on any aspect of the entry format itself, continue to comment here. If there is no further discussion over the next day or two, we can convert the existing entries to the new format and begin adding the unlisted episodes.

Looks like we have two OKs to rename the episodes in series/production number format (and yes, I would agree that a redirect page for all episode titles would be beneficial). Reboot, you withheld comment above - are you on board or do you have objections/further considerations?

Michael's idea to split what we have been discussing into two different pages solves some issues and also makes each resulting page more targeted and focused. I like it. Questions and comments:

• If there is a direct to video/DVD release, that would NOT appear on the Broadcast page, correct?
• There's a fuzzy line for some internet/downloadable content. If one has to pay to download content, is that the deciding factor for whether or not it appears on the Video Publishing page? If you can view something on the web but not download a copy of your own, that falls into the broadcast category only?
• Video Publishing History - maybe Video Release History? The word Publishing doesn't really feel right
• Broadcast History - I've been assuming that if there is a feature film (or short) released in theatres, that would be included under the "broadcast" category. Correct me if I'm wrong on that. Since it may be the 31st century before we see such a release, I would be OK with naming the page Broadcast History and then renaming it to Broadcast and Theatrical Release History if and when something like that ever happens. Too cumbersome? Unnecessary? Not really a problem for the foreseeable future, but I thought I'd throw it out there. A separate page for films would be very short, even if they ever do release one.
• I'm good with keeping promotional material & interstitials on the series/episode pages, should we determine that individual examples of such content are worth having in the wiki. If we eventually add enough, perhaps they could be listed on their own page, but I'm not going to lose sleep over that any time soon.

-- Gopher 14:00, 25 October 2007 (PDT)

After thinking about it, how about these revised definitions? They may seem arbitrary but you have to draw the lines somewhere. I think I addressed all of the comments about what goes where.

• Broadcast History page includes broadcast and/or internet content, in free non-tangible format. This includes (but is not limited to) TV shows via air/cable/satellite, internet content such as webisodes and podcasts, mobile phone mobisodes, etc. Commercials and interstitials still shouldn't go here. Content is organized by date of first appearance.
• Video Release History (or whatever) includes new or existing content for which payment is required. This includes tangible format (DVD, VHS, etc.) or non-tangible format which must be purchased over the internet (e.g., downloading episodes in iTunes). Direct to Video/DVD goes here. Content is organized by date of first availability.
• Theatrical Release History (features and/or shorts) are a whole separate entity, as they're neither broadcast nor "published" in the sense described above. In the theaters, it's a Theatrical Release (feature-length or short). When it comes out on video/DVD/iTunes, it's in Video Publishing. When it's shown on TV the first time, it's in Broadcast History.

-- Omnicom 22:32, 25 October 2007 (PDT)

Replying

Moved the examples to /Formats - since we were now talking both above & below them, it got a bit unwieldy.

Anyway....

• CG> Looks like we have two OKs to rename the episodes in series/production number format (and yes, I would agree that a redirect page for all episode titles would be beneficial). Reboot, you withheld comment above - are you on board or do you have objections/further considerations?

I delayed replying to think about this one, and it's been several days because I'm really not sure.

Basically, what the big problem with this, to me, is that no-one will know, offhand, which episode you mean if you say, e.g., JLU 3.03 (hell, I've seen people get confused online re: JL/JLU series numbering whether (e.g.) JLU S3 refers to the first series as JLU and the third overall series of JL, or the third series as JLU and fifth overall). In the comics, where every issue's got the book title and number on the front cover, that's the easiest way to go about things, but at no point when watching the series or buying the DVDs is it obvious or even intuitive what the order is. I can't remember whether the LSH eps have the episode titles on-screen (I haven't seen S1 for a while, and S2 isn't airing here yet), but I know the DCAU eps do, and, at any rate, the DVD covers certainly use the ep titles but no numbers.

That's not to say the info shouldn't be there, but if there's one thing the current page format gets right, it's the prominence of that data vs. the episode titles. I don't know if I'm entirely comfortable with standardising this way because of this.

In other news, I'm fine with MG's "revised" Broadcast History/"Video Release History (or whatever)"/Theatrical Release History plan. - Reboot (SoM) talk page 19:43, 27 October 2007 (PDT)

But won't that be taken care of by the format (which shows both episode number and title) and the redirects? You don't need to know the number, it's just there for reference. As for the two JLU episodes, since it's just the two I think we can live with any confusion. Type in "Far From Home" and it'll take you there whether you know the episode number or not (or even whether we have it right or not), but it should be there for cataloging purposes. -- Omnicom 23:27, 27 October 2007 (PDT)