Talk:Eve (Angel)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


why is Angel referred to as a 'cult' show?

Possible answer: There are a lot of demonic cults seen in the show. But seriously, it's fan base is much greater than its ratings would suggest, and it produced lots of spinoff merchandise. I'd say that makes it a cult series.


Shouldn't Eve's status be "Presumed dead"? The fact she was in the building when it was falling apart with no clear intention of leaving and no longer had her immortality suggests something bad happened to her.-- 17:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:EvePromo.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:EvePromo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Children of the Senior Partners[edit]

In the description, she is referred to as a "Child of the Senior Partners", which is a link to a page that redirects to a supposed subsection of Wolfram & Hart, which does not contain any information about these "Children of the Senior Partners". The Senior Partners page does not contain any reference to these either. What should be done about this link? I think that even a red link would be more useful than this pointless redirect, because it would at least mean that clicking it would not give one further information on the subject, which the link currently suggests it does. I'm kind of new at wiki editing and policy and whatnot, which is why I haven't just done anything myself yet. If anyone could take care of this, that'd be great. Thanks! (talk) 03:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)