Last modified on 18 June 2014, at 16:40

Talk:Veronica Mars

Return to "Veronica Mars" page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Veronica Mars page.


Please see Veronica Mars/Format for formatting guidelines. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 11:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Vote for deletion noticeEdit

This article was preserved after a vote for its deletion. See its archived VfD entry for details.

Thanks to everybody who rallied to its cause! — Jeff Q (talk) 04:35, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Size of pageEdit

This page is currently 157KB. The Buffy page is 291KB. VM had a season and a half, Buffy had 6.5 seasons: almost four time as much. Angel, having had 5 seasons, is just 64KB. This suggests, to me, that it might be wise to trim quotations a little, until more reasonable levels are reached (note that Buffy is the longest page here, and documents a looooong running seasons). Thanks ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 15:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Title correctionsEdit

As I write this, the episode titles in this article appear to have been taken from TV.com's episode listing, which disagrees with UPN.com's listing, which is presumably more authoritative. Both sources and this list have (different) irregularities in their punctuation, capitalization, and spelling practices, in that not one of them is completely consistent with any known official style. To complicate matters, Wikipedia has now implemented a List of Veronica Mars episodes that has yet a fourth set of inconsistent practices.

Because I'm obnoxiously detail-oriented, I'm going to update both WQ and WP's episode lists (and WP's corresponding articles) so that they adhere to two basic principles:

  1. They will follow Wikipedia and Wikiquote's capitalization, punctuation, and spelling practices, which are identical.
  2. The title wording will follow UPN's list, on the assumption that it is most authoritative.

Where these two conflict, the first will be followed unless there is compelling reason to believe the difference was an intentional alteration by the creative team and not just a typo on the part of the UPN web content creator. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Jeff, your approach seems valid to me. I had also noticed the inconsistencies, but hadn't been able to find the time to figure out which was right. And since this page is actively worked by many, including you, I assumed it would be taken care of. I wholeheartedly support your rationale. ~ UDScott 14:24, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I was bold and did all the corrections, but I admit being troubled by two of them:
  • "The Return of Kane" vs. "Return of the Kane": UPN uses the former, but TV.com and IMDb (I just discovered) uses the latter. I was thinking it was supposed to be like The Return of Shane, but it might instead be a parallel to LOTR: The Return of the King.
  • "Kanes and Abels" vs. "Kanes and Abel's": Again, UPN disagrees with both TV.com and IMDb. It still trumps them, because TV.com is presumably not as close to the creators as UPN, and IMDb is known to have many errors of this sort, but UPN.com has its problems, too.
We could really use a Veronica Mars source better than UPN.com. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Though I'm not sure about "Return of the Kane," I'm fairly certain that it is "Kanes and Abel's." The title is referring to the Kane family and Abel's daughter - thus Kanes and Abel's. alliterator 12:23 3 February 2006
Actually, I've just looked at a few alternate sources (TWIZTV.com, Whoosh, and the official site) and each lists those particular episodes as "Return of the Kane" and "Kanes and Abel's". This includes the "official" WB site for the show, which I would consider a pretty reliable indicator. ~ UDScott 16:54, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I write for MarsInvestigations.net, whose titles are pretty much accurate. The only one I'm unsure about is "Ruskie Business" vs. "Russkie Business." MI.net has the first, but we've gone with the latter. alliterator 12:23 3 February 2006

A discussion at w:Talk:List of Veronica Mars episodes#Title corrections resulted in going with the titles "Return of the Kane", "Kanes and Abel's", and "Ruskie Business", based on agreement between two authoritative sources, the WB Veronica Mars site and the commercial DVD titles, mostly in contradiction with another authoritative source, UPN.com. (Unfortunately, none of them knows how to spell "Russkie", but if they wish to advertise their ignorance, that's their artistic privilege. ☺) The titles have already been corrected here as I write this, but I wanted to confirm this for readers. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Eliminating episode numbersEdit

Per Wikiquote talk:Templates/TV shows#Eliminating episode numbers, I would like to eliminate the episode numbers in the Veronica Mars ep titles to fix a number of current problems. Given the intense effort on the part of multiple editors here to keep the episode list current, I don't see that we really need the numbers, and this would allow direct links to WQ from the new Wikipedia VN episode articles. How do folks feel about this? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Custom table of contentsEdit

An anonymous user has created a malfunctioning custom table of contents for this article. This is worse than having the standard one, because it not only fails to provide proper links to all the sections, but also, in the carelessness of incomplete testing, practically guarantees that this problem will only worsen with an active show whose custom TOC needs regular updating. (This is the main reason why it's a bad idea to implement a custom TOC before a show ends its run.) Unless a registered user commits here on this talk page to maintain this TOC (or one like it) for now and the foreseeable future, I will revert this article to a standard table of contents. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


You will see that all of the links have been fixed, and with such a large number of people contributing to this page it stands to reason that it willl stay updated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.62.91.130 (talkcontribs) 17:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, 66.62.91.130, but there are still two links that aren't working, which you would have found if you had verified every single link as I already pointed out is a requirement for having these custom TOCs. It's not the number of editors contributing that matters; it's the need for at least one wiki-skilled editor to commit to properly maintaining the custom TOC. The fact that you've missed links even after having been told twice about this doesn't bode well. (It also doesn't help sponsor a feeling of participation that you haven't registered an ID. Users don't "own" IP addresses, so communicating with them on the IP talk page is problematic, and it is necessary for someone who commits to this level of maintenance to be easily and unambiguously reachable by the other editors who will inevitably ask why things aren't working right. I know because I've been through this on several different articles.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I checked all the links (again) and found one that wasn't working. I also cannot be responsible for problems in the TOC when someone else changes one of the headings.

66.62.91.130, you are wrong on two counts:
  1. First, you did not check all the links. You missed "Leave It to Beaver", which was incorrectly spelled "Leave it to Beaver". I discovered this with a 90-second test of every single link in the TOC, the same kind of test I perform on any article with a custom TOC. You have thoroughly demonstrated by now that, whatever you are doing when you test, it is not adequate to the responsibility of maintaining a custom TOC.
  2. Second, although wiki editors are generally welcome to do whatever work they wish (and avoid what they don't), custom TOCs are not the same thing as other edits. They are sufficiently complex that anyone who implements them is implicitly accepting the responsibility not only to create them, but to maintain them. Just as editors involved in an article revert erroneous or improper edits to the article, so too are they expected to watch for changes to custom TOCs. But because they're so challenging to implement, only a few editors in a project the size of Wikiquote know how to do this. (This is why I haven't just volunteered to jump in and do this myself — I don't have the time to add this commitment to my own work. I'd hoped to goad you into learning how to do this correctly and committing to the effort. I have apparently failed to do either.)
I also note that, despite your substantial contributions to Wikiquote thus far (assuming you're only a single person and not a bunch of folks using the same IP address — we have no way of knowing), you have yet to register a username, so I could post helpful suggestions to your user talk page and avoid these more "public" criticisms. (I cannot fathom why somone would not register a username. I can learn more about you from your IP than from a well-chosen username, and we require no private information for registration, as even the email address is optional.) Neither have you learned to use edit summaries, which anyone watching the changes to articles (like someone taking responsibility for fixing complex problems) should know is a critical time-saving element. All by yourself, you are managing to make this article hard to maintain. If no one else steps up to the responsibility of properly maintaining this TOC, I will revert to a standard TOC in a week or so. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
As promised, with no volunteer to manage the custom TOC, I have restored the standard one. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 12:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

holy godEdit

who the hell took the time to type all this shit up, seriously —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.251.140.128 (talkcontribs) 01:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." — a variation on a saying commonly attributed to Laozi (Lao-Tzu). The whole point of Wikimedia projects like Wikiquote is to make robust works possible by having millions of editors. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Names in QuotesEdit

It lists the name beaver in the quotes, shouldn't it be "Cassidy" -Peachey88 09:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You raise a good point. Usually, we use the names that characters are best known by; thus, it's always "Weevil", not "Eli". The "Cast" section gives the complete name to make connections clearer. (Please note, though, that it only exists to connect the characters with the actors. Explanations of relationships should be left to the corresponding Wikipedia articles, leaving Wikiquote articles devoted to quotes.)
But it occasionally happens that a dialog segment requires that some connection be made right there, else someone unfamiliar with the show would be confused. Consider the passage:
["Amber is a bitch" has been keyed on Beaver's car.]
Veronica: Hey, Cassidy. Who's Amber?
Beaver: I have no idea.
The exchange implies Beaver is Cassidy, in much the same way a reader must deduce by context who is speaking in an unattributed exchange of quotes in a book. But you can add clarifying info to the context line to make this a bit clearer; e.g., "has been keyed on Cassidy's (Beaver's) car". (That's an awkward example because of the apostrophe-s, but you get the idea.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler quotesEdit

I'm kinda new to this editing thing, and I've been too lazy to register an account thus far but I think i'll be doing that soon. Back to my question, I was wondering, for these quotes are you looking for ones that are memorable and humorous or ones that add to the storyline. OR is it just a mix of both and I should want try to leave it out the ones that give away the episodes plots? I really hope that makes sense...I'm looking for some guidelines I guess. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.187.75.78 (talkcontribs) 06:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to have missed this question earlier. In general, we're looking for quotes that are memorable long after the story is told, not quotes that illustrate the storylines. Wikiquote is a collection of pithy quotes, not a quotation version of a plot summary. The difference can often be seen when fans want to quote critical moments in a show that bring plot points to a dramatic climax, but aren't really memorable words unless they invoke in your mind a scene that you've already watched. Someone who has never seen Veronica Mars should be able to appreciate whatever quality is exhibited by the quotes here. The only people who can appreciate plot points are ones who have seen the show. I hope this helps to clarify things a bit. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

quoteEdit

i think it was the mars, bar episode where Keith finds a gun and asks veronica about it, i think we should quote veronicas reply about vengeance but i no longer have the episode to do it, can someone else? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.119.126 (talkcontribs) 09:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Too many quotesEdit

While I know it may be difficult to limit the number of quotes per episode for this show, it certainly appears that we have way too much here to escape possible copyright issues. We really need to trim the number of quotes per episode to single digits at least. This page is now one of the largest on Wikiquote and serious attention to this is needed. ~ UDScott 20:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Article could use some trimming here and there, otherwise it's mostly good. MatthewFenton 13:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I have restored the {{checkcopyright}} tag that Matthew removed, as this article doesn't even come close to being within our goal of 3-8 quotes maximum per episode. (That's every single episode, not average, as each episode is a copyrighted work.) The purpose of the flag is to get people to do the "trimming". Otherwise someone will swoop in and do massive deletions, or else the entire article be replaced with a {{copyvio}} tag, which would require it be rewritten from scratch. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I like quotes. I don't know much about the copyright issue of quotes - btw the comlete transcript of the show can be found somewhere on the Web, and it makes it much easier for me to watch the episodes (I'm German and I doubt they ever publish the series in German). However, there are too many quotes here. A lot of them are nice to read but not outstanding, and not really funny unless you've seen the show and remember what the situation was. And it's quite a lot to read... So I suggest 3-5 quotes per episode (as done on Wikipedia) plus perhaps a few background information about each quote. -- 21:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I have trimmed the quotes for season 1 (will continue working on the others when I can). Please try to keep this page in a reasonable condition. ~ UDScott 12:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Season 2 has now also been trimmed. ~ UDScott 15:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Season 3 is also now complete - I will remove the copyright tag. ~ UDScott 16:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Split the article upEdit

Maybe we should think about putting season 1 and 2 on separate, because it would reduce the page size (length and KB size) and easier to manage as well. 59.167.214.31 08:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.214.31 (talkcontribs) 08:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I think not. Editors of this article have not demonstrated any interest in keeping the amount of quotes down to a non-copyright-violating set, like 3-8 per episode. Splitting up the article will only encourage this problem. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Possible VandalEdit

In the Debasement Tapes section and i think theres a tinny bit in the I Know What You'll Do Next Summer section. Peachey88 01:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? On a quick check I didn't see anything that jumped out at me. Also a perusal of the history shows no changes to those sections for months. -- Greyed 01:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
EG: Peachey88 12:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

BlackKat70: [to Piz] Advice: Never meet your idol.

Desmond Fellows: More advice: Always confirm the accuracy of photos.


[Mac and Veronica are getting lunch] Mac: Is the eggplant good? Spaghetti server: It's okay. Mac: How about that stuff? Spaghetti server: It's good. Mac: It's probably horrible for you, right? I'll stay with the eggplant. No, wait - what do you think? [pause] I need to see a psychiatrist. Veronica: I was thinking more an English professor. What we're dealing with her is an absurd level of symbolism. [to server] Two lasagnas. Spaghetti server: Okay. Mac: Symbolism? Veronica: I mean, the Bronson Parmigiana is good for me, but, ooh! The Maxuccine looks awfully tempting. Mac: It's not my fault Max won't stop calling. Like you should talk. Veronica: Me? I'm not ordering good boy while wishing I ordered bad boy. Mac: No, you gave up bad boy, but keep asking for samples of good boy. Veronica: No, I - wait, what? Mac: Okay, if Logan is the fettucine... [cellphone rings] Veronica: It's the eggplant.


Desmond Fellows: [to Veronica] Anyone ever tell you, you look like a feisty young Barbara Eden?


Desmond Fellows: The bad boys get all the chicks. I mean, look at you, Pez. You're single, and you're very nice. There's a correlation.


(although i'm not quite sure about this one) Kizza: I'm looking for detective Mars. Veronica: I'm detective Mars. Kizza: But you're just a girl. You're a teenager. Veronica: A girl, a teenager, and a private detective - I'm a triple threat. Barely fits on my business card.

Please do not call material that you simply believe is in error "vandalism". Vandalism has a very specific meaning here — an obvious defacement of a page with material that is clearly not part of the subject matter. The vast majority of inaccurate quotes are added or changed by your fellow Wikiquotians in good faith, often operating from memory (just as you appear to be doing). Having added quite a few quotes to this article myself, I can assure you that none of this is vandalism, and all of it sounds rather plausible. (I distinctly remember some of these dialogs myself, although I can't vouch for the exact content. But my own testimony is nothing compared to a proper review of the epsiode to confirm the material.)

We welcome any suggestions of changes (which you can do yourself, if you believe these to be either inaccurate or otherwise not worthy of inclusion), but please assume good faith of all editors whenever possible. If you have any questions about this, I'd be happy to discuss this with you on my talk page. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not talking about the material as such but as the names in the section, i can definetly say that "Spaghetti server" was never a character within the show. Peachey88 03:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Heh, look at the dialogue and you'll see that it fits. They're in a restaurant and are talking to the person who takes their order and serves their food. A server or, if it's a spaghetti joint, a spaghetti server. Could probably be shortened to server and not lose anything but I don't think that is vandalism. Not sure about the character names of the other two. It's been a while since I watched Veronica Mars. But with a character who's name is "Pez" I doubt "Kizza" is out of line. I'll double check when I have more time. -- Greyed 03:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
More specifically, the IMDb entry on "Debasement Tapes" lists the minor character who served the food being discussed in the quoted scene (in the university cafeteria, as I recall) as "Spaghetti Server", making this an accurate attribution. (Our style, like IMDb's, is to captalize roles as proper nouns, so I've tweaked the article to reflect this.)
Some quotes, like this, feature characters who are not regulars. Whoever contributed this quote was right to use the published "name". It's perfectly fine, too, to raise an objection if you believe there is an error. But calling it "vandalism" is unnecessarily accusatory, especially when, as Greyed suggests, the context makes this plausible.
There are instances where editors have made prank edits that also may seem plausible but are incorrect. Even if something appears in retrospect to be a malicious edit, we try to assume good faith unless we have compelling evidence to the contrary (like a string of edits from the same username or IP that are blatantly malicious). This promotes better cooperative working, which is vital on a project like this where it's impossible to really know your fellow editors. Please consider this in the future. Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)