This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.

Interview talk:Tim Kring

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Keep or Remove

I discussed the idea of adding this interview with Ryan earlier and it sounded like a good idea at the time, but I'm starting to think otherwise. It's not one of Ryan's interviews, but it's from someone he knows on another site (who also happens to be an occasional contributor here). The difference between this one and Ryan's interviews is that Ryan posts his here exclusively and then we promote the interview here. With Dave's interview it looks like he's going to be promoting the version on his site. So it doesn't really make too much sense to me for us to reprint the entire interview if it's being promoted elsewhere. Thoughts? (Admin 23:58, 11 February 2008 (EST))

  • I'm on the fence here. The links to the website that contains the exact same text do seem superfluous, though (Woo hoo! Finally used it in a sentence). --Hero!(talk)(contribs)
    • I agree with Admin that it should be removed unless we have explicit permission and desire for the reprinting, and agreement that it will be trimmed/deleted from the other site. Since it is printed in its entirety elsewhere, I feel it's more appropriate for us to delete it and add it as a link as we do all of the CBR interviews. We would be sending traffic to the OWI website that way, but I feel that's appropriate that we treat other site's interviews as we would want our own to be treated--we wouldn't want someone to reprint the entirety of one of our interviews on another site. As a side note, this is a cool interview and congrats to OWI for scoring it.--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2008 (EST)
      • I neglected to mention, we do have explicit approval to reprint it and in fact the original creator of the article was User:Deasnuts who is the one who conducted the interview. There was always the expectation that it would be printed on both sites and originally it sounded like a neat idea. However, as I mentioned before, upon thinking about it some more it doesn't seem to serve much point if he's planning to promote the version on his site. I think we should just link to it like we do the CBR interviews like MiamiVolts mentioned. (Admin 00:28, 12 February 2008 (EST))
      • I think it's fine to keep the interview here. It can only increase our traffic and increase the-owi's traffic. Dave has had some terrific interviews, and I think having him post interviews here can only help our publicity and his. Personally, I don't see the issue, other than having the interview reprinted elsewhere (which happens quite often with my interviews). So long as we're not saying it's exclusive, I think it fits well with our other interviews. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:26, 12 February 2008 (EST)
        • It doesn't fit in with the other interviews, though, where this is the "source". He's got the interview on his site so we're just reprinting something in full that exists elsewhere already. It would be like reprinting (with permission) all the CBR interviews. It doesn't really serve much point. It also doesn't increase our traffic if people are directed there for the interview. The only people who would find the interview here are people who are already on this site anyway. (Admin 00:28, 12 February 2008 (EST))
          • I see what you're saying. I guess I'm thinking that I'm willing to send out publicity emails to all my contacts on the blogs and message boards, and send them to our site. Dave just sent one out, and it went to about half the people I would send to. I have another ten or fifteen people I would tell, and they would presumably link to our site. I guess in the end, it doesn't really matter, but I just don't see the harm in double promoting the interview. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:49, 12 February 2008 (EST)
            • I don't think there's any real harm either, so if people don't mind it then I can live with it. :) I mostly wanted to get some feedback on the issue and see if anyone else had any concerns with it. We may want to avoid doing it again in the future, though, unless we come up with some criteria for determining what interviews we'd have a full copy of here and which we wouldn't (assuming copyright permission granted). I don't think we want to be in the habit of just republishing interviews that we could just be linking to instead. (Admin 00:53, 12 February 2008 (EST))
              • I can accept that. But really, I know the only reason people are debating the issue is so the page gets more visibility in the recent changes, right? Right? :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:58, 12 February 2008 (EST)
                • Ryan, the first rule of covert advertising is that you dont talk about covert advertising. Shhh. ;) (Admin 01:01, 12 February 2008 (EST))
                  • LOL. I actually was serious in thinking we should limit our Interview namespace to only Heroes Wiki interviews to set an example, but I agree again with Admin. Hush hush on the covert advertising. ;)--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:12, 12 February 2008 (EST)
                    • I was joking with the covert advertising. :) I also think it would be more consistent to limit it to exclusive Heroes Wiki interviews, but I think it doesn't hurt too much to make an exception here as long as we don't consider it precedent for future cases similar to this one without getting a good discussion going about it first. (Admin 01:15, 12 February 2008 (EST))
              • I think it is fine to keep, as it was the interviewer that posted it. But the unique thing about Ryan's interviews (other than the fact that he has the entire contents of Heroes Wiki downloaded into his brain) is that most of the questions come from the users here. Maybe that could be a requirement for the future. -Lөvөl 01:24, 12 February 2008 (EST)
                • Thanks, Level, you're very kind. :) Actually, Dave did solicit lots of questions from fans at 9th Wonders, etc. The question about the charity comes from Admin, and the request to describe the writer's room and organization of information is mine. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:33, 12 February 2008 (EST)
                  • The kudos are well deserved, Ryan. :) Good idea about the writer's room question. I can only imagine that Tim's description of the discussion as "lively" is at best an understatement... Heh.--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:00, 12 February 2008 (EST)


To expand some more of above conversation, my thought is that if the interviewer introduces him/herself as representing being a user/editor of Heroes Wiki along with another site or alone and planning to post the interview at, then I would consider it a "Heroes Wiki" interview regardless of whether the questions were gathered from the other users here. If no mention of "Heroes Wiki" is made by the interviewer, then I wouldn't consider it an interview done "for" our site regardless of whether the user is an interviewer here.--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2008 (EST)

  • That touches on a sensitive area. Since it's mostly been Ryan doing our interviews it hasn't been a problem, BUT if others are going to do interviews and post them here they have to be very careful about how things are worded. No one can really "represent" Heroes Wiki so wording would need to be chosen carefully. You can say you're doing an interview to post on Heroes Wiki or administrators could say they're an administrator on Heroes Wiki. If anyone could represent Heroes Wiki then technically someone could go out and cause trouble and then claim to represent us and that's simply not the case. I don't know how Ryan handles it with people he contacts (but however he's doing it seems to be working out well for him and us), but I'd say in the general case people shouldn't claim any type of affiliation with the site, rather explain that they're working independently and wish to contribute the information to the site. (Admin 01:51, 12 February 2008 (EST))
    • I send out a pretty basic email to people that is almost always worded something like "Hi, I'm an administrator at Heroes Wiki, a reference site for everything to do with Heroes." I've resisted doing a form letter, but I almost always open the same way. I get responses from about half the people I contact, or maybe more. I get "quality" responses (meaning more than just "thank you") from about a quarter of those people. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 08:19, 12 February 2008 (EST)
    • So if a man is going to do an interview for posting on the site, he shouldn't say he is Joe Schmoe of Heroes Wiki... he should be specific and say he is Joe Schmoe, a user of Heroes Wiki. That good enough? Whatever we decide, I think it's a good point and we should document it somewhere in the help.--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:00, 12 February 2008 (EST)
      • I think an explicit explanation is best. Rather than just claiming some affiliation, it's not too difficult to say. "Hi, my name is Joe Schoe. I am an editor on Heroes Wiki and am interested conducting an interview that would be posted on the wiki..." etc. etc. This way there's no ambiguity and less risk of someone accidentally misrepresenting themselves. (Admin 02:05, 12 February 2008 (EST))
        • Getting the wording right can be tough if you're nervous. ;) Anyways, I updated my comment, struck out "representing" and added "being a user/editor of Heroes Wiki" and planning to post the interview here as requirements to what I consider an interview that is done "for" our site.--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:12, 12 February 2008 (EST)
          • Though somebody who is interviewing should strive for the "right" wording, of course, I don't think the exact wording matters so much during the actual interview (I know it's hard for me to always say exactly what I want to say when speaking) as it does in what's printed and published. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 08:19, 12 February 2008 (EST)

Writer's room

  • According to Tim, "...the actual room itself is divided into a couple of big giant boards. One has arcs that are for the whole season, and divided into each character and each storyline, another board is just the immediate breaking of two or three episodes and the third board is the breaking of just a single episode down to its details. Those boards are just covered with material all the time. We use both dry-erase and tackboards with cards on them. It is a very fluid system, cards can get pulled off and get re-worked and re-thought." I'm surprised it doesn't look like the string web in Isaac's loft by now! :) (Admin 01:41, 12 February 2008 (EST))
    • I would love to talk to the Bible guy. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:42, 12 February 2008 (EST)
      • When I saw his comment about the bible guy, I wanted to find out who he was and get him on here. :) (Admin 01:46, 12 February 2008 (EST))