Talk:Pilot (The X-Files)

Untitled

Isn't the ending scene to this and to "The Erlenmyer Flask" a tribute to the end of "The Raiders of the Lost Ark"??? Might be worth looking into. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.248.15.158 (talk) 01:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The first episode (and I believe only the first episode) says that it is based on actual events. Did Fox (or anyone involved with the show) ever reveal on what "actual events" either "Pilot" or The X-Files might be based? --In Defense of the Artist 02:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

A simple ploy to make people watch, I believe. I haven't seen any definite either. Davhorn 03:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Nope, it's based on the case that eventually lead to Presidential Determination 95-45 (of course, without the UFOs thing). [[1]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.81.245.131 (talk) 23:44, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

What's the deal with the organic molecule when Scully meets Mulder? How is she supposed to identify an incomplete structure (There are three R sequences.)? A "synthetic protein"? Where are the amino acids? 130.243.201.151 21:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC) The deal is that most people aren't that observant. Move out of your mother's basement and you'll see.

Mom lives a long way from here. That most people don't notice is hardly a good reason for making poor research. Especialy since Scully is supposed to be educated on the matter, one could expect a cerain level of correctnes, as far as the story allows it. 130.243.208.107 14:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The X-Files (pilot episode)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Hi. I will be reviewing the article on The X-Files (pilot episode). Please give me a couple of hours to read through the article and collect my thoughts. I usually print the article out and go over it with a pencil, and write my notes on paper before typing them up, so please be patient. I'll post my review and any comments when I'm done. Regards, Matthewedwards :  Chat  21:33, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I had something written, something prepared, and it was all typed up; however, somehow I pressed my browser's back button, and when I pressed the forward button all my typing had disappeared. I will try again either tomorrow or Tuesday, because I'm too pissed off to do it all again right now! Matthewedwards :  Chat  01:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   The pilot episode of the science fiction television series The X-Files which premiered on the FOX network on September 10, 1993. Is not a complete sentence. See also my comment about bolding, under the MOS section. Try " "Pilot" is the pilot episode of the science fiction..." Done

   Since you don't have a paragraph or even a sentence in the Lead section about who the main stars of the episode are, the least you could do is add Duchovny's, Anderson's, and Davis' names in parentheses after their characters names Done

   It dealt with themes of alien abduction, a subject that would continue until the end. The end of what? The episode? The season? The series? The end of time? Also, why is "themes" pluralised, when only one theme is mentioned? Done

   The episodes received a strong Nielsen household rating compared to other episodes of the seasons. Why not just "Nielsen rating", it's proper name? This sentence is poorly written, also. What seasons? It seems like you're assuming the reader is aware that X-Files lasted 9 seasons Done

   In addition to setting the tone for the show, the episode sets up several character and story arcs. The show is the episode. "Series" would be a better word choice. Perhaps you could also say how it sets up these story arcs. Also, a link to story arc wouldn't hurt. Done

   Try to be WP:CONCISE in your writing. Instead of "Pilot" marked the first appearance of the "Cigarette Smoking Man", who will go on to become the series' signature villain, you could say " "Pilot" marked the first appearance of the "Cigarette Smoking Man", who becomes the series' signature villain". Same information; fewer words. Done

   ; although he has no lines. This is fragmented, like there should be a qualifier: "Although he has no lines, he is one of the more important guest characters in the episode." Or something. I'm just guessing, and I don't mean to suggest you put that in the article Done

   Again, conciseness, especially in the plot summary. It's not a scene-by-scene recap: In Collum National Forest in Oregon, a young woman, Karen Swenson, flees through the woods in her pajamas. --> "Karen Swenson flees through Collum National Forest, Oregon, in her pajamas." Also, how do we know her name at this point? Perhaps, "An unidentified female"?

   A shadowy figure approaches and white light appears, increasing in luminosity as it approaches her. has repetitive wording. Does he approach from the front or rear? Is he what she is running from? Done

   The next morning, she is found dead, with two small bumps on her back. check punctuation. The first comma is unnecessary Done

   In Washington D.C. at FBI Headquarters, Special agent Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) meets with Division Chief Scott Blevins and two others, one of whom is smoking a cigarette. A couple of things here: "Special agent" is Scully's title, so it should use Title case. Also, you linked Blevins' title with his name, but not Scully's? Why? Third, the sentence should be active, and finally, who are "others"? Try "At the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters in Washington, D.C., Special Agent Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) meets with Division Chief Scott Blevins and two other men, one of whom is smoking a cigarette." Done

   Blevins tells Scully that she is being assigned to the X-Files, to work with agent Fox Mulder (David Duchovny), in an attempt to debunk his work. is wieldy. Try "Blevins assigns Scully to work with Agent Fox Mulder (David Duchovny) on the X-Files in an attempt to debunk his work on the paranormal." Done

   Scully heads down to the basement where Mulder is assigned and introduces herself to him. Mulder is disappointed to hear that his new partner is a skeptic towards unexplained paranormal phenomena, including the existence of extraterrestrials. Is it necessary to include the first sentence? Could a reader still get the gist of the episode if it said, "When he meets her, Mulder is dimayed to find out that his new partner is a skeptic towards unexplained paranormal phenomena, including the existence of extraterrestrials." Done

   Heading to the scene of the accident where she was killed, Scully discovers that her watch corresponds to the time when they experienced missing time. This is the first time you've mentioned them experiencing missing time. When, where, how did this happen? And who are "they"? Presumably Mulder and Scully, but it's not too clear.  Done

   I haven't read the rest of the plot section. It comes in at 743 words, which is too big anyway, per WP:PLOT and MOS:TV, and it's riddled with poor phrasing and filler sentences

497 words now. --TIAYN (talk) 12:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

1. The pilot aired on September 10, 1993 on the Fox Network in the United States and Canada. I don't understand how this happened, since Fox is not available in Canada

   The story was written by executive producers Chris Carter, plural

   Prose remains iffy, using four or five words where one would suffice, there are also typos and other grammatical errors

1. B. MoS compliance:

   I do not believe the article is titled correctly. Looking at MOS:TV#Naming conventions and WP:NC-TV. (cf. Pilot (Lost), Pilot (Smallville), Pilot (House), Pilot (30 Rock), Pilot (Cold Feet), The Pilot (Friends), Pilot (Fringe), Pilot (Numb3rs), Pilot (Parks and Recreation), Pilot (The Office), Pilot (Veronica Mars), Pilot (Will & Grace), and List of television pilots named "Pilot"

   MOS:BOLDTITLE says not to bold the title if it's purely descriptive. In this case, The pilot episode, it is descriptive, where as "Pilot" is the premiere episode would be okay.

I'm not able to redirect the episode. Can you fix this? --TIAYN (talk) 11:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

1.  Done Check your redirects. Malcolm Stewart died in the 1950s

   Don't link WP:COMMONTERMS such as "United States", "Canada", "Ireland".

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Other than the final sentence, the entire "Writing" paragraph goes unsourced. If refs 3 and 4 do actually cite every single fact in that paragraph, you should reference each fact. Right now, especially because they are book sources, not something that is online that I can check, I do not know what is and isn't cited.

 Done I removed one of the references because they mention the same thing. The book source was there before i showed up. So the second ref. was not really neccessary. --TIAYN (talk) 11:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

1. Does Ref 3 cite each paragraph of the Conception section or just the last sentence of each paragraph? A reference should be present after each individual fact stated. There should at least be a reference after the quotes.

1. B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   The article relies heavily on DVD commentaries rather than reliable third-part sources. The third-party sources that are used, Entertainment Weekly, Variety, and the two books, however, are perfectly fine.

   C. No original research:

   I can't be sure because I don't have access to the source (assuming Ref 3 covers it), but A notable influence when writing the episode, was Kolchak: The Night Stalker a series from the 1970s. sounds like it's OR. You should remove "notable" as it's WP:PEACOCK

   It's unclear whether Ref 3 covers the entire Conception and writing section, as it is only placed at the end of each paragraph.

   His final scene seems to suggest that his character later became the "Cigarette Smoking Man". this appears to be pure speculation

   The "Pilot episode" was generally well-received by fans and critics alike. no reference for the fans part. No mention of what the ratings were. Has the episode been sold on VHS or DVD? Was were the sales figures? etc etc

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Check out the other GA pilot episodes that I listed above. None have a section listing deleted scenes. They are not notable. All episodes have scenes cut from them. Unless they are discussed in reliable third-party sources, they don't need to be here. Instead, the article should be focussing on how the pilot was conceived. Did Fox approach Carter to make this series, or did he conceive it on his own and try to sell it to the networks until Fox picked it up? When did he write it? The section at the moment doesn't even make it clear that Carter did write the episode.

   There should be a casting section rather than a paragraph included in the "Writing" section (which doesn't offer any information about how the episode was written); there were other people besides Duchovny and Anderson who were cast in the episode. Why were they picked? Did any one else audition for their roles? It says When casting the actors for the two main parts, Carter had difficulties finding an actor for Scully. Was Carter the casting director? How much pull did he have in deciding who was cast?

   Filming: Where was it filmed? LA, Vancouver, Oregon? Was it shot in studios and soundstages, or on location? When was it filmed? Who directed it? Other than the Lede, there is no mention of the director. Were any special effects used in filming? How did they achieve this? For the ape-like corpse, was it CGI, props and makeup, or a combination of both? I don't know if any of this information is available but there are so many books written about this series I find it hard to believe this kind of information is not available.

   Other than the Lede section, there is no mention of when the episode was broadcast, or what network. Was it broadcast in other countries? To avoid WP:BIAS, you should at least mention whether it aired in Canada, the UK, Australia, and other major English-language speaking countries. How was it received there? Was it as popular overseas as it was in the US? Did it receive comparable reviews and high ratings?

   Has the episode been made available in any new media formats? Is it available to download from sites such as Hulu, iTunes, X-Box Marketplace, Amazon Unbox? Has it been released on VHS or DVD? If so, when? Was there a commentary track on the DVD?

   B. Focused:

   see above

3. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   It would be good to get more than just two positive reviews from trade magazines. Did the LA Times, Chicago Tribune, NY Times review the episode? What about newspaper and magazines from other countries such as the Radio Times in the UK? Are there any unfavorable reviews for the episode?

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   No edits to speak of in the last 2 months. Edits before that appear to be geared towards setting up this GAN

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   This fair use rationale needs a specific purpose of use - the generic template is not enough. See this dispatch on non-free images, particularly the section at the end about writing purposes of use. See File:Mother and Child Reunion (DTNG).JPG and File:Flywheel_BBC.jpg, or some of the Doctor Who FAs, such as The Stolen Earth on how to meet WP:NFCC#8.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Images need alt text

6. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   At the moment this article needs a lot of work before it can pass GA, although I do believe it is possible. There needs to be more real world perspective of the episode in the article, and third-party sources detailing aspects I already suggested, such as casting, filming, writing, how it performed in other countries, etc etc. Right now there's too much written about deleted scenes, and other stuff garnered from DVD commentaries, which is okay in moderation, and when you can put it into context with the real world, but at the moment it just reads like a decent fan page. I seriously suggest you read MOS:TV, WP:WAF, and the many articles about television episodes listed at WP:GA#Live action television episodes and WP:FA#Media. There are many, many books written about The X Files that some of this information will be there. Perhaps there are newspaper articles reviewing this episode too, and they may be available at your local library. In any event, I don't think that the article can be brought up to meet the WP:GA? in the seven days that this nomination could be left open for, so I am going to close it as not passing this time. Good luck with it, Matthewedwards :  Chat  14:37, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Title

Shouldn't the title of this article be Pilot (The X-Files)? It's the standard for other pilot episodes without titles, and the DVDs list the episode as "Pilot", not "The X-Files", anyway. Consensus is probably the best way to go about deciding on the title, so have at. I'm for moving it, to line up with how other series go about it, but I could be convinced by strength og numbers the other way. GRAPPLE X 23:48, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm all for this. See my comment two years ago during my GA review. I must have missed the nominator's subsequent request for me to move it. Matthewedwards :  Chat  04:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pilot (The X-Files)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lemurbaby (talk • message • contribs • count • logs • email) 11:19, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

• This article is looking great. After making some minor formatting edits I'm happy to award this article GA. Congratulations! ... Any chance you'd be willing to get the articles on Mulder and Scully up to GA as well? Both of them are almost there. Let me know if you take them on and need a reviewer. Cheers, Lemurbaby (talk) 11:29, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

  Thanks for taking the time to review this! I'll probably end up getting round to Mulder and Scully soon enough. I was planning on doing some work on the characters when I've done the first season articles, and I'll definitely let you know when I get started. GRAPPLE X 22:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pilot (The X-Files). 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/20071223131112/http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117901226.html?categoryid=32&cs=1&query=The+X-Files to http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117901226.html?categoryid=32&cs=1&query=The+X%2DFiles

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) 15:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)