Jump to content

Talk:Alien (franchise)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 212.122.206.18 (talk) at 11:02, 17 June 2017 (→Board game from Poland (1988): new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Just as a reminder about continuity/canon

For the first time in a year, we've had a wave of edits by a single editor attempting to state that Prometheus and Alien: Covenant are of a separate canon and that Alien belongs to a shared universe. As a reminder, 20th Century Fox has clarified that Prometheus and Alien: Covenant are components of what the studio has dubbed the "Alien Prequel Series", which leads directly into the original film and negates AvP. Therefore, there are currently six films that comprise this series and AvP is a separate crossover beast with its own separate canon from Alien continuity and the Predator continuity. I'm aware this was a cause for confusion after Prometheus was released and before Alien: Covenant was announced, as we had no idea in hell was Prometheus was, but that's not the case anymore. We have this discussion in the archives, but I'm leaving this here again, in case there is any further confusion in the foreseeable future. DARTHBOTTO talk•cont 05:31, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Skerrit didn't play Ripley! 50.136.186.91 (talk) 15:18, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This page only says that Ripley was originally supposed to be a male character, played by him. DARTHBOTTO talk•cont 08:33, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Storyline chronology

This "Storyline chronology" only includes recent works, why? It includes the films but only a handful of video games and novels, why not all? Are they part of a new canon that negates everything made prior the release of Prometheus à la Star Wars when its expanded universe what rebooted in 2013? If so, does anyone have a source detailing all this? Klow (talk) 10:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Future

There has been several editors that have retitled sections on this page with way too many words for a heading, and have also speculated on certain things. Specifically, the section regarding Blomkamp's cancelled Alien film needs only to be titled Cancelled sequel as it was intended to be a sequel to the original quadrilogy. Secondly though Scott has stated that there is an Alien: Awakening film in development, he has since stated that Blomkamp's film was going to be Alien: Awakening. It would seem that there is simply confusion as to what is going on here. Whether it's that Blomkamp's film was supposed to enter production after Alien: Covenant (which Ridley had said before), or the films have similar titles -- we don't know the answer. To speculate that the films are re-purposed versions of each other is completely incorrect and needn't be done on this page. Unless you have a source that states such, we need to wait until further information regarding this topic comes out. User:Nurseline247 where's your source?--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 13:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Covenant tie-in shorts

Why are the Alien:Covenant tie-in shorts (crew messages, last supper, etc) covered in this article instead of in Alien: Covenant ? They are companion films to that film, so should be in that article -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 10:12, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Split shorts and merge into the film articles

I propose that

  • the Prometheus tie-in shorts be split away from this article merged into Prometheus (2012 film)
  • the Covenant tie-in shorts be split away from this article and merged into Alien: Covenant

Afterwards, very small summaries (such as one sentence ones) can remain here indicating the shorts exist.

These shorts are primarily associated with the films they are companion pieces to, so should be documented in those film articles, since they are part of their marketing, and extras. Thus they should primarily be covered in their associated film articles, and not the main franchise article, just the same as how the films are primarily covered in their own articles, and not here, where only short summaries of the films exist. -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 02:29, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • Support I am the nominator -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 02:27, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is a franchise article and therefore it is rather fitting that it would mention all aspects of the franchise, the fact that they are advertisments does not really matter nor that they are associated with specific films, they not part of the released theatrical product. The Prometheus article is already very very long and a featured article, there is little here worth splitting there. I do think that it would be good if the Covenant article mentioned the shorts more though.★Trekker (talk) 03:59, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As stated, by ★Trekker, this is a franchise article - not merely for films, "all aspects of the franchise". There are way too many shorts. Nurseline247 (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for Prometheus Pointless. The shorts are already covered in the Marketing section of the Prometheus article. DrKay (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:
This doesn't need splitting it needs removing. If I'm reading these right they're just adverts or promo materials. It needs to be summarised HEAVILY under a marketing section in the respective articles IF notable. The TED talk is alreayd covered at Prometheus, the Shaw asking for funding from Weyland video is not notable, it's just marketing material. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 17:00, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That is the point, it is marketing for the individual films, so should appear in the film articles. Splitting and merging does not mean a complete verbatim move, it means splitting the material from here, and merging whatever is needed there. That does not mean a verbatim copy. What you propose is the same as this proposal, just with with restrictions on how the merge is done. -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 05:30, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The major marketing is already covered in Prometheus. The minor videos are no different than normal trailers and don't need mentioning per WP:TRAILER, so just delete them. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 09:38, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea why the fact that something is short or used for marketing should matter. It seems like a rather dubious and biased distinction to make.★Trekker (talk) 08:27, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2017

Alien Covenant Now Has 288 Reviews 207.172.180.75 (talk) 01:20, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. —KuyaBriBriTalk 02:42, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Board game from Poland (1988)

There was a game in communist Poland [1] --212.122.206.18 (talk) 11:02, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alien_(franchise)&oldid=786117480"