Talk:Smallville season 10

Guinness' mistake

OK, so I know that the award presented to Stargate SG-1, as described in the source, was titled "Longest Consecutive Running Sci-Fi TV Show". But that award was a mistake, and ever since it was presented Guinness has been covering its rear by using a unique interpretation of the word "consecutive". The original series of Doctor Who ran every year (i.e., consecutively) from 1963 to 1989: a 26-year run, with more episodes and more screen time than either SG-1 or Smallville. If you look at the comments on the GateWorld page, there's a post from the Editor in Chief of Guinness, who says:

I’m the Editor in Chief at Guinness World Records (and the one who presented Russell Davies his Doctor Who certificate at ComicCon last year). To clarify: Stargate achieved the record for the Longest running consecutive TV sci fi, as it was currently ON AIR and had been on air CONSECUTIVELY longer than any other TV sci fi that was currently on air at the time; Doctor Who has the absolute longevity record as it started in 1963 but is has not CURRENTLY been on air longer than SG (and yes, DW had longer spells consecutively, but not at the present time; it was during a previous spell on air). At ComicCon, DW received the (new) award for the Most Successful TV Sci Fi, based on longevity, DVD and book sales.

He's saying that to Guinness, "longest running consecutive series" means "longest running consecutive series currently on the air". I don't think that anyone else uses "consecutive" to mean "consecutive and current".

This has all been hashed out at the Stargate SG-1 page, where they eventually decided to say (at Stargate SG-1#Legacy):

With its 202nd episode, "Company of Thieves", Stargate SG-1 surpassed The X-Files as the longest-running North American science fiction series on television. Doctor Who fans dispute SG-1's listing in the 2007 Guinness World Records as the "longest-running science fiction show (consecutive)", as 694 episodes of the British show were produced and shown consecutively between 1963 and 1989.

If you really want to go into that detail here, you can do so; however, I suggest that it might be simpler merely to insert "in North America", as I did before I was reverted. The controversy is alluded to in the GateWorld source, so it's not OR. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 15:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Additional: I've now found six sources which refer to the record which Smallville will break as the longest consecutive running sci-fi show in the US: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Some of them look like they might not meet the strictest interpretation of WP:RS, but then again I'm not sure that GateWorld does either. I'm going to add "US" to the description of the record, and a couple of these sources as references. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:40, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Semi-Protection time again?

Not only do we have an influx of people wanting to separate Absolute Justice into 2 episodes and push Lazarus to #197, but there seems to be an unusual obsession with the source saying Allison Mack will be in seven episodes. One IP'er starting with 67. changed it from "seven" to "several", and another starting with 94. did it as well, even going so far as to remove the source. It may be time to put a lockdown on the page. Thoughts? KnownAlias contact 17:04, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree. When you spend each day reverting the same things over and over, and there are hidden notes that explain why something is the way it is, it gets to the time when you need semi-protection.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Just fixed a "22" episode edit on Season 9, too. Might need to extend it to that page as well. KnownAlias contact 17:24, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I would do a single request for both pages and explain the connection between the pages and why it is necessary to protect both.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 18:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Just did. Here's hoping. KnownAlias contact 18:55, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

That happened super fast too.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:00, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Defending "Seven"/"Several" edits

I was the one who edited it to several episodes as the source you have listed is wrong. Every other source has said that AM will be appearing in several episodes, not giving an actual number. Also when one of the writers was asked on Twitter what Allison's episode count was, he said he didn't know. How could he not know if it was supposedly said? Also, the writers have said that Absolute Justice was two episodes and that episode 4 of Season 10 is considered as the 200th episode, making Lazarus episode 197. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.11.177.12 (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about the AM thing, but as far as Absolute Justice goes the DVD box set says "21 episodes". It would be mathematically impossible for AJ to be considered 2 episodes and there only be 21 on the set. As far as the writers are concerned, they "produced" 2 episodes, but that has nothing to do with broadcasting. Obviously, someone is going to have to figure out what is what before episode 4, because if the studio says there are 195 episodes then episode 5 will be counted as the 200th episode broadcast.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:47, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the Absolute Justice thing, but I still think that AM's contract status should be changed. As can be seen at: http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/05/19/allison-mack-smallville/ , she said several and the source you have listed has changed it to seven. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.11.177.12 (talk) 19:57, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Kind of starting to agree with him. The source's quote of Mack is direct from the Aussiello article, referencing EW as the source of the info and giving no indication that they ever talked to her themselves. There's no way from that article to verify the number seven, except from the title they gave it. "Several" to "seven" could just be a copywriter with a case of tinnitus. Now that arguements have actually been presented, I'm open to debating the issue; frankly, I'm now in favor of switching to the EW source and going with "several". KnownAlias contact 20:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, I would just stick with "multiple", as "several" is a weasel word.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:26, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

AM will be appearing in SEVEN according to the source.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 22:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

But that source is crediting Entertainment Weekly with the scoop, calling Mack's statement an "exclusive", and using her quote verbatim from the Ausiello interview. They even include a link to the EW article, establishing that it's just a parrot of that article. Every other article quoting the Ausiello article sticks with "several", so if the only thing they didn't take from the EW article, the only thing they actually contributed themselves was the specific number, then where did that number come from? It puts the validity, and as a result verifiability of the information into question. Since the article essentially is the EW article, it's just better to go with that source's source; the Ausiello interview. KnownAlias contact 23:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, sorry, I didn't exactly get what you were refering to before. Thanks to whoever for pointing it out for us.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 23:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Episode numbering revisited

Episode 1 (197) : Lazarus - Episode 2 (198) : Shield - Episode 3 (199) : Supergirl - Episode 4 (200) : Homecoming - Episode 5 (201) : Isis - Episode 6 (202) : Harvest - Episode 7 (203) : Ambush - Stop to refer to DVD numbering ! You're wrong since the beginning Bignole. Absolute Justice is a single aired episode, but it must be considered as 2 technically, as Al Septien said. Homecoming will be the 10.4 and the 200th, that's all--Shiny50 (talk) 03:41, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, the producers consider it two episodes---which it was---but the studio considers it a single broadcasted episode (which is why the DVD says "21" episodes). We cannot say that 22 episodes aired for season 9, when the DVDs clearly say "21". All we can do is make a note that episode 199 is actually the 200th produced episode because of the combined broadcasting of episodes 11 and 12 in season 9. You're just going to have to deal with this, because the consensus is that it's a single broadcasted episode. I'm tired of rehashing the same arguments with you over and over again.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:21, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Bignole is right. It's not just him you're disagreeing with. The community made this decision, and they based it on reasonable arguments derived from verifiable information. No one disagrees technically with what you're saying. But it's agreed that what you're saying only works from a production standpoint. From a broadcast standpoint, Lazarus is #196. They produced 186 episodes by the end of Absolute Justice, but combined two of them to broadcast only 185. You're the only one railing against that. As a result, "episode 200" (199 on this list) will get a note acknowledging the Absolute Justice production/broadcast discrepancy. KnownAlias contact 12:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I mostly just read Smallville articles but there is a question..... where is episode 197 ? ..... if "Homecoming" is both the 4th of the season and the 200th why is 197 missing? It looks completely random to me. Why not remove 196 or 199 or 198 ?

If i understand the notes in the articles The CW is considering "Absolute Justice" one episode for broadcast and home distribution purposes (thus ending the 9th season at ep 195) but then changes their stance on it to being 2 episodes so as to fall in line with the production company's count for the 200th episode (thus counting the season 10 premiere as ep 197). But the article has the season premiere as 196 and skip-numbers to 198 so as to make "Homecoming" 200 in the list.

Also try reconciling the skip-numbering of 197 in the list with the notice on the main article that 197 episodes have been broadcast as of a few hours ago. This reads in the articles as completely wonky, confusing, and the footnotes only serve to confuse it further. Does the episode list follow the production or the broadcast numbering? Currently it flipflops as needed to match respective references. The CW can't have it both ways and have it make sense. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 09:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

No clue, the list followed broadcast amount for a long time, then temporarily switched to production amount, and was then changed back because the DVD amount corresponds with the broadcast amount.

But there is something factually wrong with the note, since "Absolute Justice" is counted as two episodes in production, but one aired and on the DVD. The production amount is one more than the broadcast/DVD order. So the note is wrong, it should state: "Thus, "Homecoming" is considered the 201th episode produced, but the 200th broadcast. The CW recognizes "Homecoming" to be the 200th episode." _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 09:34, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

That's not correct Xe. "AJ" is considered the 185th and 186th episodes produced. Thus, season nine ended with 196 episodes "produced". The season ten premiere would be the 197th episode produced, followed by last night's episode at 198, next week would be 199, and then finally "Homecoming" would be 200. Because "AJ" is considered just the 185th episode "broadcast", when you do the math that makes "Homecoming" the 199th episode broadcast. The CW does indicate in the DVD boxset that "AJ" is a "double episode", but numbering it's still counted as one. I think the CW is recognizing that "Homecoming", regardless of broadcast numbering is still the 200th episode produced by the show and that is what makes it a special feat. As far as celebrations go, they don't care that it's actually the 199th episode broadcast.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:11, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh yah, got confused with the missing episode. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 13:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

An easy way to sort this out is to just have one list for the production order and one for broadcast number on Season 9 and 10. Put down 'Absolute Justice' as 185/186 on production but as 185 on broadcast, then have 'Homecoming' as 200 for production and 199 for broadcast. Much less confusing I think and both sides of the argument are sorted since 'Homecoming' IS the 200th episode and 'Absolute Justice' aired as one episode.SundableObject (talk) 20:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

You can already see this in the production codes. No need for two episode lists. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 20:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Does that matter? It is just an easy fix to the episode count problem. 'Homecoming' is branded as the 200th episode. 'Absolute Justice' is the 185th episode. Something needs to be sorted to easily indicate why both are true and I don't think the production code covers it. But if you think it would be easier to have it stay confusing then I guess you can keep it that way... SundableObject (talk) 20:53, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

It's unnecessary coding and a completely unnecessary column on the table that we'd have to add to the other 9 seasons. It's much simpler to have a "Note" (which we do) that explains the situation. The episode table doesn't go out of its way to talk about how "Homecoming" is the 200th episode. Even when the plot is written for that episode it won't start with "The 200th episode". So, as far as the table itself goes it's unnecessary because to the average reader they won't think twice about such a thing. When they read later (if they we get info about it) that "Homecoming" is the 200th episode, but see that the table says "199", they'll also see the "NOTE" that is attached that explains the numbering issue.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:46, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Why would you need to add the extra column to every season? Just add it to Season 9 and 10.SundableObject (talk) 21:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Because all of the seasons are transcluded to the List of Episode pages, which means that we'd have two seasons with tables that looked odd compared to the other 8 seasons tables that appear. Given that this only affects 2 episodes ("Absolute Justice" and "Homecoming"), why create an entirely new column just to indicate the difference between broadcast and production? Especially since you'd have 3 columns that do nothing but indicate episode number (season, series, and the suggested "broadcast" column).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if this caused a fuss. I might have just changed it myself but the numbering had been in place for some time and i thought to ask rather than 'step on toes'. The note and Homecoming being 199 in the list actually makes sense.
This is only slightly related but i don't have the DVD of s9 and the thought came to me about Absolute Justice and if that is just the broadcast title much like Façade was retitled Kryp/Tuck for broadcast on The WB. Before they were broadcast as one i am certain i saw them spoken of by individual names. If they were renamed at production then fine. If The CW renamed them then should not the entire collective list use original broadcasters' titles for the episodes. The list now does use broadcast episode count but by my older familiarity it uses production/home video episode titles. This column is using broadcast-related data and that column is using production-related info is an inconsistency that maybe has been addressed before and is buried in some archive somewhere i haven't found. Much like Lionel i have not been that involved with Smallville anywhere for a few years. Feel free to curse me for wanting to see the episode where "no flights, no tights" is done away with and all of those old lingering questions coming back to my forethoughts ;)
And in case noöne knew and you want to mention it somewhere, the 10th season is being shown in Canada on CHCH. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 03:55, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

"Kryp/Tuck" was never the title for "Facade", that was more of the subtitle/caption for the episode. The episode itself was always "Facade". As for "Absolute Justice". It's history started as two separate episodes ("Legends" and "Society"), but after they filmed the episodes (but before the editing process), it was decided to merge them into a single broadcast and they then retitled the episode "Absolute Justice". When the DVD was released, it is still called "Absolute Justice" and it is labeled as "Episode 11" (not "Episode 11 & 12). Thus, because it would seem rather odd to have episode counts that don't match the actual figures, we have left "Homecoming" as the 199th episode, with an explanation that as far as production goes it is the 200th episode produced for the show and that is why the CW is treating it like the 200th episode.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

New Characters

Should we add New and Returning characters like in the previous seasons? ChaosMaster_Chat 21:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Who's new and who's returning? The original list is for "returning guests". Right now, I think Schneider is the only one we know about so far. Doesn't seem like a reason to have a section just yet, though I assume we'd have one eventually.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually just noticed the Kara return. Still think that 2 characters probably isn't enough since we don't have any details about their return to beef up the section. It would really just be two sentences.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Alright, sounds fair to me. Sorry, you don't have to answer that on my talkpage again XD ChaosMaster_Chat 01:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Perfect section for these sources: ONE and TWO. How in the world are all of these dead characters coming back to life, lol. ChaosMaster_Chat 02:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure we can use the second source. When I checked SpoilerTV it looked like the post came from a blog, or some comment answer (see here). It doesn't say where they got it from. They credit ComicVine for the other source, who in turn credits SplashPage, which is apparently owned by MTV (see original source). I think the MTV source should be fine to use.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Reference dump

Episode 200 behind the scene pics

Lional Luthor 2 episodes

 ChaosMaster_Chat 01:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Kara's return

Allison Mack int

 BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

emote

means to act out a particular emotion. You don't emote radiation, you emit radiation. 4.249.63.102 (talk) 00:16, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Then correct the typo.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

18-49 average?

I was wondering whether we should add the 18.49 average to the ratings (possibly in brackets next to the ratings or as a separate table) since the 18-49 average means a lot more to the future of a show than the ratings (in terms of Smallville it will give the likelihood of a spin-off show since that seems to be touted). Taking this week as an example it had 2.89 million viewers but a 1.2/1.3 18-49, while under viewers it looks very bad but the 18-49 average puts it in a much better position especially on a Friday, the mentality seems to put viewers as a whole under more importance which isn't the truth to advertisers today, just an idea SundableObject (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

First, there is no future to this show anymore because it is in its final season. Secondly, the average reader does not understand (the average editor doesn't either) what the 18-49 ratings share actually means. You'd end up having to send the reader to another page just to understand what the rating share actually means, and even then the explanation for it on the page is convoluted. We are not including the "overall viewers" in association with advertising figures. We're merely showing the overall number of people that are watching the show. Rating share might be important to advertisers, but it isn't to the average reader and if a show is cancelled because of ratings share then that is something that should be stated in prose. A simple figure says nothing but provides more questions as to why it is even listed. A reader can see "3 million viewers" and understand exactly what the means.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:46, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

All I said was "just an idea". You really don't need to be that mean about it. I'm so sorry for suggesting something to improve the article, in the future I'll keep my mouth shut and let you run the entire article the way you want it. SundableObject (talk) 21:51, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

How was I mean? I didn't use exclamation points, or CAPS. I was merely stating my rebuttal for being against it. If you are that offended by something like that then maybe Wikipedia isn't the place for you. I've been in discussions where people are throwing all CAPS and exclamation points out like they're the only way to talk. I felt that I was quite civil in providing my response.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:03, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I have to support Bignole here. How was that response mean? It simply pointed out the problems with the notion of introducing the 18-49 average. The petulance of your response seems like a gross over-reaction; if you can't take that kind of peaceable, constructive criticism, perhaps it's best if, as you say, you keep your mouth shut. - 220.239.203.208 (talk) 12:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Lionel Luthor (oops, my error)

Oops, my mistake. Sorry about that. Brain fart there. I had a strange notion that that was the DC comics character article. Ignore my stupid error (wink). DonQuixote (talk) 03:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

It covers both (all) versions, as there is no article on any version of Lex's father. There isn't even consensus as to what Lex's father's name is, so all versions are covered on the Smallville article, but the TV show is given preference over everything else.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:30, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. I was probably (mis)remembering Superman: Birthright which has bits and pieces based on the show. DonQuixote (talk) 03:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Cast List

Guys please talk to me here if you have any problem with the cast list that I have updated and don't just delete it right away.

We already have an entire section of the article that covers returning characters and new characters. It is redundant to list them all over again. The only reason the current "Cast" list was even present was because it helped to keep the infobox from cutting into the episode table, as the lead was not full enough and the article large enough to keep the two from blending. That is no longer the case. Since the main cast is already listed in the lead itself, we don't need a separate list just for them anymore.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

People expect to see things clean, they don't want a jumbled thing so the cast list I made helps that, so can you please restore it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nasirakd (talk • contribs) 08:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

The list is only there to keep the infobox out of the episode table section, and that is no longer a problem. See Smallville (season 1), Smallville (season 2), and Smallville (season 3) do not have a cast list because they are more developed. Season 1 is a featured article. But, season 4 through 7 do have a cast list because they are not developed. Then season 8 and 9 are back to not having a cast list because they are developed. This page is developed enough that it doesn't need a space (which is what the list served as because it was redundant to the lead in the first place) anymore.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Air date edit wars

There are conflicting reports of what's on the air tomorrow night. The best info is from the CWs site, which says you're in for a Nikita rerun. Based on that, please leave it "TBA". Tomorrow this will all be water under the bridge, anyway. TJRC (talk) 22:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

As I tried to explain to that IP editor, I had the press release from the network in my hands as I changed things - the exact press release which is now up on The Futon Critic and every other TV news site out there - including the ones the IP erroneously called unreliable. I do not appreciate being labelled a vandal by an IP whose only edit history is today. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 23:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The IP's history started today, but it's not a given that the user's history did. The user was right that we don't historically consider SpoilerTV a reliable source, which has to do with a general lack of editorial process, as well as the sources SpoilerTV uses; but in this case, there was a clear acknowledgement of the CW itself as a source for the article. It probably well could have sufficed until more reliable sources came forward with the information, as they were bound to do under the circumstances. A consensus for that might also have been reached if it had been discussed on this page sooner. KnownAlias contact 23:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Just cite the Futon Critic and note the date changes. According to the press release, the episodes were just shifted by 1 week. This weeks episode will air next Friday according to the press release. Just cite the Futon Critic and move on.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Production # Scion/Kent

Why do the episodes Scion and Kent have the same production number? I'd delete it for one of those episodes, but I don't know which one is wrong. GiantTiger001 (talk) 04:29, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Check the sources; the docstoc source gives that code to Scion. So far the only number given to Kent or Booster is their sequence as #17 or #18, but no ProdCode. No source, no number. KnownAlias contact 04:37, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

That doesn't explain why it was listed for Kent. As long as it's only shown for one episodes, that's all that matters. GiantTiger001 (talk) 07:16, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Eddiebabes, 24 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} i want to request to edit this because i want to add a description of the new smallville episode. the description will be, After Zatanna sends a magically spiked bottle of champagne to Clark and Lois for their bachelor/bachlorette parties, the gang blacks out after the toast and can’t remember anything about the night before. When Lois realizes she lost her engagement ring and drags Oliver back to the Fortune Casino, the two run into the owner Amos Fortune, who accuses them of stealing money from him. Meanwhile, Clark tells Chloe he has a memory of stealing an armored truck the night before. Eddiebabes (talk) 09:41, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Must have a source for the episode and it cannot be a copy paste job from another website.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Pilot re-airing

I know it's the pilot and from season 1. But it was repeated as a lead-in to the series finale. Should the information and ratings be included, like... "The CW repeated the pilot, in preparation for the series finale." Just curious. Jayy008 (talk) 18:02, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Not on this page. It would be relevant at Pilot (Smallville).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Jayy008 (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Finale 1 & Finale 2; there can be only 1

Apparently the promo poster, via TV By the Numbers, is advocating that April 15th begins the countdown to the final five episodes. Not exactly a reliable source in it's own right, but a fair warning to start looking for one, as "Finale" is going to be another "Absolute Justice" as far as the count is concerned. KnownAlias contact 02:00, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I would wait for the official press release before making any changes. It's no big deal to change it once we've gotten word. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 02:08, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I agree. I'm bold enough to change it if I think it's right. This is just so the in the know like you, me and Bignole, for example, can start preparing in our heads how to try to avoid it being labeled episode 216/217 every day (you know it's coming). KnownAlias contact 02:15, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I think it's similar to "AJ" in that it was two separately produced episodes at one point, but I think that they had decided to make this one episode long before they had with "AJ", which appeared to be last minute. We'll figure it out. We already are different than most places, because others have the episode count as one more than us because of "AJ", as they count it as two episodes where we go by the studio listing it as one episode on the DVDs.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I will gladly edit the poster and find someone to publish it saying SIX but it will be more difficult to fix the Absolute Justice mess on the wiki. Every time i look at the episode list i laugh at the stupidity of wiki consensus and The CW - a single episode has two directors and two production codes. Most people would say, 'that is two episodes, duh'. That The CW counts "Homecoming" as episode 200 and Bignole had to write a second disclaimer note into the episode list numbering would itself be proof of the nonsense found here that you are looking to repeat. Neither of the references used actually state that The CW considers them to be a single episode. One is a dvd/bd release press release from Warner Bros., not a statement from The CW, and the other is a bloody picture that could have been made by me in less than 5 minutes for all you know and for how much it is in keeping with other Smallville promotional art, not that it actually indicates anything about it being a single episode according to The CW. I don't like tagging so i won't be tagging the references for failed verification. If someone can't find actual references i might just fix the episode lists despite consensus being to use fake references. A hundred fans all wrong are still all wrong even if their numbers grow into the thousands.
And as a side note of some connexion, Bignole, i love how you boast of differing from kryptonsite regarding the episode count. If it were me i would be hiding my head in the sand and keeping my mouth shut in hopes that noöne noticed. If you want to get really into abiding by the DVDs then i should like to point out that episodes 1 & 2 are first released as a single episode on DVD in 2002 and the season didn't come out on DVD for more than a year after that. Do you re-count "Pilot" and "Metamorphosis" into "Premiere" as has been done with "Society" and "Legends" into "Absolute Justice". If you say that it wasn't broadcast as a combined two episodes then you are dismissing the concurrent Canadian première (that ran an hour longer than did The WB's broadcast). Yes, Smallville displaced the third episode of season 2 of Gilmore girls in Canada because Smallville was a two-hour episode(s) on Global (repeats got the awkward American cut also found on the season DVD). For many weeks i hated Smallville simply for that. Think i am making it up? Canada wasn't the only country that saw a 2-hour première. It might not be reliable but i found it from the oldest available revision of the main article and it should at least give cause for further investigation when you read the air dates for season 1 in Italy. [7] Your count could be off by 3 by the time it is all done. Now that would be most impressive but is more like "look how wrong i am!". If broadcast and DVD matter then do it all the way through. If production is what matters then do it all the way through. Either way the first two episodes do actually go together as one. As it is, and has been for at least 6 years now [8], the episode list has them separate and make no mention of the combined broadcast in Canada. [Through some odd dupe pages running concurrently and conversion to disambiguation and probably a copy & paste somewhere along the way too the origin of Smallville and the competing Smallville (TV series) appear to be lost so i am not sure who initially wrote the episode list, just who put it into the version of the article that has carried forward to now.] Though set in the USA Superman and Smallville each have some pretty strong ties to Canada. And while i am on this point the list of home video releases excludes the première and the season 1 article says the premiere was re-edited for the DVD release in Canada. The re-editing went the other way, in creating the American broadcast and season DVD version of the episode(s) unless you can explain how in editing it together there ended up being more than what they started with from the individual episodes.
I know i rarely ever show up at Smallville but it is because i loved it when the show was actually more to do with Smallville. Bignole, sorry this is really long but your comments about other sites and implied doing it right here i really can't disagree with more. Hence really long. If you make it this far just remember i rarely come here so its not like you get the 2000 word essays from me every other day.
As for the section title, nice Highlander reference. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 10:25, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not actually sure I know what you were saying you were going to do, but it read like you said you were going to circumvent consensus and edit how you pleased? Maybe I just misread that, so apologies if I did. The CW and Warner Bros. work together to issue the DVDs, and since they see "AJ" as a single broadcasted episode that is enough for us. As for this piece of promotional art, I never said I am going by that. I'm an advocate of waiting and being patient and seeing how things are actually listed. We already know that the powers that be cannot agree on how mathematics works. I do not use posters as verification of anything, as images are not allowed as reliable sources. We'll know a little more when the press release for the episode description comes out, and even more when they package the DVD. Again, when it's two episodes they would list them as "21 & 22" in the DVD. With "AJ" they did not do that, and the final count was literally "21" in the booklets themselves. Delirious, you can disagree as much as you please. That is your right to do so, but you have to realize that we have 2 competing ways of counting, one is a booklet produced by Warner. Bros and The CW that counts for us, and the other is how the writers feel that episode should be counted. Either way, we would have to include hidden notes explaining the counting procedure, whether it was to explain why it was listed as 1 episode, or why it was listed as 2 episodes. You cannot avoid the hidden note.

As for your concerns regarding the first two episodes...we know they were put together on a single DVD (they were separated on the season DVD though). We don't have a source for them being aired as a single broadcast in Canada so that would be why it is not there. We cannot use word of mouth. That was not how they aired in the US (their country of origin), so we would need a reliable source to note on the season 1 page (as well as the pilot page) that the first two episodes aired together as a single broadcast in Canada. If you have that reference, awesome, because we can add it to the articles.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, the press release says "final episode", and not "episodes". We're going to have to figure this out, but in the mean time before we determine if we're going to have this as one episode or two, we should probably at least merge the sections because we cannot arbitrarily separate the plot into two sections when it airs. It'll make better sense to have it as a single plot. We can figure out episode count afterward.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

More interestingly is the press release from Warner Bros. announcing "the complete series" release of 218 episodes plus exclusive bonus content. http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/news/Smallville-The-Complete-Series/15319

After 10 incredible seasons, Smallville: The Complete Series will arrive on DVD this fall. This ultimate collector's set for the ultimate fan features over 192 hours of content - including all 218 episodes, over five hours of newly added special features such as an unaired, never-before-seen Superboy pilot from 1961, a 90-minute series retrospective with all new interviews, the 2010 final Comic-Con panel and more!

Anyone think that maybe with most of the rest of the world saying 218 it is Wikipedia that is wrong?
As to your claim that The CW and Warner Bros. communicate on DVD releases need i remind you of Warner Bros. confirming the cancellation of Life Unexpected via their press release of then-forthcoming DVD release which had The CW trying to convince people it wasn't cancelled as they still had episodes to broadcast. As to country of origin, the Warner brothers themselves are some immigrants to and others born in Canada and this show is made in Canada so country of origin is 2 points to Canada, 1 point to USA. USA loses that claim. 1 episode having 2 production numbers is just absolutely not right. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 04:21, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I saw that, but it'll more interesting to see how it is actually labeled on the discs. But regardless, the actual season 9 discs (and DVD menu) say 1 episode. The fact that they may or may not (it isn't out so we cannot verify what the discs will say) repackage it as 2 episodes doesn't change how it was broadcast, nor how it was originally packaged. Again, they did produce 218 episodes, no one has denied that. But they will have only broadcast 216 episodes since they have combined 4 episodes into 2 episodes for broadcast and distribution. As for Warner Bros. the company is an American company. If a Japanese man comes to America and starts a company it's an American company. It doesn't matter that he is Japanese.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me)

You intend to buy it just to see if it really is split into Society, Legends, and the two whatever-the-names-would-be? Ok. I am still waiting on the other 8 seasons in HD DVD. You trip on "originally packaged" every time you write it because "originally packaged" would put 1&2 as a one-off double like S&L and the last two. You are playing it both ways depending on the episodes in question. I keep pointing out that inconsistency in your arguement. The one point is for the company the Warner brothers started in California. If only they had started the company in Canada and moved it to California then it would have been 3-0 in my little point scoring. :) Then again, two nights ago i saw a commercial during SVU on NBC from Exxon Mobile which spoke of the Alberta oil sands being a saviour for the national (ie American) economy. Last i checked the USA hadn't bought northern Alberta. The claims made that people probably blindly believe. Which reminds me, i changed the production numbers since i actually watched tonight's episodes and the production numbers were non-sequential and i was curious what was here. I included a picture in case you are relying on a tv rip w/o end credits. Picture is of my tv screen from WGN since it is what is available in Calgary. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 03:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I won't need to, someone else will and probably post it on the web. The first 2 episodes were released as a single DVD, yes, but they aired weeks a part. Not to mention that the actual season DVD has them separate. Special releases are not the same thing as standard distribution. The first two episodes were released as a special release before the season had even completed. Just like how this "complete collection" is a special release. I'm still curious as to whether they will actually count all of those episodes as separate, of if that was just the marketing using the production figure as the broadcast figure.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:23, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

For writing so much of the content of Smallville you are wrong on one point here for sure. The DVD was not released before the season's initial broadcast was completed. Or are you claiming that 2 July comes before 21 May in the calendar. Strike one. In these parts it isn't considered a special release. It is licensed for sale in the USA too. Strike two. It is standard distribution and can still be had from Amazon. Strike three. This is not at all like the complete series release other than coming from Warner Bros. and being in DVD format as the complete series has a lot of perks added as incentive to buy it and unless you consider subtitles a sign of a special release... Strike four. The first season of the oc was released in 16x9 in the complete series but 4x3 in the individual season release and i have yet to find the 16x9 dvdrip on the web; don't count on finding the complete series dvdrip of Smallville (people will probably mislabel existing releases). Strike five. The first two episodes were not broadcast "weeks a part". In the USA it was 16 & 23 October 2011 and in Canada they were shown on the same day, back-to-back. Strike 6. The only thing that i can't dispute is the claim of your own personal curiosity. I would rather have a beneficial interaction than point out how many inaccurate claims are contained in what you write.
Until i actually have titles for individual episodes there isn't much more to put forward for the 218 episodes. I am still looking for a source for the Canadian broadcast that is more than an angelfire free page that hasn't been updated since part way through the first season. As for Canadian broadcasters they would be Global, Citytv (when owned by CHUM), A (when owned by Rogers), SunTV, CHCH, and SPACE (when owned by Bell). Call it an idea for a sentence or two somewhere somewhere in one of the articles. It is not too often a show moves through 3 networks, two independent stations, and a cable channel before voluntarily ending. I'm off to some Will Estes watching now. I ♥ cancelled shows. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 05:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

First, if you continue with this deliberately uncouthe way of speaking, then we won't be speaking any longer (I'm referring to this constant "strike 1, strike 2" crap that you've been doing while you speak to me and anyway else. Learn some manners). Being a special release does not mean that you can no longer find it, especially when it comes to online vendors that specialize in holding on to items no longer produced for general sale. The first 2 episodes of Smallville released as a single movie was a special release. They did not air together (in their country of origin), they were not filmed together, the only thing they had in common was the fact that their storylines went from one day to the next. So, that is why they have never been considered a single episode like "Absolute Justice" and potentially like "Finale".

As for this Canadian claim, I still do not see any argument here. Warner Bros. is an American studio. The CW is an American studio. Both own the majority of the rights to Smallville. That is why Smallville is an American show. Indicating a transition throughout its run between various broadcasters can be fine with a source. But we need a source discussing that.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Tell me i am wrong six times when you are actually lying six times and i will call you out on it six times. Don't like it? Don't lie. Don't do it six times in one paragraph. Learn some manners and integrity. Telling me to learn some manners when i catch you in a pile of lies is such a petty, immature, and annoying thing to do. They did air as a single broadcast in their country of origin. You might want to look up what the words "country" and "origin" mean. The country of origin for Superman and Smallville is Canada. Not that that was ever a concern i was in the mood to pursue but you have become fixated on it so here we go. However you want to call it a special release it still amounts to what is considered original research on Wikipedia as the article on the pilot lacks reference for this claim of it being a special release. Gord does call it a movie. Gord does not call it a special release. Assuming facts not in evidence. I don't know if you are in Canada or not but 9 years ago when word broke of it being released the only thing special about it was that Warner Bros. was sticking it to the Americans and rubbing it in their faces that they were not getting this exclusive Canadian release and media of all sorts made note of it. I found out about the DVD release thanks to a magazine cover i saw while buying some groceries. The awkward, crappy edit of the pilot is not exclusively an American special as that is the version shown when the first episode was repeated in Canada. Citing the existence of the release is not the same as citing the claims made about the release. The article lacks the latter but does contain the former. If you really want to consider it a special then the special was seen by what all i have ever found everywhere but the USA and that would rather make the USA version the special/different/exception. You can also dismiss the assertion from Warner Bros. of 218 episodes all you want. You can have it all three ways on the three groups of two episodes in question. I know you are wrong. That is good enough for me. But what about all of the other people who don't know that you are wrong? You seem content to let it go and since it is your reckoning i would expect you to stand by it. But i disagree with it and you.
A two hour broadcast counted as 2 episodes with 2 episode numbers,
A two hour broadcast counted as 1 episode with 1 episode number, and
A two hour broadcast counted as 1 episode with two episode numbers.
That is what you are advocating for and presently have in the respective articles. It is ridiculous. Dismissing sources from those with the final say in the matter because they say something you disagree with is not how this site is suppose to function.
As for the broadcast history in Canada, i was suggesting something you could do to give more balanced coverage and recognise the country of origin in a small measure. It would not be one source but a collection of them you would be looking to find. Why am i suggesting it to you rather than doing it myself? Because i realise that if you don't like it then i am wasting my time in pursuing such addition of content. I recorded the early seasons on VHS and i also have VCDs of season 1 that until writing this i had forgotten about. That should mean i have the first two episodes from Global and The WB in their original broadcasts. {{Cite episode}}? Researching the Canadian broadcast history would not give me any information i don't already have. It would give me references that for my own knowledge i don't require but which would be required here if you permitted the content. Anyway i know you hate long messages so i shall stop here. Have fun. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 16:19, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Lead

I recently added O'Toole and Schneider to the lead in "characters returning" format under "original" is John Glover notable to include in the lead too? Jayy008 (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I would say yes. Even though he was not a regular in season 1, he was a recurring guest and a big part of the season one arc. Then he was a regular for the next 6 years and has come back as a recurring character.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I will make the changes now. Jayy008 (talk) 17:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Finale

Is the finale simply called "finale" or are they not releasing it's name yet? Jayy008 (talk) 17:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

All sources say "Finale".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:19, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Jayy008 (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Guiness World Record

I don't think you have a reliable source to say that Smallville now has the record for the longest continuous run of a Science Fiction programme. I've started a discussion here: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#GateWorld as a reliable source for Guinness World Record information? Maccy69 (talk) 08:39, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

It says in the U.S. specifically. Jayy008 (talk) 14:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Future tense

I notice a lot of this article is written in future tense, like based on promisary interviews written before the episode airings. Stuff like "will feature Booster Gold", etc. I've yet to see this (or any other) season so I don't know how many of these predictions were accurate, but could someone rewrite them in the past tense in the fashion "people predicted the appearances of" said people, and verify who actually appeared and who ended up not appearing if there were any in either category? DB (talk) 00:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Some of it needs to be removed entirely, because it's speculation on future events that happened and isn't worthy of mentioning that it was "speculated". The rest does need to be changed to past tense. I'll try and get to it over the next week(end).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I noticed the same thing. I figured the reason was that we were so cheated on Finale that no one cares enough to keep the article updated. Seriously, I came to this article expecting a section explaining (or at least speculating) why Tom Welling wasn't clearly seen full-body in costume.--Keeves (talk) 16:27, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Comicbookmovie.com

Because ComicBookMovie.com is an unedited site of solely user-submitted content, it doesn't pass muster as a reliable source. Per WP:USERG, we cannot use as reference "any website whose content is largely user-generated, including the Internet Movie Database, Cracked.com, CBDB.com, and so forth, with the exception of material on such sites that is labeled as originating from credentialed members of the sites' editorial staff, rather than users." --Tenebrae (talk) 01:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I reverted myself for now since Ed Gross seems to have a regular column — in fact, a bunch of them — at the site. However, there is nothing I can find in the way of a masthead to show that he is a "credentialed member of the site's editorial staff." Indeed, ComicBookMovie.com's "About Us" page says nothing about a staff, but only about user-generated content:

About User-Generation and CBM Fansites!

Also in 2008, CBM developed its unique fansites concept and opened up the site to user-generated content from its large community of passionate users. Now visitors of the site can contribute directly to CBM's content with their own news aggregation and unique articles. While a large group of volunteer editors maintain the professional quality of the content, user contributions appear immediately on the site. All visitors need to do to contribute is join. They can also create their very own Fansite where all their contributions are housed. When registering, contributors agree to follow accepted journalistic standards and ethics. Find out more about CBM Fansites HERE.

What do other editors think? --Tenebrae (talk) 01:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, there's the key: The phrase "They can also create their very own Fansite where all their contributions are housed." The Ed Gross contributions are in one of his Fansites. That's not staff. That's user-generated content, and that's strictly forbidden. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:20, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

In general, I discourage and remove fansite information, and that includes in the case of KryptonSite (and its webmaster contracted with Warner Bros. to write the official companions for the seasons). The only time I ever give exception is when the site conducts its own one-on-one interview with people working on the show(s). I think that CBM also has a disclaimer TO the contributors that basically says falsifying information will result in it being removed from the website. So, in this case I would call exception simply because Gross, who does appear to be a volunteer (which pretty much all of their journalists are) met with Laura Vandervoort one-on-one. The fact that he published a personal interview on "his" fansite is irrelevant in this respect because it's a one-on-one interview and not a "scooper" report that cannot be verified.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Finale, parts 1 & 2

How about splitting "Finale", in the episode list, into "Finale", Part 1 and "Finale", Part 2, as usual. As examples, are Will & Grace (season 8) and Desperate Housewives (season 2). Cvhcsee (talk) 15:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

It all aired as a single entity, and because we don't know exactly what was filmed in each segment we cannot arbitrarily split the episode at the halfway point and say that was where "part 1" ended and where "part 2" began. It also flows better as one cohesive plot than if we were to split it. Just because others split it doesn't mean we should.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Colour contrast problems

It seems that this article is using colours in the infobox which don't satisfy Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines. The contrast between the foreground colour and the background colour is low, which means that it may be difficult or impossible for people with visual impairments to read it.

To correct this problem, a group of editors have decided to remove support for invalid colours from Template:Infobox television season and other television season templates after 1 September 2015. If you would still like to use custom colours for the infobox and episode list in this article after that date, please ensure that the colours meet the WCAG AAA standard.

To test whether a colour combination is AAA-compliant you can use Snook's colour contrast tool. If your background colour is dark, then please test it against a foreground colour of "FFFFFF" (white). If it is light, please test it against a foreground colour of "000000" (black). The tool needs to say "YES" in the box for "WCAG 2 AAA Compliant" when you input the foreground and the background colour. You can generally make your colour compliant by adjusting the "Value (%)" fader in the middle box.

Please be sure to change the invalid colour in every place that it appears, including the infobox, the episode list, and the series overview table. If you have any questions about this, please ask on Template talk:Infobox television season. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Smallville (season 10). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121017130035/http://www.seattlepi.com/tvguide/423969_tvgif25.html to http://www.seattlepi.com/tvguide/423969_tvgif25.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120121122047/http://www.seattlepi.com/tvguide/427272_tvgif23.html to http://www.seattlepi.com/tvguide/427272_tvgif23.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)