Talk:List of Babylon 5 episodes

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Babylon 5 / Episode coverage Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Babylon 5 task force. This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Could someone please add a note somewhere explaining what the double asterisk (**) for 4 episodes in season 2 means? The double asterisk in the episode/movie chronology section near the top is explained, but does not apply in the section devoted to season 2. Is this referring to the "improved episode" as referenced below? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.185.102.168 (talk) 18:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone clarify what this is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.145.251.34 (talk) 19:03, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody on purpose mixed up the production code, mostly interchanging the production code of one number with 1 less, probably so that if you download a pirated copy of Babylon 5 episodes according to this guide, you get the wrong one. I've rectified it for Season 1, 2 and 5, Season 3 & 4 seem to be unaffected, but the biggest mess was in Season 1 and Season 5. Please lock this article, so TimeWarner employees cannot change it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.84.21.77 (talk • contribs)

Have reverted this, you seem to be unaware of what production codes are, they are not the episode order, these episodes were produced/broadcasted out of order. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 08:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm begging for a beating by asking this here, but: as a user of wikipedia, I think the "One article per each episode" is sort of overwhelming. I don't like it for a few reasons.:

• It clutters up the namespace (example: while searching for "The Summoning", the video game, I end up at "The Summoning", the Bab5 episode. Given the huge number of episodes, that's significant.
• Each individual article doesn't contain all that much data, but has lots of metadata.
• The entire project is completely duplicative of The Lurker's Guide. If this was on a Bab5 wiki it would make sense, but I think it's a hell of a lot of overhead to jam into a general-purpose encyclopedia.

Am I entirely alone in this, or are there other people who think that this might be overdoing it a bit? If there's consensus on this, I'd like to propose the following:

1. Change all wikilinks in List of Babylon 5 episodes to point to their corresponding Lurker's Guide entries.
2. Mass delete all of the wikilinked per-episode articles, perhaps making an exception for the pilot movie.

Thoughts? I also cross-posted this proposal over on Talk:Babylon 5. Nandesuka 19:08, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry for the late reply, I only saw this today... I'd have to say that I totally disagree with changing wikilinks to point off Wikipedia because since there is no original research on Wikipedia everything here is already out there somewhere. The point of Wikipedia is collate useful information here rather than simply point people elsewhere. That said, I also don't think it's particular useful to have one article for each episode. What I think would be best is to organise the episodes into omnibus articles (as per WP:FICT) for each season, rather like they have for Lost season 1 episode guide then put the Lurkers guide in as an external link at the end. -- Lochaber 13:46, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• My thoughts: Many (or most) major TV series have an article for each episode. It seems a bit inconsistent to delete the entire B5 articles, especially as B5 is notable as a landmark series. Some of the episodes are highly notable, some having beaten major film productions to win Hugo Awards.
• Additionally, as B5 made a major contribution, not just to science fiction, but to the entire genre of television drama as a whole, as a major pioneer of arc-driven overarching storylines, it could very well be argued that having individual articles is a good way (or even a necessary way) to show this.
• Rather than delete, I think we should work on slowly recreating or restoring them (archive.org) as Stub articles and mark them with improvement templates, and deleting any un-encyclopedic content. The aim of Wikipedia is to be a repository of human knowledge, so I feel we should aim for improvement, rather than deletion. Stub articles are okay on Wikipedia. I suggest that these be restored, with real-world content being added, with good sources being DVD commentaries, interviews, and the "jms speaks" sections of http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/ etc, as these are Straczynski speaking himself. While DVD commentaries are not available for all episodes, some of the comments are applicable to multiple episodes. Fan sites by individuals (especially those adding rather fictional information) aren't usually helpful.
• I know the conflict of page names issue is annoying. If I understand correctly this ought to be fixed via renaming e.g. "Chrysalis (Babylon 5 episode)", especially for titles which are commonly used words or phrases (e.g. chrysalis, knives, endgame etc); or via use of disambiguation pages, rather than by deletion.
• Whilst a Wikipedia plot summary ought not simply duplicate one published elsewhere, it would be expected that Wikipedia would duplicate much information published in the Lurker's guide, such as J. Michael Straczynski's comments in the "jms speaks" sections, as these are aggregations of his statements from several different places. As it was made in the 90s, there wasn't as much published real-world information as recent TV series, so we can only do what we can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fh1 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• hello, first i find it sad that the episodes pages have been removed, but links still exist and return one to the listings page. second, if b5 loses it's per-episode-pages then this needs to happen to other series as well! start with Game of Thrones!

--2003:C1:C705:9100:246C:19A1:3BD8:AA1B (talk) 13:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the first season episode list to a style in fitting with other episode lists on wikipedia. Unless anyone has any serious objections, I'll continue with it when I have some more time.--Warpfactor 11:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I've done up the season 2 list in the same style. Additionally, I added different coloured lines to each season, based on the DVD colour schemes. But if you want to redo the episode descriptions, I'll understand. -- Bronzethumb (talk) 11:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't it be mentioned that there exists another order which actually improves it? The Lurker's Guide assembled it based on JMS's posts on the Internet. 81.182.236.91 (talk) 15:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused as it is, that when the article tells me that some episodes in Season 2 have been broadcast in the wrong order (even JMS confirms it) that the episode order isn't fixed. --IvoPalli (talk) 08:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. The table lists the episodes in the order in which they aired, while the note in the lead mentions that the original airing sequence for a couple of episodes isn't the intended chronological sequence. Where's the confusion? DonIago (talk) 16:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the practical use of have a list of episodes in the aired sequence instead of having them in the sequence in the way they were meant to be viewed? --2A02:A443:875D:1:9DF9:472:2B18:31FC (talk) 11:34, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that goes back to the fundamental question of whether one believes it's more important to present the episodes in the order in which they were actually aired, the order in which they were originally produced, or the order in which the showrunner intended for them to be seen. This is a perennial problem with Futurama episodes, as editors frequently edit them to list the episodes' airing order rather than production order.

I would suggest that the airing order be retained but the bit about them being out of sequence with JMS's recommended order be included as a footnote rather than in a bit of prose that's completely separate from the episode listing. DonIago (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it that there doesn't seem to be one?

• The short answer is simple: There is. It is merely called 502 rather than 501. The long answer is hard to explain: The episode now known as 523 was originally produced as 422. However, when the fifth season was greenlighted, a "new" 422 had to be written and produced. This left one too many episodes. Apparently the original 422 got pushed to 501, couldn't stay there, but once the first episode of the fifth season had to be numbered for production reasons, became 502. The old 501 became 523, as it *has* to go last (and JMS admits in DVD commentary he did not finish post-production on 523 for emotional reasons until the last possible moment prior to air). (Man, somebody clean up my explanation so it makes sense.) (Also, the episode shuffling is explained in note 1 in the article.) --Aladdin Sane (talk) 21:22, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here in the UK, with the exception of S5, each season of B5 ran straight through at one episode per week, so, for each of the first three seasons, the season finale (and some preceding episodes) aired here in the UK before the date listed as the original air date. S4 started late enough in the year to finish after the US, and S5 had a 5-month gap between episodes 17 and 18 over here to avoid overtaking.

Should there be some indication on the page that it's factually inaccurate?

Rmsgrey (talk) 12:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of Babylon 5 episodes. 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:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/tv/soap_opera_babylon_000317.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: 5 June 2024).

• 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} 01:32, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The episode "In the Kingdom of the Blind" is already among those listed here. There is not that much info in the "In the Kingdom of the Blind" article and it could either be merged or a redirect. Mannanan51 (talk) 03:42, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support unless that article can be bulked up with real-world information other than mere reviews. DonIago (talk) 04:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, along with "Phoenix Rising (Babylon 5)" which had even less content. – Fayenatic London 21:21, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Babylon 5 episodes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070420190701/http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/tv/soap_opera_babylon_000317.html to http://www.space.com/sciencefiction/tv/soap_opera_babylon_000317.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:37, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The link to this episode's page redirects back to the link despite the page briefly appearing on-screen. Could someone fix this please? Thanks in advance Gowt (talk) 04:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you'd like changed. The episode article was redirected after a move discussion and because the page for the article contained no substantive content. If you'd like there to be an article for the episode, you can go to the article and add substantive content in place of the redirect (though I'd recommend having others review it before doing so). Alternately, you could unlike the article from the list, since as you noted it's currently a circular link. DonIago (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Babylon 5: The Gathering, Babylon 5: The Legend of the Rangers, and Babylon 5: The Lost Tales are on this page. Shouldn't Babylon 5: In the Beginning, Babylon 5: Thirdspace, and Babylon 5: The River of Souls also be added? Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (talk) 09:02, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thirdspace does appear, but it's listed under season five. Not sure what's going on with this listing, honestly. I think all of the films should be listed, but probably outside the flow of the episodes (in other words, we shouldn't be listing things "chronologically"). DonIago (talk) 13:31, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All the movies are listed on this page. They were in a separate section until last May, when they were moved into the episodes section. - Eureka Lott 15:09, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@EurekaLott and Doniago: thank you for your responses. Even though the films may be connected to certain seasons, they should not be included in the season sections. They should all, except for maybe The Gathering (since it is the pilot film), be moved into a separate film section. Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (talk) 16:21, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TVBuff90: as the editor who merged the films into the episode list, would you like to weigh in on this? My feeling is that this list should reflect an out-of-universe perspective (though perhaps with appropriate and sourced notes as to where the films may fit in-universe). In any event, merging the films with the standard episodes in airdate order seems very unintuitive to me. DonIago (talk) 05:00, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Doniago: I agree with your comment/question to User:TVBuff90. As I have noticed on other franchise pages, the films are not usually included with the season sections, unless very closely connected. Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (talk) 14:00, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Given that they're not responding but also aren't inactive, you have my blessing to break the films out. DonIago (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Applied the changes to the way it was suggested in the above discussion, but never done for some reason. Note, this isn't like Battlestar Galactica: Razor, where the Movie was produced as part of the season. These were separate productions, even though they were concurrently released with Season 5. I'd keep The Gathering separate, because it was the pilot and not a spin-off like the others, even though it was technically also a TV-movie (the heading can be changed, but I didn't have a good idea). furthermore I don't now the production code for The Legend of Rangers and think it should either be added or the codes should be completely left out. Any help would be great. Have a nice day, stay healthy.2003:E0:6F25:1249:99C8:A9AB:F6E:2CE1 (talk) 06:57, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think The Road Home shouldn't be listed as a TV movie. While technically it's not a "DVD", I think it's still closer to The Lost Tales in categorization than to the TNT TV specials and TV pilots. Suggestion: change the title "Babylon 5: The Lost Tales" to "Direct-to-video films" and move The Road Home from Television films list to the Direct-to-video films list. Also, I think the two Voices in the Dark stories should be merged into one row. 80.98.191.91 (talk) 13:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another option would be to rename "Television films" to simply "Films", and perhaps update the descriptions of the films that were made for television accordingly. As it is, I agree that it's misleading to have Road Home under "Television films" as it wasn't made for television.

I don't think I have a strong opinion at this time as to whether the two "Voices in the Dark" stories should be consolidated. DonIago (talk) 13:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Made the boldest version of merging things for everyone to see how it looks and see how much of it should stay. Sorry it's ugly, I'm not very good at this. I also added the episode titles to the pilot movies since this article is an episode list. Seemed the right thing to do. I hope this made it more better than worse. :)

I had the idea that maybe a column should be added named "Distribution" that could have values like "TV special" or "direct-to-video". 80.98.191.91 (talk) 13:15, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]