Talk:The Twilight Zone (1959 TV series)

Editing Needed

This page requires a good amount of editing. Phrases like "they were are made available through CBS All Access when watching the full episodes" make no grammatical sense at all ("were are"? and who is doing the watching?), which makes reading this page a labor. Someone with strong writing skills should really give this page a makeover. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.74.7 (talk) 16:20, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Better

The page looks a lot better. I added a small section at the beginning, and the season-by-season breakdown is solid. I think it meets the Good Article criteria. But maybe, maybe not, we'll see how it goes. - Zone46 03:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA

None of the images have Fair Use Rationales, otherwise this is a good nomination. Add the rationales and re-apply (see WP:FAIR) Cheers, Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 22:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I think I added the rationales correctly (I'm new to this image stuff), so I've renominated the page. - Zone46 15:09, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

The first Shatner picture does not look like a screenshot of that episode. It looks like a staged publicity photo on the set of the episode. Image should be tagged accordingly. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 20:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Second GA nomination

On hold for: lead too short, fair use rationales are weak--see other FA/GA articles for examples, several unfootnoted quotes, and should have a notice at the top about the other Twilight Zone articles.Rlevse 22:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

How do I footnote the quotes? They are all quotes from the Twilight Zone Companion, which is referenced at the bottom of the page. - Zone46 21:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

GA awarded. Though I'm concerned with the breadth of the article. Could we see some more sections be added to this one so that critics and development be shown. Lincher 01:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I added a development section a month or two ago, so I'm not sure how else to expand it. As for critics, there are quotes from several critics included in the article (from The Twilight Zone Companion), both positive and negative. - Zone46 01:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Rename or Merge?

Hey, everyone, there is a second Wiki-article on The Twilight Zone (called The Twilight Zone). To me, it is signigicantly different from this article (it tells the Twilight Zone story more from a producer and writer point of view). Can we maybe RENAME this article (i.e. The Twilight Zone (Season by Season History)) or something like that? I don't think we should MERGE these two articles. I like them both as they are. User:ProfessorPaul19:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't rename or merge. The Twilight Zone is about the whole series in general. (See Star Wars) while this page is only about the original series. There is also a page on The New Twilight Zone. - Zone46 22:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 03:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Improvements to individual episode articles

I've been reading various episode articles listed on List of The Twilight Zone episodes and I noticed some (minor) style errors common to most of them -

1. They have an unusual section at the bottom that is redundant because these articles are already accessed in the Infobox on the right. Back to: The Twilight Zone, Episode List, Season 1

This is sometimes listed under "Twilight Zone links", but is still not needed when the infobox has all the relevant links. This appears to date back to 2002, before the infobox was added.

2. The "External link" section is often placed in the middle of the article, but it should always be placed at the end (and called "External links", even if there is only 1 link)

3. Now a seperate subcategory exists for Category:The Twilight Zone episodes, the episode articles should be removed from the main Category:The Twilight Zone. This is the point of having a subcategory and will make Category:The Twilight Zone episodes much easier to use.

I'll start working through season 1. Magiclite 23:44, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

4. Another point: regarding the Themes section in many of the articles; most of these consist of mini reviews which are POV, or theories of what the underlying meaning/message/moral of each story is, which violates WP:NOR. Any type of analasys like this must cite a reliable source. The same goes for statements such as "this episode is similar to another episode called... etc". Magiclite 21:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Someday, in a perfect world, we'll have something like Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/Style guide for the Twilight Zone episodes. Like many (most?) Wikipedia TV episode pages, they're all over the map today in terms of consistency between pages. It's going to be a monumental task to fix them, but it would be nice if someone who knows how could get the ball rolling. Travisl 21:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject The Twilight Zone. Thoughts? Travisl 04:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Videotaped episodes

I noticed that both this article and the episode list mentions that six episodes of season 2 were done on videotape. Does anyone which episodes and do the videotapes still exist? Davhorn 17:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

The "Episode Notes" section of Twenty Two (The Twilight Zone) states:

“ Even though the six shows were taped in a row, through November and into mid-December, their broadcast dates were out of order and varied widely, with this, the fifth one, shown on February 10, 1961 as episode 17. The first, "The Lateness of the Hour", was seen on December 2, 1960 as episode 8; the second, "Static" appeared on March 10, 1961 as episode 20; the third, "The Whole Truth" was broadcast on January 20, 1961 as episode 14; the fourth was the Christmas show, "The Night of the Meek", shown as the 11th episode on December 23, 1960; and the last one, "Long Distance Call", was transmitted on March 3, 1961 as episode 22. ”

Travisl 19:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Aha, so it was hidden away somewhere. :)

Any idea if the tapes still exist or if today's releases are from telecine copies? Thanks for the help. Davhorn 23:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Judging from the quality of these episodes currently in rotation on SciFi and on the new DVD releases, the videotapes do exist and were used as masters. The quality is noticeably different from that of the episodes in earlier syndication packages, which were barely distinguishable from film and were probably mastered from telecine copies of the original tapes. Sorry, I have no sources on this, but the difference in quality is noticeable. 12.22.250.4 (talk) 22:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:It's A Good Life.JPG

The image Image:It's A Good Life.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

50th anniversary

In what capacity will the show be celebrating its anniversary on CBS? A retrospective special? Prime-time airings of classic episodes? 67.49.175.253 (talk) 09:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:The Twilight Zone (1959 TV series)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA Sweeps: Delisted

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I believe the article currently has multiple issues that need to be addressed, and as a result, I have delisted the article. Although several references are listed, there are no inline citations for the article's content which is required under the criteria. Add additional citations from a variety of sources to provide a balanced representation of the information present. Perhaps sources can be pulled from the main articles linked to within the article. Look to books, magazines, newspaper articles, other websites, etc. Take a look at the non-free images in the article and determine if they are actually representing the text or if they are just being used for decoration. If its for decoration, remove them from the article. Although the article has been delisted, the article can be return to GA status by addressing the above points. Once sources are added and cleanup is done, I recommend renominating the article at WP:GAN. If you need assistance with any of these issues, please contact me on my talk page and I'll do my best to help you out. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

video format

Please add tech details about the video format. The shows must have been originally broadcast NTSC. Monochrome or color? But they were made on film? Do any of those film-based masters still exist? Are all remaining copies limited to old-school NTSC resolution? Do any HD versions of any episodes exist? -96.237.15.90 (talk) 02:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Add another pop culture reference

In the show Futurama there is a quite obvious reference to The Twilight Zone. Which episode escapes me, but there was one with a show called "The Scary Door." It was extremely similar to The Twilight Zone, starting from intro to end. Halofanatic333 (talk) 12:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Appearances on camera...

In addition to announcing the next episode, Serling would frequently appear on camera at the end of the first scene.

"scripts written by"

Many if not most of the scripts were based on existing short stories. This was not unusual at the time, but obviously it is not the way TV writing works now.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

---

The Twilight Zone (1959 TV series) → The Twilight Zone (TV series) – Like Psycho (film) and Shameless (TV series), this article must omit the year for the sake of typing things comfortably. In fact, many people associate The Twilight Zone with the very old series, as well as the franchise. --George Ho (talk) 00:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose - not the only series of that name, correctly follows the guidelines for TV disambiguations. "Many people" is very subjective.--Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 05:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  We're talking primacy of "(TV series)". Yes, there are 1985 and 2002 versions. However, the 1959 one is the most associated, but think about Shameless and Psycho if you can. There is common sense. --George Ho (talk) 05:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  What you are considering common sense, is culturally biased. It is also a perspective of one's experience, and a generational point of view. I agree that the other two series of The Twilight Zone are based upon, some might say a continuation of the 1959 series, but not a clear primary topic. --Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 06:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  If you think Psycho must be disambiguated by year, then please propose. I would rather wait for other people's responses than waste time to change your mind. --George Ho (talk) 06:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  Please do not "put words in my mouth", I do not recall ever stating anything about Psycho. But maybe you read something that I am not aware of. We are discussing the 1959 TV Series "The Twilight Zone", and in this case it does not eclipse either of the two other series to be the primary subject (at least not the 1985 series). If you think that there should be an article The Twilight Zone (TV Series), perhaps you should model one after Doctor Who, which encompasses both the original series, the TV movie and the revived series in one article, oh wait there is one already The Twilight Zone that does exactly that, and more!Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 06:30, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  1959 has 1000-1200 views per day, 1985 has 290-330 per day, and 2002 has 230-320 per day. --George Ho (talk) 06:44, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  Incoming page hits are tools to help evaluate but are not considered absolute determining factors in determining "primary topic". We do not know why each person went to one page or another. --Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 07:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose – lame rationale proposed. Title policy does not have "ease of typing" as a criterion. Dicklyon (talk) 01:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  I don't think the policy prohibits "ease of typing", does it? --George Ho (talk) 02:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  No, it doesn't. Nor does it encourage it, except via redirects for variant punctuation and capitalization and such. WP:TITLE does, however, encourage precision in titles: "Titles usually use names and terms that are precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but not overly precise." Your proposed new title is not unambiguous. Dicklyon (talk) 02:47, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  Then is "Psycho (film)" ambiguous? Why or why not? Back on topic, why would anybody associate "(TV series)" with either revival series that have little or no chance of reruns other than in cable? --George Ho (talk) 03:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  We are not talking about a series that ran for over 20 years, and a revival of a couple of years, we are talking about a series run and a revival that had very similar length runs, and a second revival on top of that. So yes in this case we need to further disambiguate. --Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 03:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  Propose a disambiguation on Psycho then; there was a consensus to make 1960 film a primacy of "(film)" back then. --George Ho (talk) 03:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  What are you going on about? Why do you keep telling me what to do? If you feel strongly about that topic, do it your self. You are the one who keeps bringing up that movie. We are discussing The Twilight Zone here, pushing your obsession with that movie does nothing to advance the discussion about the subject at hand.--Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 04:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  As much as I would like to go along with it (because to me the original is the only true legitimate series with that name, and the others are copycats that were made to squeeze money from the name and legacy), the current title is correct -- just as the original Outer Limits. --Musdan77 (talk) 04:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

  ...Well, Psycho aside, Outer Limits versions do not have the same level of phenonema as The Twilight Zone. In fact, Outer Limit is more ambiguous than (or not as unambiguous as ) The Twilight Zone. --George Ho (talk) 05:04, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

message

from the opening: "...and usually ended with some sort of message."

the meaning there is unclear; is 'moral' message intended? 76.105.151.238 (talk) 02:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I was under the impression that it was referring to the epilogue by Serling (which usually does contain a moral message). But, I'm glad you brought this up, because the lead section needed some improvements. Hopefully the changes I've made are satisfactory to all. --Musdan77 (talk) 16:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

latest changes

Someone undid a revision I made saying "headings can't have links". However, I notice they didn't make any changes with the heading, but removed a sentence at the bottom saying the first season openings have been restored--Robert Treat (talk) 00:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC).

Hmm, don't know how that happened, but you could have (and should have) notified me on my user talk page. Then, I would have known sooner and could have fixed it sooner. --Musdan77 (talk) 05:31, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2014 Compilation - The Twilight Zone: Essential Episodes

While the bulk of this New York Times DVD review article covers other titles, it does end with:

THE TWILIGHT ZONE: ESSENTIAL EPISODES For those unwilling to invest in the 25-disc set containing all 156 episodes of Rod Serling’s influential TV series, these two discs cull 17 episodes. The picks include civil rights and anti-McCarthy allegories like “The Eye of the Beholder” and “The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street,” the doomsday visions “Time Enough at Last” and “The Midnight Sun,” and two of the best nervous breakdowns in TV history, William Shatner’s crackup in “Nightmare at 20,000 Feet” and Telly Savalas’s freakout in “Living Doll.” (CBS DVD)

Additional corroborating links are:

• http://www.amazon.com/Twilight-Zone-Essential-Anniversary-Collection/dp/B00JKTFQH4
• http://www.mediamikes.com/2014/07/dvd-review-the-twilight-zone-the-essential-episodes/

Conrad T. Pino (talk) 03:10, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done Added. --Musdan77 (talk) 18:42, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

A borrowed beginning?

Each episode of this 1959 on series starts with: "There is a fifth dimension, etc". Two years earlier, the film: "Not of this Earth" (1957) has the beginning (words on the screen): "You are about to adventure into the Dimension of the Impossible! To enter this realm you must set your mind free from the Earthly fetters that bind it! If the events you are about to witness are unbelievable, it is only because your Imagination is chained! Sit back and believe that YOU may cross the brink of time and space.. into that land you sometimes visit in your dreams!"(84.236.152.71 (talk) 17:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC))

6 Video-taped episodes of ssn 2

Seems pretty darned significant, not sure why @AldezD: thinks this is original research... a quick Google search can give u numerous sources, not sure how to cite though Peace is contagious (talk) 07:28, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Your edits (1, 2) included no referenced information or sources. This information needs to meet WP:V and follow guidelines in WP:CS. AldezD (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

The edits also read like they were lifted straight from another source. --Drmargi (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

some1 else on Wiki wrote them under a specific TZ episode, seemed better here. Peace is contagious (talk) 17:12, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

The source you added in this edit is a fansite message board and does not meet WP:V. Please stop adding this content without addressing the earlier linked guidelines. AldezD (talk) 17:50, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

This book should satisfy even the most anal-retentive of pedants:

https://books.google.com/books?id=MqtTBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=twilight+zone+6+videotape+episodes&source=bl&ots=-pVPZtIu4M&sig=xn8w11dI9lzZa8qbGEDlkcqDDls&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjg_f2jj4nKAhXJ9h4KHUv7CFIQ6AEITjAH#v=onepage&q=twilight%20zone%206%20videotape%20episodes&f=false

Peace is contagious (talk) 17:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Promo spots lost or not?

Discussing Serling's promotional spots in season one, the article says "a few are lost completely and some survive only as audio tracks; however, they are all available through CBS All Access when watching the full episodes." This makes no sense, if some are lost completely, how can they all be available? This needs to be clarified. CodeTalker (talk) 02:11, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

season 5 narration

Was the opening narration for season 5 the same as used in season 4? Elsquared (talk) 03:43, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Best 10 episodes according to Time magazine

I'm not sure if this information should be added to the article about the series, or the articles about each episode. Anyway, here's the info and the archived sources.

1. The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street (1960) [1]
2. It's a Good Life (The Twilight Zone) (1961) [2]
3. To Serve Man (The Twilight Zone) (1962) [3]
4. The Invaders (The Twilight Zone) (1961) [4]
5. The Hitch-Hiker (1960) [5]
6. Living Doll (The Twilight Zone) (1963) [6]
7. Nightmare at 20,000 Feet (1963) [7]
8. Walking Distance (1959) [8]
9. Time Enough at Last (1959) [9]
10. The Eye of the Beholder (1960) [10]

Mateussf (talk) 02:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Not included because source needed?

Richard Egan was to have been the narrator, but was unavailable due to contract issues, so Serling himself did the narration. Carlm0404 (talk) 23:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Home media

Were the DVD releases really the very first home-media releases? No VHS? No laserdisks? No 8 or 16mm home-movie releases? --2003:DA:CF04:959:914A:DC7C:523D:F23 (talk) 12:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)