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.

Template talk:Nextepisode

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Spoilers

Is this summary of Godsend too spoilerish? I don't really mind it personally, but having it on the front page might be a bit much. Maybe it just needs a quick spoiler warning? - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:51, 9 January 2007 (EST)

Seeing as how it came from tvguide.com and is basically in the press, I wouldn't put the spoiler warning on it. We haven't had one before. ---- Ohmyn0.jpgOhmyn0talk.jpg 00:02, 10 January 2007 (EST)

I know we haven't had one before, but just because it's in the press doesn't mean it's common knowledge. We just need to be mindful of people that want to avoid spoilers. 'Sides, it's still pretty up front and center, and a spoiler warning doesn't hurt. :) - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 07:35, 11 January 2007 (EST)
Well, is we took "new hero" and linked it to Claude, that would justify the spoiler warning. --Orne 08:31, 11 January 2007 (EST)
I raise the same concerns about the Main Page "Next on Heroes" box here. -- DTM 16:09, 18 January 2007 (EST)

.07%

Can we be sure this is the confirmed name of the next episode? Heroe 21:59, 10 March 2007 (EST)

  • It was printed in Entertainment Weekly, but there's no harm in waiting until we hear something more official. BTW, IMDb is still calling it simply .07 (without the percent).... but they're about as reliable as NBC. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:57, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Screwy spacing

Well, I tried to the best of my knowledge to fix the spacing for this page. The height seems to be getting screwed up. Can somebody fix it please? Much obliged! — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 06:55, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

  • It's still showing up the same for me. I know each browser is different, but on mine, there's unneeded space between "For spoilers about upcoming episodes, see" and "upcoming episodes or .07%" as though it were double-spaced or something. Hmmm. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:13, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
    • On mine, there's much less space with it in the same row than on a separate row. (With a separate row, you've got the table padding and spacing to deal with as well.) The problem with small text is that it doesn't affect line-height.--Hardvice (talk) 11:33, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
      • Thanks, it was the line-height style change I was seeking. It looks fine on mine, now ... I don't think it's messing anybody else's up, but if it does, let me know. Thanks, hv. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
        • Looks unchanged on mine.--Hardvice (talk) 14:10, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
          • Well, then, I guess we're good. Thanks for your help. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 14:56, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Where does rerun info go?

Where should we put the upcoming info about reruns? It doesn't really belong on Spoiler:Upcoming Episodes, does it?--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:43, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

  • The "Next on Heroes" section has never been assigned a formal role, other than simply announcing upcoming episodes. Lately (this summer) it's been used to alert everybody to upcoming graphic novels, and has had a long-standing countdown to Season Two's commencement. I think rerun information is fine to keep in that spot, too (and marathon showings, like the few they've had on SciFi), but I don't think we need to list the next three or four. I also wouldn't put a link to a talk page on the main page. Instead, I would just update the template after the rerun airs, putting the information for just the next one scheduled. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:51, 12 August 2007 (EDT)
    • I guess I'll add this info. as a user subpage, then, since making it a regular article would probably be overkill.--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:31, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

Re-run info

I've made a user subpage for this info.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:49, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

  • It looks good, very professional. Incidentally, tomorrow's rerun is the first instance of a rerun (that I know of) that wasn't part of a marathon. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:44, 12 August 2007 (EDT)
    • Have there been other re-runs on NBC? As far as I know, the only other re-runs have been on Sci-fi making this to be the first ever NBC (USA) re-run of Heroes.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:17, 12 August 2007 (EDT)
      • No, back in the beginning of the series, NBC hosted a marathon of all their episodes. It was somewhere around Collision or Hiros, I believe--in fact it was probably between those two because they were heavily promoting the Save the Cheerleader, Save the World tag, and I vividly remember the shot of Nathan flying away from Bennet as part of the upcoming episodes teaser. On a personal note, I had never seen Heroes until that marathon, which is why I had never seen Genesis, because they were still mucked up in the legalities of the Emerson lawsuit. (I've since watched the episode numerous times on NBC.com and SciFi, for those who care). -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2007 (EDT)
        • I think you're right. I had forgotten that in the beginning, they did a brief marathon of re-runs (like 2-3 episodes on a Saturday).--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:49, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

Count Down

I figured CURRENTDAY and CURRENTHOUR wouldn't work but hoped LOCALDAY and LOCALHOUR would. Is there a way to get a users time? -Lөvөl 16:34, 18 September 2007 (EDT)

  • Not reliably, no. If we still want a countdown at this point I'd say make it to the day rather than down to the hour. Though at this point we're so close to the Season Two premiere that I personally don't even see a need for a countdown. (Admin 16:37, 18 September 2007 (EDT))
    • It was a fun idea, but I don't know a way to do it feasibly. {{#expr: 20-{{LOCALHOUR}}}} returns -1 after 9 pm. I think the Sept 24 date is probably enough. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
      • Is it just negative hours you are having trouble with? If so, try something like {{#if: {{#expr: 20-{{LOCALHOUR}}}} < 0 | {{#expr: -1*{{LOCALHOUR}}} | {{LOCALHOUR}} }} hours. However, that's only going to be valid in the USA--The show doesn't come on at 9PM, Sept. 24th in Europe and Asia. That's why using {{#time: U}} for the total seconds since 1970 is a better way to go. Just subtract the current # of seconds from the # of seconds Monday at 9PM EDT (1190678400) to define CURSECONDS. Then, divide CURSECONDS variable by 86400 for total # of days, and use (CURSECONDS mod 86400) / 3600 to get the hours.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
        • It won't work. LOCALHOUR is based on the local time of the wiki, Eastern Time. There's no way to get a countdown that's accurate across the US because the countdown depends on your timezone. If I'm in Eastern Time then someone in California for instance won't see the episode until 3 hours later than I do because they show it at 9pm local time in each place. It doesn't air across the US simultaneously so there's no way to have an accurate countdown. (Admin 21:38, 18 September 2007 (EDT))
          • Yeah, but you can have an accurate countdown until the East Coast showing, which is first. Isn't that better than no countdown at all?--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:47, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
            • Personally, I don't think any countdown is necessary. ...and it's easy for us to vote for an east coast countdown since we're both out on the east coast. ;) Let's just leave it as is and appeal to the least common denominator. (Admin 21:49, 18 September 2007 (EDT))
              • Ok, though if we were appealing to the least common denominator, we shouldn't list the date it airs on NBC at all. Just in case we decide to use hours for a future countdown, I think the trick would be to find out where the offset is stored in a user's preferences, reference it and add three hours to the countdown for people using rocky mountain or pacific time.--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:50, 18 September 2007 (EDT)

New premier date

Here is the Entertainment weekly article. --SacValleyDweller (talk) 10:51, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

  • Sept. 15th? Are you shitting me? That's way too far away. AAAAARGH.--Piemanmoo 15:01, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
    • When was it announced that the premiere is actually two episodes and not one? I haven't read this anywhere.--Bob (talk) 15:14, 15 September 2008 (EDT)

Episode teasers

I noticed that during the previous seasons, this template included the official press release for the upcoming episode. Due to this, I added the press release for the season three premiere, but I'm not sure I like it; it's *huge* and edits (other than the removal of actor names and the introtext, which is already done) doesn't seem right, since it's official material. Thoughts? Pierre 16:19, 15 September 2008 (EDT)

  • I kind of like how it is right now, personally. A link to the episode name is enough for me, and if they want the press release, they can view the spoiler page. Everything's available how it is now, and it's still small.--Bob (talk) 18:05, 15 September 2008 (EDT)

NBC summary

I know we've often included the episode summary on this template, but I removed it. Personally, I don't really mind one way or the other, but I'm trying to look out for those who avoid spoilers. Placing the summary of an upcoming episode on the main page is really placing spoilers on the main page, no matter how you slice it. Sure, we've done a spoiler warning before, but that still doesn't help those who have already seen the info they were avoiding. There are other reasons to remove it too--I think the main page tends to get a bit busy, and anything to trim it down is a good idea. I also think it's smart for us to simply link to the episode page and let people read the summary there if they want--that way we draw more people past the main page, theoretically. Again, I don't really care too much for me personally, I just want to make sure that we're thinking of casual visitors who might not have the basic summary of the next episode as common knowledge, and that we're thinking of spoilerphobes who really try to avoid spoilers at all costs. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:13, 15 September 2008 (EDT)

  • I went ahead and used TV Guide's. We used them for the last two seasons, and I think we should continue that. They don't reveal too much, they're short and they're accurate. Anyone against this?--Bob (talk) 20:14, 15 September 2008 (EDT)
    • I would still prefer nothing, but like I said, it doesn't really matter too much to me personally. (By the way, sorry for adding an extra section--I didn't see the previous conversation...) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:21, 15 September 2008 (EDT)
    • Actually, why don't we use the first part (the ALL CAPS, or the italics) of the NBC summary: "Volume 3: Villains makes a two-hour special debut with revelations that will redefine familiar characters and shake the series to its core." I still don't think anything is needed, but at least this one is simpler and even less revealing. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:31, 15 September 2008 (EDT)
      • I think as the season goes on and we know what the plot is, it helps to have the small synopsis because it covers multiple story lines, whereas the all-caps stuff covers one "big" plot point. I like the TV Guide one, I think Ryan, you're the one who included them waaaay back when.--Bob (talk) 21:33, 15 September 2008 (EDT)
        • Yeah, that's possible... In the end, I don't really care. I guess I'm just bringing up the issue in case anybody else does who might be avoiding spoilers or something like that... -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:06, 15 September 2008 (EDT)
          • You always were the uncaring considerate one. --Bob (talk) 23:00, 15 September 2008 (EDT)
          • Spoilerphobe piping up here. Leave any summary of upcoming eps off of the main page, please. Thank you! --SacValleyDweller (talk) 01:20, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
            • I don't recall any complaints about this for the last two seasons. Have you read what TV Guide has listed? It's completely unrevealing about details, but gives you a rough idea of what the hell is going to happen. It's no more revealing than any promo that's aired already, nor is it any more than the "next on Heroes" segment that airs right after each episode. That's why I like TV Guide's and not NBC's.--Bob (talk) 01:37, 16 September 2008 (EDT)
              • Well - people change their minds, and new users should be able to express their comments as well, right? ;) Personally, I would like to see the summary gone from the main page; since there is users not wanting it there, since we have the spoiler rules, and since the same information is given (albeit in full lenght) one click away. Pierre 06:53, 16 September 2008 (EDT)

Destiny webisodes

According to Citizen's post at 9th Wonders!, the Destiny webisodes will be "Capture", "Escape", "Intervention", and "Let Us Pray". He doesn't list a source, though, so I'm not sure if that's correct and/or it's the right order.--MiamiVolts (talk) 13:35, 7 November 2008 (EST)

  • According to IMDb, the order is Let Us Pray, Intervention, Capture, and Escape...but it also lists them all as being released on Monday November 10, which I doubt. We probably don't need to have the subtitle on there, especially since it's not definite, so I'll remove it. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:45, 7 November 2008 (EST)
    • Citizen just informed me his source is SpoilerTV, but that's not an official source either, so I think it's okay not to add a subtitle just yet.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:47, 7 November 2008 (EST)

Being too picky?

Pardon me for asking, but shouldn't this say something along the lines of: "The next graphic novel was scheduled to be released on May 24, 2010. However, at this time it has not been released." I feel that since the show has been canceled, that we shouldn't expect anything to be updated until we know if the show is going to get a wrap up or not. Am I being too picky? --Persephone 17:43, 25 May 2010 (EDT)