Jump to content

Talk:Power Rangers/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Suit

A Power Ranger is a fictional individual who "Morphs" from an unpowered form into a powerful superhero usually wearing a brightly colored battle suit usually made of spandex featuring a helmet with an opaque visor.[3]

"Opacity is the state of being impenetrable to light." <but light has to be able to pass though their visor otherwise it is useless so maybe thats not the best description for their visor's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peachey88 (talk • contribs) 12:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

"...featuring a visored helmet, which protects the wearer from injury as well as shielding their identity from others." Smoked visor works, too, since very few of the visors are ever mirrored. Howa0082 (talk) 22:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Foot soldier biographys

In the villain list articles, i wish to add biography sections of the foot soldiers (such as Putties, Z Putties, Cogs. etc...) to each of the villain list articles. Mythdon (talk) 23:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not all that necessary, and the article on such characters was deleted. All of them have minions like that, but we don't really need to say more than what they were called, I think.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
But what if somebody is curious of more about what they are. Mythdon (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Not everything needs to be added to Wikipedia because people are curious. Arrowned (talk) 00:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion nominations

I have nominated two Power Rangers foot soldier articles for deletion. The deletion nomination is here. Mythdon (talk) 05:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

This belongs in a new section aaaaand over at WP:TOKU.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Seasons: Bulleted lists vs tables

I believe that the tabular list at the "Season" section is unencyclopedic as it does not explain much and only explains the name of the seasons, the year the seasons aired and the Sentai the seasons are adapted from. I know tables is basic among season listing, but in the case of Power Rangers i think it is totally unencyclopedic. Mythdon (talk) 04:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I kinda agree but I'd rather they explained the plot in a summary beside the titles. 121.96.126.81 (talk) 05:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Episodes that need to be deleted

The following episodes have articles but are not notable enough to have articles.

What do you think about this. If there are no further suggestions within the next 2 weeks, i will try to request they be deleted. Mythdon (talk) 04:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

That is decided by the community at large. If someone finds it and thinks it should be deleted, then so be it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Then i will request there deletion quickly at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Mythdon (talk) 07:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello there. For a year now, the section "Power Rangers in popular culture" has not been here and why?. Can i remake the section?. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mythdon (talk • contribs) 04:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Where did this come from?

Im wondering, where did the terms "Other Ranger" and "Ranger-Like Ally" come from?. Mythdon (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Arbitrary names.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
What do you mean by "Arbitrary names"?. Mythdon (talk) 03:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
No name was ever given for the group, so one was made up.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Wasn't there one page in Wikipedias policys/guidelines that said Wikipedia is not a place to coin terms. Mythdon (talk) 03:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The term wasn't coined on Wikipedia. It is just used when there is no term to use for them.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Improvement suggestion

There should be a separate article entitled just Power ranger to deal with what a power ranger is, and the "color distribution" while this existing article should be solely about production/development (show stuff) of the series. And short paragraphs to summarize the plots of each titled season should be included in this article with links to each season's main article, like how most other media series' articles are formatted

Just a thought for improvement, Islandtimes (talk) 06:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Pages moved

The following pages i have moved.

What is your opinions?. Mythdon (talk) 08:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Was there ever a name for the group of villains in Operation Overdrive? If not, it should probably be moved back.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay. And no, there was no name for the group of villains in Power Rangers Operation Overdrive. Mythdon (talk) 08:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Crew member template created

Just so you know, i created a template called Template:Powerrangers-crewmembers. Is it okay to stay?. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mythdon (talk • contribs) 02:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I really don't see it as having much of a use where a category (or simply the category) would work.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I can see that becoming overflowed very quickly. El Greco(talk) 01:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I have just created a list called List of Power Rangers crew members. Is this list useful?. Mythdon (talk) 22:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Question regarding exclusion of JF White/Violet from Colors table

I saw the summary for the recent edit removing the change I had made to the colors table. I'm curious as to why information that is verifiable is being excluded at the moment. I've done edits for similar situations (see my discussions in List of songs in Rock Band for an example) and the practice has always been to present the information once it's verified. TRTX (talk) 05:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, we do have the verifiable information, but right now we can't tell what will come first with the amount of characters added in the toy lines. We also don't have the actual names. We just have colors, which would make the footnotes for the section lacking.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Understandable. From the press release it mentions Wolf and Rhino Ranger, and includes a picture of the core team plus a purple and white Ranger. So we know that those two colors appear, and that two new Rangers appear. I suppose (looking solely at PR) we have no official confirmation that White isn't Wolf save for the appearance of the character. I'm not familiar with the "tradition" of the Toku Project, so I don't know if Sentai material (at least when it comes to mech, and Rangers) can verify PR content. TRTX (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Generally the Sentai can't verify PR in the case that the US team may not decide to do the same thing as the original, which is admittedly rare for major items (near impossibly rare on the mecha side), but has happened before nonetheless. Arrowned (talk) 19:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
That's what I was thinking. The last question I have is a combined one from here and in the existing JF page. Currently there's no mention of the RJ character's future as the Wolf Ranger. Or of his friend Dominic being the Rhino Ranger. This is again in the press release I linked to in the article. I understand that wiki has certain guidelines in regard to future information, however it would be beneficial to include a reference to these upcoming events.
As far as the footnote is concerned for the table. Would an adequeate footnote be something such as "Two new Rangers (purple and white) will be added later in the season." with a reference to the press release? (The one with the photo included). Similar reference could be included for RJ ("will become the Wolf Ranger later in the season") and Dominic ("RJ's friend, and future Rhino Ranger, who will join the cast later in the season.") These are paraphrased of course. I can also bring this up in the JF article if that is more appropriate. TRTX (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I see another editor attempted to add the check boxes for Rhino and Wolf, and was again reverted with no reason other than "No". I've yet to hear a good reason as to why they are not verified. They were in the Press Release. That is as concrete and verified as one can get. TRTX (talk) 12:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I think I've been fairly patient on this issue, and it appears that even with the "regular" editors stopping in for other changes and discussion this question is being passed up. So I'm taking WP's advice to be bold and am going ahead with the change. I've properly cited my source via WP:V. This is not based on the Sentai, but rather an official press release, which is as much proof as is needed. Also, there's no need to wait for the characters to appear, as the article is not about the order in which they joined. It's also no concern that they haven't arrived yet under WP:Spoiler, and I feel trying to withhold the information is in violation of neutrality. I respect the work that's been done on these articles, but I see readily available information missing and have added it in. TRTX (talk) 19:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Does the press release say what color the Wolf and Rhino Rangers are going to be? If not, then it's wrong to assume that they're "Other" or any specific color, just because that's what happened in the source footage (it's unlikely that they'll change the colors, but it's still original research to base it off of your own knowledge). Until they show up in the series, it's best to leave them off, because it's still not known if the three extra Rangers in the toys are going to show up at all in the series. Leave any sort of check mark off until they have their episode.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:41, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
"Just like the Super Sentai series that Power Rangers is based off of, the color palette of a Power Ranger team has varied greatly throughout the years." Sounds to me like the table is simply a tally of colors to appear in the series. This demonstrated by the inclusion of Omega as a White Ranger (rather than other) and Samurai Ranger as green. Since one of the new Rangers is white, a check box in white is appropriate. Since the other is purple, and there is no purple, that would be other. TRTX (talk) 22:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
It was the Green Samurai Ranger, and there shouldn't be a checkmark for the Omega Ranger as White.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I think maybe that's the problem with the table. It seems that it's unclear what the columns mean. Are the specific color columns referring to the colors of the core 3/5 Rangers only while "Other" refers to the traditional "6th" Ranger that appears later on? Or is other simply a column used to indicate that a ranger of a color "other" than the usual R/Blu/Y/P/W/G/Bla? TRTX T / C 04:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Theme Music

i recommend the cahnging of theme music from various to buckethead.. as he did make it —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexCorbin (talk • contribs) 13:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I have no earthly idea where you heard that, but it's incorrect. Each season has different themes, first of all, and second, the people who make these themes are clearly credited during the show's end credit sequence. Shuki Levy did the original theme, though Ron Wasserman was behind most of the rest of the early seasons' soundtrack. Buckethead is nowhere to be seen. Arrowned (talk) 17:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay, digging into information more, I now see what something of what you're talking about. Apparently Buckethead had something to do with the soundtrack of one of the two movies, though in what capacity I have no idea; he's not credited on either of the market albums, nor did he do the scores. Either way, he had nothing to do with the themes. Arrowned (talk) 17:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Power Morpher move

A couple days ago i moved Power Morpher to List of Morphers in Power Rangers, and one of the reasons i did that was because we do not know whether the Morpher category is actually called "Power Morpher", so i moved it to List of Morphers in Power Rangers. Do any of you approve of this?. 05:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)Mythdon (talk)

This is the talk page for the article on Power Rangers. It is not the talk page for every page relating to this article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I have just started a section on the talk page of List of Morphers in Power Rangers with the exact same purpose as this section. Mythdon (talk) 20:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Movement of team pages

I have recently moved the following articles;

Do any of you approve of this?. Mythdon (talk) 04:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

No. The names were at those places because it disambiguates the title very well. It makes more sense to have it at "X Power Rangers" than just "X Rangers." In the future, gain consensus before performing moves.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I still feel that those team pages should be named after what the teams are referred to, for example "Mystic Rangers". Does anybody want to keep discussing. Mythdon (talk) 03:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no more discussion. It is not a good idea. It will not be implimented.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I feel it is a good idea, because they would be more relevant titles. Relevance is important for article titles too. Mythdon (talk) 05:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The titles as they are right now are relevant enough. No one is going to go to look at the title of "Wild Force Power Rangers" and say "What is this page about?"—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't matter. They should still be moved. Relevance is still one of the reasons. The other reason is that for example, "Dino Thunder Power Rangers" is not the term for the Dino Thunder team, "Dino Rangers" is. Mythdon (talk) 06:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
They do not need to be moved. It is not necessary and the current titles make it very clear as to what the article is about.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Although it makes it very clear as to what the articles are about, that is not a sufficient reason for keeping them those titles. The correct thing to do is to move them to what they are referred to. It is like saying "we should keep those details in the article because it is truthful" and somebody responding "but there is no source for the information". Mythdon (talk) 08:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The article is about the Power Rangers in whichever series it is. Particularly when there are multiple "teams" in one show, and they are not all called "[Color] [Name] Ranger," it makes it much easier to group them as "[Name] Power Rangers." If it ain't broke, don't fix it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not trying to fix something that is not broken. I would never try to fix something that is not broken. If I felt that it was not broken, I would not be having this discussion with you right now. Hopefully you will understand what I'm trying to tell you in the future. Mythdon (talk) 08:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
There is nothing that I can see is wrong with the original and current location of these five pages. The titles are clear as to what the articles are about, and the only user who has had any issue with where the pages are located is you. Please seek out a third opinion on this matter, if necessary.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I acknowledge the fact that I'm the only user with a problem with where they are located. It is smart that you pointed that out. I really feel that there is an issue with the current locations as there is a term for the teams. If there wasn't a term for the teams, then again (like when I was saying that if I was trying fix what is not broken), I wouldn't be having this discussion with you right now. Mythdon (talk) 09:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
"Mystic Rangers" is not as clear a title as "Mystic Force Power Rangers" is, as that title also includes the Solaris Knight and Wolf Warrior, just as "Lightspeed Rescue Power Rangers" includes the Titanium Ranger, where "Lightspeed Rangers" does not. There is nothing wrong with the titles. There was nothing wrong six months ago, and there is nothing wrong now.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 09:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The "Mystic Rangers" and "Lightspeed Rangers" titles should still be present. Although not as clear as "Mystic Force Power Rangers" and "Lightspeed Rescue Power Rangers", it is still best to have "Mystic Rangers" and "Lightspeed Rangers". Just because Solaris Knight and Wolf Worrior do not have "Mystic Ranger" in their names does not mean these pages should stay with the names they have. Mythdon (talk) 09:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I do not think that these pages should be moved or should have ever been moved. That is final.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 09:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Until an agreement between us comes at some point, I do not see an end of discussion, unless we didn't want to press issues. By the way, when it comes to these article titles, i still feel it is best that they get moved. In fact, i think the worst thing we can do is not move them. Mythdon (talk) 09:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I have nothing more to say on this, other than that before you do go about moving these pages, you get a consensus to do so. Right now, there is none.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 09:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion on moving pages

I am responding to a request for a third opinion.

There is no reason to move the pages. Including "Power Rangers" in each title provides a clear delineation between the article being about Power Rangers and what could be an article about rangers in the Forestry Service, or in the military, or in any of several other areas. Further, moving pages comes with a price in that double-wikilinks get created, which causes unnecessary confusion and puts an extra burden on Wikipedia's servers. The consequences of moving a page should always be carefully considered: does it make sense? would it help our Wikipedia readers? will it cause extra load on the computer system? etc. A quick check of one of these pages shows that it is linked from several hundred other pages --> a move would have a significant effect, even if it were justifiable. Truthanado (talk) 21:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Checklist Issue

There's something wrong with the color checklist. Green ranger did exist in season 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.240.7.190 (talk) 23:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

This user is correct. The Green Ranger did make a number of appearances in season 2 prior to switching over to being the White Ranger. This should either be reflected in the checklist or addressed with a footnote explaining the absence. (Heck, the easiest way would be to group MMPR into one series of checkboxes and have a foot note that Green Ranger was replaced by White later in the series. TRTX T / C 19:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Color table

Even though Power Rangers is a joke, the Wikipedia article isn't. You are missing some markers to the color table in the newest series, that HORRIBLE knockoff of Juken Sentai Gekiranger that is called Power Rangers: Jungle Fury. One is the "Other" category, referring to the inevitable knockoffs of GekiChopper and GekiViolet, and the others I saw briefly in a toy commercial, green and black. Probably Fist Sage knockoffs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.218.109 (talk) 01:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

We already discussed this, not more than five sections up. The Elephant/Bat/Shark toys aren't confirmed to be actual characters, and won't be added unless they appear in the show, which hasn't happened yet. Arrowned (talk) 02:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

History of Power Rangers

I think there should be an article on the history of the show (but nothing to do with the storyine), such as network changes, stuff like Power Morphicon and bla bla bla. Could an article like that be useful?. Mythdon (talk) 18:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Video games usually have a "Reception" section of the article. I'm not sure what the equivalent is for a TV series, but check some of those. A seperate article isn't needed, but perhaps a section. TRTX T / C 22:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Episode numbers: Updating vs waiting

I see no good reason not to update the episode numbers in the infoboxes every week. Other tv show articles update the episode number. Mythdon (talk) 02:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I was checking around and noticed that too. I think overall it's seems overly detailed and means extra work every week, but the idea is to have consistency across Wiki. Frankly I'd rather the overall approach for all of wiki just be a total episode count up through the most recently completed season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TRTX (talk • contribs) 02:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge requests

Due to article sizes i have requested these merges at Wikipedia:Proposed mergers;

And one more thing; When we make the Jungle Fury Power Rangers, and (optionally) Allies in Power Rangers: Jungle Fury articles, why not put the information in an article called Characters in Power Rangers: Jungle Fury instead.

Also, i am too lazy to put the merge tags on the articles right now, so can somebody do this for me?. Also, do any of you approve of this request i did?. Mythdon (talk) 05:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The characters have sufficient coverage separate from each other that they, as separate groups, have their own articles. There is no need to fix something that is not broken.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Do you think it would be breaking any rules for somebody to merge the above articles?. Mythdon (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Without consensus, it would be.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edit at Wikipedia:Proposed mergers?. Mythdon (talk) 09:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
No consensus. TRTX T / C 17:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Who asked you?. Mythdon (talk) 03:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Seriously? It's an open talk page. That and Ryulong explains his reasoning in the comment directly above yours. TRTX T / C 03:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I still think that S.P.D. Power Rangers should be merged into Space Patrol Delta, not to mention the two articles would fit perfectly in one single article. Can i add the merge tags to the articles if you are okay with my request to merge the articles?. Mythdon (talk) 20:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait a minute. I just figured out that if we merged the articles, they would be too big too navigate. Sorry for my request a few months ago. Mythdon (talk) 06:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"Villians of ______" naming convention?

Looking at the above section Mythdon started, I noticed that a few of the villian pages have names that differ from the "Villians of _____" naming scheme. While I can see the usefulness of this, would it maybe be better to name the articles in one common fashion ("Villians of _____" is a great convention), and then redirect the specific group name to the Villians page for that season? Just a suggestion. I originally had it posted in the same section so it made sense with the conversation, but it was repeatedly deleted rather than resectioned or moved to an appropriate talk page. TRTX T / C 03:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, if they have a name (like "Machine Empire" or "Troobian Empire") then by all means move them.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Ryulong, do you mean move them to "Villains in ______" or move them to "Whatever the villain group is named?. Mythdon (talk) 04:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Move them to whatever they are named. Villains in Power Rangers: Zeo is about the Machine Empire, which is why it should be at Machine Empire.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
I want the Villain articles to be named the group(s) name (if any). So your saying you agree with me?. Mythdon (talk) 05:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Does it matter? I've made my opinion clear.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Elements of a Power Rangers season

Is it me or does the "Elements of a Power Rangers season" section not explicitly say the main purpose or premise of the rangers (defeating evil) like in the "Series overview" section of the Super Sentai article? If its not prominently apparent in within the entire article (amid the production and technical details and descriptions) itself, then it should be included.

Rebel shadow (talk) 05:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Relation to Super Sentai

Since November, numerous IP users have removed information on the Power Ranger articles linking them to the Super Sentai series. I think this is all one person who either likes to vandalize or is being biased against Americans and/or Japanese. Check all the pages and you'll see what I mean? The Legendary Ranger (talk) 17:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, honestly this content isn't all necessary. I'd be more worried if they were removing it from the series' articles.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Colors

It should be added to this section a notation that the "Dai Shi" for Jungle Fury also has an unconventional color/armor scheme similarly to the Wolf Warrior from Mystic Force. For those who might disagree on the basis that he's a villain and not a ranger I only point again to the Wolf Warrior. While both are initially enemies the same as the WW did, the "Dai Shi" will eventually team up and combine powers with the Rangers. They both share the same source of power as well and control animal spirits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.73.41 (talk) 02:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

i noticed that on the Super Sentai page that they make a note of the Red and Blue being the only colors to be in all Super Sentai Series. In the Power Ranger series Red ,Blue and Yellow are the only colors to be constant in the shows.why is this not a a fact in the Colors section like it is on the Super Sentai Series —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.219.219.230 (talk) 23:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not necessary to mention here.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

if thats the case then why is it necessary on that page then?

Perhaps it isn't.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Power Rangers 2009

There will be the 17th Power Rangers for the year 2009, it will be called Power Rangers R.P.M., which will based from the current Super Sentai series, Engine Sentai Go-onger. -- 12:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.120.245 (talk)

1 - Old news. 2 - Not entirely true anymore, as Disney had issues with it (too close to Cars) and the writers are retooling the idea from scratch. 3 - Even if it were still true, all this information comes courtesy of forum posts by people who aren't Disney employees, which would never pass WP:V. Arrowned (talk) 12:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
So your basically saying Power Rangers R.P.M. will not come true?. Mythdon (talk) 00:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
They might change the name only, or they might change the entire premise. We have no idea what they're gonna do at this point; all we know is that a live-action season using Go-onger is still in the works, since a logo-less picture of the Red Ranger did appeare at the Licensing Show. Arrowned (talk) 04:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Are you saying the animated series will not come in 2009?. Mythdon (talk) 05:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
That was announced (by fandom sources, not anything truly official) months ago. It might still be in the works, or it might not; either way, it's not an issue this year. Arrowned (talk) 15:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
So your saying that the 2009 Power Rangers series will be live-action like previous seasons?. Mythdon (talk) 23:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I thought I made that fairly clear with "a live-action season using Go-onger is still in the works", but to be absolutely technical, the answer is: the writers are working on a live-action season. Since they're retooling things like I already noted, we don't know what's going to happen down the line, or whether their plans will work out. For now though, we have no reason to believe next season won't be live-action. Arrowned (talk) 00:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The Rhino Ranger

He is a white Ranger so why not give the Power Rangers Jungle Fury a check mark for a white ranger in the colors area of the artical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.137.237 (talk) 19:41, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

We can only check them off under White if "white" is specifically in their name; otherwise, it's a WP:NOR issue. We then list them under Other instead. Arrowned (talk) 22:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Color

Please change the color page because I've spotted an error. The Titanium Ranger was the first American made Power Ranger but not the only one. In Power Rangers Jungle Fury, there were three rangers that were called the Spirit Rangers and they are the next American made Power Rangers. The Elephant Ranger bores green, the Bat Ranger bores black, and the Shark Ranger bores cyan which is a lighter shade of blue. Please change the color page. Thanks.

Note: The Spirit Rangers that appear in the series are in their Jungle Master mode. The toy version of their original form is just a promotion to those rangers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.158.29 (talk) 17:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

"Confirmed details" sections

When Power Rangers RPM starts receiving regular editing, i feel it is best not to include the "Confirmed details" section as it is unprofessional and unnecessary. Anyone agree?. Mythdon (talk) 09:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

This is the talk page for the article on "Power Rangers" as a whole. If you wish to discuss the article for Power Rangers: RPM you can do so at Talk:Power Rangers: RPM.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Character history

I feel that when we write about a characters history in their own articles that we do not make individual sections of different seasons and simply write as if it is one section. Do you think this would help Wikipedia in terms of Power Rangers?. Mythdon (talk) 11:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

This makes it so we are treating the biographies as those of real people. By dividing up what show that aspect of the character's history took place it treats it as a fictional character biography.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

"Rangers" sections. From tables to subsections.

In late 2006, the lists for the Rangers in each series page was converted from tables to subsections. Although i agree with the fact the conversion was done, i want to know as to why this was done. My guess is that the conversion was done to make the sections more encyclopedic and professional. Mythdon (talk) 04:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Why does this matter?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Curiosity. Mythdon (talk) 05:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
This style guide says that tables are primarily discouraged for lists because they are harder to edit. Hence, the change was probably due to style guides. Does that clear it up? Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
So your saying it was done to make the sections look more professional?. Mythdon (talk) 05:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd go with more along the lines of presentable and accessible. We want readers to be able to get the most information from as little clutter as possible; a giant table is often confusing to keep track of, even if it is viewed as more professional. A simple list, while not so sophisticated, does the job well. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Also these tables had colored backgrounds which inevitably made them illegible and full of esoteric coding that made them really difficult to edit. Compare with the tables that persist over on es.wikipedia.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Why would colored backgrounds make them illegal?. Not that I'm going to argue with you. Mythdon (talk) 08:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Illegible, not illegal. Hard to read. Arrowned (talk) 09:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Merges of designation articles

I feel it is best that we merge the following articles into List of Power Rangers designations:

After the merge, we can do the following:

  • Remove any mention of "Ranger-like ally" and treat those type of characters completely separate from eachother but keep those characters treated as allies.
  • Remove lists of witch Rangers used witch designations and leave it to the categories and lists.
  • To replace "Other Rangers" and remove original research, lets make a section called "Other designations of Power Rangers" and treat those designations and those type of characters completely independent but not treat them like the normal designations.

Is that a good procedure?. Mythdon (talk) 11:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

No. There is nothing wrong with how the pages are currently set up and by merging all of these articles, it is just a copy of List of Power Rangers. The pages do not need to be merged. Again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Lately, your responses to my suggestions have been "if it ain't broke, doke fix it". That is not the case. It may seem that way to you, but that is not the case. Also, merging these pages would not in any way be a copy of List of Power Rangers. I'm trying to improve these pages by requesting they be merged.
There are no problems with them. There's nothing to improve as far as I can tell. Sometimes, no change is just as good as change.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
"Sometimes, no change is just as good as change"? I don't get that. I feel these merges should be done as it would improve Wikipedia in terms of Power Rangers. Also, the three things i feel should be done after the merges would improve Power Rangers articles. Also, when you remove lists of the Rangers in the designation articles, the articles become only the size of sections and i feel it is unnecessary to list witch Rangers used witch designations and leave that to the list articles and categories. Mythdon (talk) 02:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Just leave things alone. I don't think that merging these pages into one giant page will improve Wikipedia in any way. Sometimes the way things are are just fine.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
True, sometimes the way things are are just fine, and things are fine the way they are right now, but this discussion is about improvement, not fixing things (except in the case of the three things to do after the merge). Mythdon (talk) 03:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
And there's nothing that needs to be improved upon.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes there is. There is more to improve on the Power Rangers articles than you realize. Mythdon (talk) 03:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't see how this merge will improve the articles.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Ryulong; lists are fine for some things, but if you want to take multiple fairly-sized articles and put them all on one page you're creating a mess. First, huge pages take a longer time to navigate and load; this can be very annoying if you have a slow connection and only want to look at one specific subject instead of twenty. Second, there's no real reason to merge them all; I could probably take all of the articles on cities in New York and merge them into "List of cities in New York State", but that would just be useless. See what we mean? Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 03:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion on merges

I am responding to a request for a third opinion. The view posted by Master of Puppets is precisely my view as well. — Athaenara ✉ 05:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Category for crew members

I have just created a category called Category:Power Rangers crew members. Do any of you approve of this?. Mythdon (talk) 06:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

This was deleted before, I believe.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Also Category:Power Rangers suffices for the three people you put in the category.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Why would there not be a need for a category?. Mythdon (talk) 01:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Because there aren't that many crew members with Wikipedia articles.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:33, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Then why not have a category for cast and crew? That would prove to be a big category. I promise you. Mythdon (talk) 01:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Because one for the cast was deleted at CFD some time ago. A page serves better, as does these particular people's mention on any article that they did work on the series for.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Would adding crew members as a purpose to List of Power Rangers cast members and then moving it to List of Power Rangers cast and crew members work?. Mythdon (talk) 02:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Issues since June 2007

This has been tagged as having multiple issues since June 2007. Why haven't these issues been fixed yet? Mythdon (talk) 02:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Because these issues haven't exactly been spelled out nor has anyone bothered to fix them. Most of it involves sourcing statements.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Color pages

To continue the discussion. I'm going to finally bring it up on this talk page. I feel is best we do not include Rangers not referred to by their colors on the following articles:

Please note that I'm not including the Quantum Ranger as an exclusion since he was treated as a Red Ranger in Wild Force episode "Forever Red".

I wish for those articles to have those exclusions. Mythdon (talk) 04:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

This talk page is not for discussing those articles. It would be better discussed at WT:TOKU.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

TV Guide untrustworthy?

It seems that we can no longer trust TV Guide as a source for Power Rangers episode airdates. Jungle Fury episode Welcome to the Jungle aired February 18, 2008 but TV Guide is saying it aired March 1, 2008 (part 1) and March 2, 2008 (part 2)[1]. If this discussion has already took on place another talk page, please let me know and give me a link the the discussion. Mythdon (talk) 07:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

TV Guide is an official third party publication which is nationally distributed. I don't think its reliability should be brought into question here.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
In regards to the Jungle Fury list, It seems very obvious its reliability of the Jungle Fury episode list is clearly unreliable. I watched Jungle Fury's first episode before March 2008 even started its first day. Mythdon (talk) 07:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, which listing were you looking at? Perhaps you were looking at the ABC affiliate listing instead of the Toon Disney one? Or perhaps there was a re-airing of the episode. Regardless, TV Guide is a reliable source. It's not getting removed.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at the episode list. Not the schedules. The episode list link is above in case you haven't read it yet. Mythdon (talk) 08:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Well that list says something aired on February 18 (more than likely the first episodes on Toon Disney as it was Monday). March 1 is probably when these same episodes aired on ABC and that is what TV Guide has chosen to include on its listings.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 09:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
When we mention when the Power Rangers episodes aired, we currently mention when it first aired on Toon Disney so I feel we should cease using TV Guide as a source. Mythdon (talk) 09:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Your link even says on the right in the infobox that it premiered on February 18th. Your entire basis for not using TV Guide is faulty because it only proves we should use TV Guide. Nice one. --The Virginian (talk) 11:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
It seems to me your entire argument is less over reliability and more over usefulness. TV Guide very easily passes Wikipedia's guidelines over verifiability, so their reliability is not in question. But in terms of usefulness, you just seem to be concerned over the fact that they don't properly keep up with the episode titles (lately they seem to have just listed "PRJF" on a new Jungle Fury airdate rather than any detailed information such as titles or descriptions) meaning we can't use their site to move up future episode titles before the day they air, which I agree is frustrating. However, that has little to do with whether it's allowable to use TVG altogether or not. Additionally, how TV Guide orders its airing information is really not an issue for us to argue over. The fact remains that they still give airdates for all episodes on whatever channels they air on, and whether their list for this is confusing or not, it's a proper third-party source. Nowhere in the Wikipedia rules for citations are we advised not to link to a site just because it's confusing. If the site was wrong, it'd be a different story. But the information, badly organized or not, is accurate. Arrowned (talk) 11:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
My argument is not more about usefulness than reliability. Did you look at that list? It looks wrong to anybody who knows their true airdates. Mythdon (talk) 12:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
But it's not wrong; that's the whole point. TV Guide lists airdates for everything on television, and that includes multiple channels and reruns, which is obviously the case here. If you're arguing we shouldn't use TVG cites for airdates, that's fine, but that's hardly ever what we use it for. We almost always use it just as proof that episode titles are legitimate and actually aired somewhere, sometime. Arrowned (talk) 13:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

ABC Family

The infobox says that ABC Family aired this show from 1998 to 2006. Why is that?. Mythdon (talk) 06:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

ABC Family had a Jetix block.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I know that. What about before 2002? Why would it say 1998-2006 rather than 2002-2006?. Mythdon (talk) 06:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
That was when it was still Fox Family.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
So your saying Power Rangers In Space was the first to air on the channel?. Mythdon (talk) 06:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
No. They began showing the original ones on Fox Family, before Jetix existed. Why is this of such major importance?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Accuracy. Mythdon (talk) 06:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
To the best of anyone's knowledge, the show NEVER aired on FOX/ABC Family previous to 2002.RangerKing (talk) 03:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Can you show us a source?. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 03:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Bulleted lists

I'm going to bring up another discussion about the "seasons" section's tables. Tables listing seasons in the case of Power Rangers is unprofessional. Bulleted lists would be much more professional in this case. I'm very sure this is worthy of discussion. Mythdon (talk) 06:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

It's fine the way it is. The tables were only unprofessional when they were used in the articles in the character sections. It was also unprofessional with how they were initially used in the Super Sentai article. The use here is fine and encyclopedic.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Why is it fine the way it is?. Mythdon (talk) 06:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Power_Rangers/Archive_3&oldid=1136240269"