In the 1980s, I was a big Star Trek fan. Not the kind who would dress up as Spock to attend a convention, but one who had seen all of the episodes multiple times and could rattle off an alarming number of quotes. A few weeks before the much-anticipated summer 1982 release of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, I heard a rumor that there was a trailer for the new Trek film attached to Conan the Barbarian at a local 2000-seat theater. I had planned to see Conan in the first place (I had to take my father, since I was under 17), but as I sat in my seat awaiting the start of the movie, I discovered that I was anticipating the Star Trek trailer more than the feature film. That was the first time I can recall thinking of a movie trailer as more than just an advertisement.
Trailers for "event movies" have always carried a little extra buzz, and, once the Internet started entering people's homes and broadband allowed quick downloads, movie trailers - even of non-event movies - became a big attraction. Back in its fledgling days, the E! Entertainment Channel had a 30-minute program called "Coming Attractions," which was wall-to-wall movie trailers.
Recently, studio executives have figured out how in-demand trailers for "event movies" are. This year, for the first time, they are exploiting them in a new way - advertising when they are going to be shown. This first happened for Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith. Fox widely advertised that the worldwide debut of the full trailer would be during an episode of the TV show, "The O.C." The ratings spike for the episode indicated that some people were watching not because they cared about the lives of the characters, but because they wanted to see two minutes of Anakin, Obi-Wan, and Palpatine. I missed the TV premiere, but caught the trailer a couple of days later before a showing of Robots.
From a practical perspective, Universal needs to do something to boost awareness of this film. Cineastes have known of its existence for a long time, but the general public remains largely unaware. There has been little in the way of publicity (unlike the last time a monster movie - Godzilla - was remade). Event movies such as King Kong need a long, big build-up. People have to make up their mind that this is something that needs to be seen. Maybe this scheduled, multi-channel airing will jump-start the countdown to Kong's latest romp. And, if you miss it on NBC tomorrow, you can always catch it before War of the Worlds, starting Wednesday.
Here is what was added to the encyclopedia for Version 7.0, which contains all the updates for Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith. NOTE - if you haven't seen the film yet, and want to remain spoiler-free, please don't look at this edition yet! added A Stab at the Heart (SW Databank)added Clone Wars cartoons, Volume 3added Clone Wars Adventures, Volume 1added Clone Wars Adventures, Volume 2added Dark Rendezvousadded Galactic Crisis!added Labyrinth of Eviladded The New Essential Guide to Weapons and Technologyadded Planet Hoppers - Byss and the Deep Coreadded Secrets of the Jediadded Star Pilotadded Star Wars: Empire - General Skywalker (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added Star Wars: Empire - Wreckage (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith Illustrated Screenplayadded Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith Novelizationadded Star Wars Episode III Incredible Cross-Sectionsadded Star Wars Episode III Visual Dictionaryadded Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided - Quick Reference Guideadded Star Wars Gamer magazine, issues 1 and 7 (thanks to mMathab for this one!)added Star Wars Insider magazine, issues 79 through 82added Star Wars: Republic - Dreadnaughts of Rendili (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added Star Wars: Republic - Trackdown (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added Star Wars Tales, issues 21 and 22 (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added Star Wars Trading Card Game - Revenge of the Sith expansionadded Unrest in the Senate (SW Databank)added information from the official Star Wars website (www.starwars.com)added information from the Wizards of the Coast Star Wars RPG websiteadded information from the Wizards of the Coast Star Wars Miniatures website (thanks Tim!)added more information from Reversal of Fortuneadded more information from Star Wars: Obsession (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added partial information from General Grievous (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added partial information from Star Wars: Empire - In the Shadows of Their Fathers (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)added partial information from Star Wars: Republic - The Siege of Saleucami (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)finalized information from A Hunter's Fate: Greedo's Talefinalized information from Star Wars: Empire - Idiot's Array (thanks to Lady Chiss for this one!)re-read Specter of the Past
I would like to call the attention of members of this project to the recently revised guideline at WP:FICT, which now states that all sub-articles on fictional subjects must independently meet a new (stricter) notability ruling than what was in place prior to the new guideline. If enforced, the new guideline would likely result in the deletion and/or merging of hundreds of articles on fictional subjects, such as fictional characters, television episodes, fictional locations, etc. There is active discussion / disagreement related to this issue at Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction), and in the interests of ensuring the topic is fully discussed by interested editors, I would invite members of this project to participate in that discussion (whether you agree with the new guideline or not). Fairsing 22:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At the risk of starting a minor edit war, I have removed the section from These Are the Voyages... listing the alleged inconsistencies between the recreation of the 1701-D in that episode and the original TNG episode. Another editor flagged the section last month as being unverified and unsourced and looking at it again 18 months after I first stated an objection to it on the episode's talk page, it truly is complete OR without sources. I have taken the be bold approach and deleted it from the article and moved the content to the talk page. If someone can provide a published review or article that states this info then I have no objection to it going back in, but as it stands now -- given the fanbase's dislike for the episode and Enterprise in general -- it violates WP:NPOV. 23skidoo (talk) 20:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Some of you may be aware of the growing and nearly out of control deletion attempts by users supposedly enforcing the Wikipedia policty on notability. In fact, many are abusing it to get their way. Most trek articles have been through the notability wringer already and many were canned, so far the episode articles have survived. Now, however, in another wave of deletionism, the "notability policy" has been the latest weapon of choice, and this person, Fasach Nua, is trying to delete scene images from the Star Trek episode articles, starting with first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation, saying they violate Rule #8 under the fair use policy which deals with notability. They are specific scene clips from each episode the articles are about and are therefore notable to that article. An image from the episode is allowed under the fair use rules as long as proper fair use tags have been given - in which case they have been. Each article can have ONE image.
So I ask that if you appreciate the integrity of episode articles, to please defend in keeping a notable scene clip with each of them, (because God forbid, we have anything else but stark black and white text to look at when we read the article). If these deletionists win their crusade, this place will soon be devoid of anything pop-culture. Televison shows, music, movies, comic books and video games will all be ousted, and you'll have nothing but articles on math, science and dead people who no one really cares about. Please voice an opinion under the trek images currently proposed for deletion such as ST-TNG_The_Neutral_Zone.jpg where I voiced my concerns. Cyberia23 (talk) 18:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The BS I see is calling harmless inclusion of a screenshot as "damaging Wikipedia". These episode articles have been on here for a long time now and I've seen attempt after attempt at ridding this place of them and other TV show epsiodes, saying their "uncyclopedic", they're "non-notable", it's "niche fanboy crap no one else cares about", and - well since they're all still here! Everytime someone higher up apparently overrules their deletion requests and allows them to stay. Therefore these continued attacks on them are getting old. Seems like now, if you can't kill the articles outright - destroy them in small doses. They started with eliminating trivia sections, then trying to cut the plot sections out and limit them to only a few sentences, now lets go for the images, one by one. Its just the latest attempt to rid the site of episode articles and I'm getting really sick of it.
Just as an FYI, Talk:Guess What's Coming to Dinner? (an episode from the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica series) has a tag up challenging its notability. When I checked to see the rationale, they basically took the position that episode guides in general are inappropriate. So presumably if they can get this one deleted then they will attempt to delete more episodes of more shows. I'm not in any science fiction wikiprojects atm but I thought that this was something that people should be aware of. Wellspring (talk) 13:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply] 2b1af7f3a8