Talk:List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

TIme to archive?

If someone else agrees with me I would like to archive this page once the Featured List Nominatoin ends. Cnriaczoy42 03:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I have archived everything above this on the talk page. The list to the disscusion where we decided on the standards still links there. Cnriaczoy42 21:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Get Ready...

The first episode of Season 3 is the awakening, said by several websites. Dar book 07:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Pooldude has said he has the 4th episode name for season 3 and will announce it either Monday or Tuesday. As you know Wiki says it's not a reliable source whatever so it shouldn't be put on the list or have a page made for it. Pooldude has also said one of the episodes will be a Sokka episode so it might be that. We should be ready for countless reverts next week taking the episode out. -Dylan0513 03:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

What happened to 1 2 and 3? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 04:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Lol, he just gets them randomly from his inside man in Avatar. I'm not sure if they make the episode names in order. Maybe what just first comes up. -Dylan0513 11:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

And Pooldude had announced that episode 3.4 will be "Sokka's Master." A reminder to everyone: This is not confirmed and should not be put on the list nor a new page be made for it. -Dylan0513 05:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

He as also anounced that that episode 3.3 will be titled "The Painted Lady". Again please don't post it as above. The Placebo Effect 02:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

So, here it is July 2007, season 3 episodes should be out by now (are they?), and this article isn't being updated.... =Axlq 20:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

No, season three hasn't started, and there's no official word on when it will.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Season III did start just now xd well since u haven't posted. - Hariki<3 00:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

One Exception?

The page says that there was one exception where release didn't line up with continuity. Which one was that exactly? - Joshua368 13:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Appa's Lost Days, which showed events that happened at the same time as various events from several previous episodes, back to and including The Desert. Y BCZ 15:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Is it really noteworthy though? From a storytelling perspective, everything has been released in the right order... - Joshua368 15:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

...It's a single clarification. It's three words. Who cares? Y BCZ 17:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

If no one cared, it would've just gotten deleted. >.> - Joshua368 20:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Avatar Spirit

Whoever keeps removing the source, please stop. Avatar Spirit and Distant Horizons are official fan sites recognized by Nickelodeon. This page requires a source for the episode listings so it doesn't look like we pulled them out of our (*EXPLICIT WARNING*) butt. Please don't remove anymore sources. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 16:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Episode Names and other stuff

Hey, I'm new here (MegaSonic55) and found this information on TV.com: This season will be titled Book 3: Fire. (THIS was obvious) The characters will all have new hairstyles for this season. This is similar to Katara's and Sokka's sleeveless attire and Zuko's and Iroh's cut-off top-knots of the second season in terms of long-lasting character design changes and continuity. In this, the third season of Avatar: The Last Airbender, Aang must master firebending and defeat Fire Lord Ozai. (edit) Episodes 41-42, 45-60 have yet to be named. Episode 43 is currently called The Painted Lady Episode 44 is currently called Sokka's Master 30 January 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MegaSonic55 (talk • contribs) Diego Godoy (Talk to me =P) 03:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Number one sign you posts with ~~~~, two, we have all heard this, but unforuently, tv.com is an unverified source. Users submit information just like here so we don't use it. The Placebo Effect 02:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree you should sighn but as of either today or yesterday, the 2nd episode had been anounced. Its will be called the head band. You can look for yourself on TV.com. As we all now that its airing in march, they give more details, about its exact day being aired, but maybe not the exact answer we were hoping for. User:AvatarDude360

Good news, another episode revealed. Its called The awakening. Its the premier of season 3. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.36.18.11 (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

Yes, and again we can't put these up because they're coming from Pooldude's contact, not an official source. -Dylan0513 23:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

what do you mean?

We can only use official sources and a leak from Avatar is not official. -Dylan0513 01:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

IMDB lists some episodes with airdates and one description. Link Is this official?

1. The Awakening (April 27, 2007)
2. The Headband
3. The Painted Lady (July 13, 2007)

   After the gang's close shave in "The Headband", Sokka decides its time to leave Aang and try to find Suki. Meanwhile, Zuko desperately tries to find out the location of his mother.

4. Sokka's Master
5. Episode 5 (July 21, 2007)

-Demon42 18:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I'm sorry, but not only is IMDB a unreliable source, but really (!) who came up with them?(!) For the 100th time, unless Nick or nick.com says when the new season comes out, we don't put stuff that was fanmade. There isn't really anything we can put until said event has happened. Momoroxmysoxoff March 10 2007

There are many more sites we can use for new episode info. Most likely, an official press release from Nick or something from http://www.animationinsider.net/ will be our first conformation. -Dylan0513 15:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I've got a brilliant suggestion, one that will rock the foundation of the way we change this article for all time. Now, get yourself prepared, get ready, get ready, and, here it is........We actually WAIT for the episoides to come out, and THEN we put in the names of the shows! I know, I know, you'd think that no one would ever think of that idea, but I'm not just part of your average crowd, I geuss (Note that in everything I just typed, I was sarcastic).

But jokes aside, and seriously here, the best way to know that we have the right episoide names is to watch the episoide on T.V., or when they are released to the public by another veritifiable(sp?) source. Do not fill wikipedia with info that you see on any other sources (unless, of course, it's from the creators themselvs, or somthing along those lines). Keyblade Mage 21:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

How is IMDB unreliable? It is made by the editors of the site. No wiki editing is allowed on IMDB. Plus, I see it being used as a source for many articles. I think IMDB is a perfectly reliable source. It gets it's information directly from the source, which in this case, is Viacom International or Nickelodeon. --76.21.32.2 05:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

School Time Shipping

Well... It shouldn't be listed or something like that in the article? Maybe...Maybe not. Diego Godoy (Talk to me =P) 02:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not an episode. It being on the media page is good enough. -Dylan0513 03:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not a full episode and it's not cannon, but it's clearly an episode. Of course it should be on this page. It just should be under a separate category for "specials" is all. I'm too lazy to add it, though. ButteredToast 05:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it is not an episode. It is a special or short and we took that catagory away long ago. -Dylan0513 12:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

See, the problem here is that whether or not it counts as an episode is more of a matter of opinion. There are too many ways to interpret the definition of "episode" to say for a FACT whether or not a special or a short counts. It's really up to the individual to decide. This is one of those fundamental flaws in having an open-source encyclopedia. ButteredToast 00:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it's not an episode, it's a short. That's why it's nick.com/avatarshort. All sources will say it is a short. I don't understand how you think it's an episode. -Dylan0513 00:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Calm down. Nobody's editing your precious Wikipedia article to include School Shipping. 9_9 We're both right. You're arguing semantics. Get over it. ButteredToast 05:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Nick just showed off two more shorts during an Avatar Marathon, consisting of "Swamp Skiin' Throwdown" and "Bender Battle" on the Nicktoons Network. It might be grounds on putting the special/short section back into the article.68.228.36.135 06:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Remove images or lose featured list status

There is a discussion about Fair use images in featured lists at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_list_criteria#Fair_Use_images which may result in this list losing its featured list status. - Peregrine Fisher 23:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Huh...well, if it comes to that, I'd rather have a list that's actually useful than have a shiny star in the corner.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Why was this done suddenly without further discussion? Wouldn't the only consequence have been losing featured status? would that really be so bad?74.134.251.144 22:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Consensus got established (elsewhere) to ban this sort of use all together. Can't say I agree with it, but c'est la vie.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually it doesn't even look there's consensus for this. This is something that got pushed through by a group of admins using their power to lock articles once they've made their deletions. --Minderbinder 22:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Well still, is it for the sake of featured status or general policy. If it's the former then it sounds like consensus would be required. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.134.251.144 (talk) 03:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

Comment by Jimblack

The following comment was orginally made by User:Jimblack on this archive page and is being relocated to here.
Look guys, I Jimblack have been changing all of this because for the people who haven't seen the episodes of the show and if they read that article, they will know just a little bit about it, not like the whole thing. Oh, and tv guide.com has the different episode names like fortune teller or the warriors of kyoshi island or the deserters. Also, the conjoined episodes like the boy in the iceberg and the avatar returns make it more interesting to be in one row. So can you please just accept what i am doing and i would really like that. Jimblack 20:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Jimblack

Hmm, well considering you need consensus, considering the names we are using are correct, and considering that we've already been through page after page discussing how much to spoil, I think maybe you should just accept our edits that revert you. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 17:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Taking the items one-by-one:

• Not having spoilers in the summaries: that's what the spoiler warning is there for. These are summaries, not teasers.
• TV Guide episode names: that's just wrong, plain and simple. The episode was most defiantly not "The Warrior of Kyoshi Island" or any of those other things. Just look at the title cards for God's sake.
• The "conjoined" episodes: they are two distinct epsiodes, that's how they should be listed.

Anything else?--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Law's been set man, it's been pretty okay so far man. A lot of these guys know what they're doing so probably better not to shake the boat, know what I mean?Gamloverks 01:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Rock the boat, don't rock the boat baby. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 18:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Clean_up_for_the_featured_ones

There is a discussion concerning the images on this list at |Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Clean_up_for_the_featured_ones. - Peregrine Fisher 18:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like we've got no choice, now...but anybody have ideas to make the page not the butt ugly mess it is now?--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

UK DVD Level 2 headlineease

has the complete book one DVD been released in the UK yet? please tell me.--P. Skiddy 17:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)P.Skiddy\

Comment by Arlion 20:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)Arlion

Hey guys, how bout I shorten the text for the summaries of the episodes? The reason this is a good idea is because it will ruin everything for the people who read it. I am not going to change the names of the episodes or conjoin them like jimblack did, but I just want to shorten the summaries. so please let me. Arlion 20:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)Arlion

Hiya Jim. Got another sock puppet, eh? (You aren't fooling anybody.) Anyway, at least you're using talk pages now, that's a nice change. However, I'm afraid Wikipedia policy dosn't let us remove/shorten things just to avoid spoilers.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

213.10.13.249 12:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC) God is season 3 out yet? I'm craving for some more Avatar. But as I see it here, season 3 didn't start yet, right?

Pictures

Who the **** got rid of all the pictures for the episodes and DVD boxes? I mean i wanna know what the S2V4 picture is but its not there. But they had the S2V3 pic before it came out so what happened? (RedwallFreak305, July 4 2007, 9:41 pm)

Long story short, it got decided fair use images weren't going to be allowed in these lists anymore. Nothing to be done about it.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Season 3 DVD release date

according to this link, the first volume of Book 3: Fire will be released on October 30th, 2007. Should we add this to the list? Granted, we're not even 100% sure yet what each episode will be called (The awakening, Sokka's master, ect. are all just reported), but we do know that the season will start before the episodes are released on DVD. Also, the above link contains a picture of the Book 3 DVD coverart. Spoilers lay within. --Piemanmoo 12:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

According to the link, it should air before October when according to the link is when the DVD for the third season will be released. However, this looks pretty right on, so possibly expect the third season around September.69.136.181.249 14:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Was anyone else giddy like a school girl when they saw that cover? That link is reporting using IMDB which we don't use so we need to remember to keep that information off the page. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 06:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Not a forum H2P, keep this stuff off here... lol. -Dylan0513 00:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually just trying to make sure there is a reminder (while putting in a forum opinion...). I've seen the IMDB names removed a few times now. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 07:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Those acrually aren't IMBD names anymore. Most on there are from Dongbufeng and pooldude now. -Dylan0513 11:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

that image looks like fan art Speaketh now to me! 15:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, but it it's real. See my comments here. The image has been confirmed on an established site generally considered reliable, as well as by a known member of the show staff. Lucky number 49 17:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I was the one who originally saw this news item [1] on TVShowsonDVD.com and then emailed it to AvatarSpirit.net and posted it on Wiki. As AvatarSpirit.net notes, TVShowsonDVD.com "gets its information right from Paramount's password protected press website." So yeah, I'm pretty certain it's real.--Choi9999 23:13, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The air dates for season 3 are up on TV.com. --ShanRen 22:24, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Start of Season 3 was 'officially' announced at SDCC as September 21, 2007, 8 PM EDT. --opello 05:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Book 3: Fire Section

now that the date is out, shouldn't we start adding air dates for episodes

Nope. Not until we get episode names, summaries, and dates from "reliable" sources. -Dylan0513 02:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Um... someone told me that 320 is called Fire Lord Zuko and pretty much gave me a sypnosis of it. He wouldn't give me a source. I hope he's lying or else the ending has been spoiled. There's nothing official about 320, is there? just so i know for sure that wasn't the truth? (RedwallFreak305) (August 1 2007 11:17 pm)

I think we should add something that says when Season 3 is starting, below Season 2. Better then thrown in the middle of a paragraph. (PuffyLover77) (August 3 2007 10:21 EDT)

So how would one go about proving they are a reliable source? I would like to do such. :) I currently have access to (and have watched) the first six episodes of the new season and would like to contribute what I can to the community. So how would I go about proving what I say is true short of doing anything that is illegal or can get me into trouble? And furthermore, what information is allowed to be posted? --203.69.39.251 23:17, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Yet how do you know if these are real episodes? (PuffyLover77) (August 6 2007 5:12pm EDT)

Hi, same poster from above, different IP address (never can be too careful :) and I registered a name. I work for a company who has received the tapes directly from Nick, and I hope that they wouldn't send us fakes. We started receiving them a couple of months ago and they've been coming in every two weeks or so ever since. Sorry for being so ambiguous, but while what I'm attempting to do is innocent, I don't wanna be that guy on the 11:00 news getting 10 years in jail for copyright violations :) Any ideas on how I can verify myself as a source? I could try to post some screenshots, for instance, I can post a picture of what happens to Aang's first glider. I'll see what I can do, if anyone's interested. Aavatar

Fascinating as that is, I'm afraid we can't really use that as a source. Wikipedia policy requires sources to be published in some manner, and I don't think a personal account of an advance screening like that would cut it. Personally, were I you, I'd just rest in the knowledge of being extraordinarily lucky and inspiring some very unabashed jealously on my part. Heh.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

lol! Aw, I wasn't trying to inspire "unabashed jealousy".  :) But, of course, you're correct about wikipedia's policy. Although I'm very curious about how they handle sources not on the internet. Say, if someone from Nick called and said "hey, here's some info" would they just say 'sorry... there's no online source to cite.' Curious. Anyway, if there *is* anyway that I can contribute my knowledge please let me know. For now, I'll leave you with a few more screenshots. If you don't think I should continue to post these please let me know.

Do not continue to post them. Please. Not only is what you're doing so so so so frowned on by the network, but you're also ruining it for a lot of people. Just enjoy the fact that you've seen them and sit on whatever knowledge you have. Please. The Avatar section has always held off on posting information about upcoming episodes until they have aired. It's a good policy. Please let it continue. talk

I absolutely concur. My intentions were not to cause problems or hurt the Avatar list. I truly believe what I could provide would help make it better. My only reason for posting those screenshots was to verify that my knowledge was legit. Also, for the record, I don't see how I was "ruining" anything as most what I "revealed" had already been seen in the trailer and the other two or three were very ambigous and not "spoiler-rific". I made sure of that. Never the less, I respect the wiki community and its wishes. Aavatar 12:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

out of curiosity since the season 3 DVD state book 3 as Fire, then why not the episode lists? shadzar|Talk|contribs 10:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

So we're at the point where we'll soon have sources for the first 2 episode titles and descriptions. CableTVTalk [2], should have the September highlights out soon (week and a half most likely( featuring names and descriptions of the first 2 episodes. I have heard in the past though, that this can't be used as a source since it's a forum. My argument against this is that it's an official Nick announcement, it's just being shown in a forum. If we can't use that, Animation Insider [3] may or may not have the September Highlights as well. We can definitly use them. And if they don't put it up and we can't used CableTvTalk, TvGuide [4] will have the first episode title and description up 2 weeks before the 21st. This is the order in which the titles and descriptions usually come out, but since this is the premier, we may have other sources as well. -Dylan0513 18:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I meant for this to be discussion for if Cabletvtalk.com can be sourced or not. It would be better for this to be decided for the Highlights come out. -Dylan0513 00:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

3rd time guys, can we use cabletvtalk.com as a source or not? -Dylan0513 12:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

well, cabletv, yes, as long as its an official announcement, but not tv guide, their listing is far too off, i'd prefer maybe animation insider. but my top choice is if avatarspirit [5] posts it 71.206.136.69 00:54, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Episode Summary for first episode is from TvGuide: [6] -Dylan0513 14:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Third season

I think the statement about the start of the next season "The third season begins with Aang aboard a Fire Nation ship and Zuko returning home." needs some reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beast of traal (talk • contribs) 19:42, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

start of season 3

Has anyone actually looked at the nick.com site? According to this site, [7] (nick's main avatar page), the season begins on September 21 8:30p.m., and also the commercials agree with this. I think thats about all the evidence needed to change that. It's just been bugging me for a while and it can no longer simply be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed Lihead1 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Aang figure with Book 2 volume 4.

When I bought the DVD I got a Aang figure with it, but oddly enough I haven't found any other information about the DVD coming out with a figure. Should the figure be added to the DVD information? 75.110.134.91 02:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC) Kaji Of The Flame

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l215/_kaji_/avatar.jpg Picture of the DVD and figure 75.110.134.91 02:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC) Kaji Of The Flame

yeah i have 1 of those too. User:Wikialexdx —Preceding comment was added at 01:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Recap with Katara

Should this be added? (The Season 2 Jump-On)? 24.5.135.180 05:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

1-9 episode titles

I just check IMBD.com and TV.com and they had episode tittles!!! Yay!!! So here were the tittles that I saw form IMBD.com first episode obvously-The Awakening, second episonde also obvouse-The Headband, third episode-The Painted Lady (intresting), fourth episode-Sokka's Master, fith episode-The Beach, (episode number six is not listed) seventh episode-The Runaway, eighth episode-The Puppetmaster. Now here is TV.com first episode-The Awakening,second episonde-The Headband, third episode-The Painted Lady, fourth episode-Sokka's Master, fith episode-The Beach, (sixth episode is still not listed) seventh episode-The Runaway, eighth episode-The Puppetmaster and the ninth episode-Nightmares and Daydreams. Not sure if these are useable but that's what I found.Smileyface 12 91 00:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm....We should still probobly wait, unless those are really reliable sources. TV.com, unless I'm mistaken, isn't too good, and I couldn't find where on IMBD the episoides are listed. Keyblade Mage 00:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

I didn't think TV.com was a very reliable source I just used it to check (I figuered if more than one site said it it was more likely to be true than if only one said it) Here is a link to the IMBD.com page. Sorry they don't say what happens in the episodes.Smileyface 12 91 05:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

IMBD.com seems more reliable than TV.com --Drnoitall.hello 10:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, TV.com isn't considered reliable. Long story short, all their info comes from an unofficial leak at Nickelodeon, not any kind of official publication or anything, doesn't cut it for Wikipedia. Also, IMDB is most assuredly not reliable in regard to episode titles and so forth. They've had some incredible garbage in the past; the editorial oversight is nil. In this case, my best guess is that their stuff is just copied off TV.com, anyway.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Avatar Spirit has a list of episodes in their DVD section, they have 1-10, and if im not mistaken, they are an official source. [8]

The Awakening
The Headband
The Painted Lady
Sokka's Master
The Beach
The Avatar and the Fire Lord
The Runaway
The Puppetmaster
Nightmares and Daydreams
Day of Black Sun Rau J16 02:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, they're just a fansite...their stuff is coming from that tvshows on dvd site, I'm not sure about where they get there stuff from, have to look into that.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I am now putting up the argument that TvShowsOnDVD is not a reliable source based on the information that 310 was an assumed title at that the others were gotten from Dongbufeng.net, which is not considered a reliable source on wiki. The titles will be taken down until this is discussed further. -Dylan0513 19:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

...and there's a discussion on this on the deletion page too. I think it would be more appropriate here, but whatever. -Dylan0513 19:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

regardless of where the information comes from, Nickelodeon considers them an official source, so we should consider them one too. i doubt that they would release unscourced info. Rau J16 22:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Read the source, the assume these are the names. The Placebo Effect 22:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

"Nickelodeon considers them an official source"? How do you figure? You do realize that Avatar Spirit is just a fansite, not affiliated with Nick or anything, right?--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if you considered them reliable or not, but I have been to some pages that do. Just thought it couldn't hurt to tell you what I saw. About [9] it does have some info on it, but I don't think that nick would have the Day of Black Sun so soon. Well I guess it could just be them talking about it. Any way if it's just a fan site it is very likely that they are just guessing about what will be on there. It will only be a few more weeks until we know for sure so why not wait? and as I said I was just sharing what I found I'm sure rauj16 was just doing the same.Smileyface 12 91 08:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[reindent] It was on this, and other avatar pages when looking for sources, and name one time avatar spirit posted incorrect information. THEY ARE RELIABLE. Rau J16 19:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

AS got their information from the aformentioned article. That article is assuming the names of the episodes based on the leak at donbufeng, ergo, it is not verified and not sutiable for wikipedia The Placebo Effect 19:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. Look, Avatar Spirit parroting assumptions made elsewhere does not make those assumptions facts. ASN's own news page says that got the info from tvshowsondvd.com, and that site just assumed at the episode names for season three's disc two, they didn't get it from an official publication or anything. I don't care if half the sites on the internet have these episode titles, until it comes from a reliable source, it doesn't go in the article.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Fine Fine, but then the DVD information, and the assumed titles should all be removed. Rau J16 01:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that TVShowsOnDVD count cause I found it from Avatar Spirit but someone had to delete it when it was removed. - Hariki<3 00:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Avatar Spirit got their information from this article, which in its wording does not 100% confirm the episode titles —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Placebo Effect (talk • contribs) 00:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I Think it's perfectly fine. I use it too and get all the info and I think it is reasonable. Avatar Portal has some info too!!! http://www.theavatarportal.com/ Anyways Avatar Spirit and Avatar Portal was right for the first 5 episodes. I think they are right as well - Hariki<3 00:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Fire Volume 2

more news on volume 2 is out just a heads up Rau J16 05:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

The writeup on volume 2 says '7-10'. I'm pretty certain this should be 6-10, since volume 1 only has 5 episodes and the rest are supposed to as well (7-10 would only be 4). I've changed this, if anyone has a problem please say so. Tyciol 21:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Images of DVDs?

Should the images of the DVDs be put into the charts? This is Wikipedia after all, and it would be best to show all the info. --Lucky135g 22:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

We can't beacuse we are not allowed to have an excess amount of fair use images in an article, and puting 16 episodes would be too many. The Placebo Effect 22:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe an image of each of the complete books? That way, all the books would be shown. --Lucky135g 22:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

"Upcoming" subheading

Does "upcoming" refer to America or in general? Because The Avatar and the Fire Lord just aired in the UK. --Sonic Mew 17:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Really? I assume if it really has aired in the UK, then it can be moved out of the Upcoming section. I'll give you the honor, but prepare to get flamed by the Avatar WikiProject. The Placebo Effect 17:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

IMPORTANT DISCUSSION

In the UK, the first TEN episodes are being aired this week. That means that The Avatar and The Firelord, which airs in the US on Friday, Aired earlier today. FOur more episodes which have not been released in America yet, will air on thursday and Friday. The question is this: Do we add these episodes to the Aired section, because they have been released, or leave them in the upcoming episode section until the episodes are released in the US? My personal view is that since the episodes have aired somewhere in the world, they should be moved out of the upcoming episode section to the aired section. If you read this, Please respond because this will have to be solved ASAP because two new episodes come out Thursday and Friday night in the UK. The Placebo Effect 03:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I must say, my first thought in response to your statement is a string of vulgar, profane, and highly distubring swear words as I consider why I had the sad misfortune of living on the wrong side of the Atlantic (I'd give it all up for ten episodes in one week). Once I'm past that, it's pretty obvious that they should be moved to the "Aired" section. Wikipedia is not an encyclopedie for the US, by the US, or about the US. Many of its articles have no connection to the States in any way, and many of those that do are written from the outside perspective. If they're aired, even if it's at 2 in the morning in Southern Mongolia as a result of a faulty transmitter, it should be marked as having aired.

Of course, if it actually is aired at 2 in the morning in Southern Mongolia as a result of a faulty transmitter I'm going to absolutely freak out. What the hells the point of all my ridiculously expensive and pointless technological gear if it can't even receive faulty transmissions from Mongolia? JBK405 04:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I say we put it in the aired section but written on it as ONLY IN UK. When they are actually aired we removed the ONLY AIRED IN UK. - Hariki<3 01:51, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Why? When they've only aired in the US and not in the UK we don't mark it as such, nor when they air anywhere else (Many TV shows and movies never air in the US at all, should we mark them as never having aired despite their XXX-year broadcast run?). This article isn't about the episodes in the US, but rather about the episodes themselves, and if they've aired in the UK then they've aired. JBK405 02:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm with JBK405 on this. It does not matter what country it airs on. Ofunniku 17:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

well, i agree, too, i guess, but i saw other articles that show diffrent air dates in in others countries. Wikialexdx 20:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC

THat works better on article pages than this list. The Placebo Effect 01:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

actually, i change my mind, it should show when it got aired in diffrent countires, it shows better detail. --Wikialexdx 00:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we should put a colum for the US air Date and the UK air date, since it seems it was the same up to the 24th of October. It Can show whe it even aired in other countries, if we can find that kind of information.AmericanAtl 21:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

hi there, we are missing an "upcomeing episodes" section now btw, maybe someone wanna fix, even if its only the names of the episodes so are more comeing out than the 10 that came out in the UK or where are the dates for the rest —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.210.162.212 (talk) 07:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The Western Air Temple

This article was tagged for deletion as a hoax, and I am not familiar enough with this show to know whether it's a legit episode or not. Could one of you good folks help me out by either slapping a source on that article or tagging it for AfD deletion, as appropriate? Thanks bunches. -FisherQueen (talk • contribs) 11:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

That episode does not exist, the page should have been deleted. Rau J16 23:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

well, yeah, there is a western air temple, but i doupht it will be a episode —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikialexdx (talk • contribs) 01:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Release Date

Someone needs to change when Book 3 Fire: Volume 1 came out because it was available at Best Buy today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.161.227 (talk) 02:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Creepy

I know i'm probably making to big a deal about this, but why is creepy in the description of The Puppetmaster it just seems to opinionated for a wiki. Link287 04:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT The Placebo Effect 05:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

UK Aired Episodes

In the UK, the first TEN episodes are being aired this week. That means that The Avatar and The Firelord, which airs in the US on Friday, Aired earlier today. FOur more episodes which have not been released in America yet, will air on thursday and Friday. The question is this: Do we add these episodes to the Aired section, because they have been released, or leave them in the upcoming episode section until the episodes are released in the US? My personal view is that since the episodes have aired somewhere in the world, they should be moved out of the upcoming episode section to the aired section. If you read this, Please respond because this will have to be solved ASAP because two new episodes come out Thursday and Friday night in the UK. The Placebo Effect 03:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I must say, my first thought in response to your statement is a string of vulgar, profane, and highly distubring swear words as I consider why I had the sad misfortune of living on the wrong side of the Atlantic (I'd give it all up for ten episodes in one week). Once I'm past that, it's pretty obvious that they should be moved to the "Aired" section. Wikipedia is not an encyclopedie for the US, by the US, or about the US. Many of its articles have no connection to the States in any way, and many of those that do are written from the outside perspective. If they're aired, even if it's at 2 in the morning in Southern Mongolia as a result of a faulty transmitter, it should be marked as having aired.

Of course, if it actually is aired at 2 in the morning in Southern Mongolia as a result of a faulty transmitter I'm going to absolutely freak out. What the hells the point of all my ridiculously expensive and pointless technological gear if it can't even receive faulty transmissions from Mongolia? JBK405 04:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Why? When they've only aired in the US and not in the UK we don't mark it as such, nor when they air anywhere else (Many TV shows and movies never air in the US at all, should we mark them as never having aired despite their XXX-year broadcast run?). This article isn't about the episodes in the US, but rather about the episodes themselves, and if they've aired in the UK then they've aired. JBK405 02:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm with JBK405 on this. It does not matter what country it airs on. Ofunniku 17:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree as well. If they've aired, they've aired, regardless of where first. --Slartibartfast1992 21:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

well, i agree, too, i guess, but i saw other articles that show diffrent air dates in in others countries. Wikialexdx 20:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC

THat works better on article pages than this list. The Placebo Effect 01:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

actually, i change my mind, it should show when it got aired in diffrent countires, it shows better detail. --Wikialexdx 00:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we should put a colum for the US air Date and the UK air date, since it seems it was the same up to the 24th of October. It Can show whe it even aired in other countries, if we can find that kind of information.AmericanAtl 21:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

hi there, we are missing an "upcomeing episodes" section now btw, maybe someone wanna fix, even if its only the names of the episodes so are more comeing out than the 10 that came out in the UK or where are the dates for the rest —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.210.162.212 (talk) 07:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The displayed dates are still for the US release, while the UK dates were added and are commented out. Why is this? 132.236.59.82 05:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

And now they're back to displaying the UK dates. Let's leave them there now, please. 132.236.59.82 06:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright I just had a idea because people from the UK want it their way (which I totally get) and people from the US want it their way (that makes sence too) why don't we get throw out the upcoming episodes list because depending on your country that isn't right or is compeletly correct. And put a UK and US air dates in the table? That way everyone would be happy and most people wouldn't be so confused. So it would look somthing like this:

Title	UK Air date	US Air date	Chapter #	Episode #
"The Awakening"	September 21, 2007	September 21, 2007	1	31

I have no idea if that is the actual air date for the UK and I would suggest that the names of both countrys are spelled out but this is just to show what it may look like.Smileyface 12 91 22:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Not really, im in the US and show are others like JBK are in the us, The Placebo Effect 23:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

My opinion is that there should be only one column and that should be for the first time it was aired anywhere in the world. The finer detail about airing dates should only be available in the episode's wiki entry. 202.89.188.28 06:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok I was just giving an idea bcause people keep changing the airdates from UK to US and then back agian. Smileyface 12 91 08:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe if you just added the US airdate as a note in the episode summary to make everyone happy...But then again I'm not really a user so you guys probably wouldn't take me seriously so yeah... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.111.133.193 (talk) 05:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

We all weren't users at some point, I at least won't take you any less seriously because of that...of course, I'm still gonna disagree with you, but it is in no way because of your status (Which begs the question, which would you prefer? Would you rather I disagree with you for logical reasons which perhaps reveals a flaw in your thinking, or yould you rather I disagree with you because of an unfounded value judgement?). Despite just how kick ass the USA is, there are more people (and more nations) outside the USA than in it, and they've all got their own airdates. To list each nation/region individually is simply impractical, and to make a special note of one or two is quite biased; what makes the US/UK more worthy of a special note than, say, Korea (After all, the show is actually animated in Korea). It might make sense if those one or two other nations were special airings (For example, if this is a show which, for whatever reason, never leaves the USA and is now being shown outside the country for the first time, or something like that), but as it is, it's just quibbling. Right now, we should leave the date at the first time it aired, regardless of where it aired or under what circumstances it aired (Even if it's at 2 am in southern Mogolia as a result of a faulty transmitter). JBK405 05:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, the point of having the US airdate wouldn't be that the USA is kick butt, it would be that the cartoon was produced by the USA and primarily for the USA. Both sides of the argument have perfectly logical explanations, so your disagreement is more based on your opinion of which logical argument is more important rather than any flaws in Anonymous's thinking. That said, I don't really care which way the airdates are presented. ButteredToast 17:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

No, my argument is supported by my opinion, not based on it. It's based on Wikipedia's strict adherence to a non-biased writing style, and deciding to put the airdate of some nations airings and not others (Say, the first time it aired in Australia) displays, if not a major writing bias (We're not saying something like "These nations got it first cause the others suck" or anything like that), at least a small one.

Also, the show is primarily animated in Korea, uses Classical Chinese for all its writing, and has at least one person with German as their primary language on their production staff (I think I might have correcly placed the accent from the DVD's commentary). It's definitely a USA production, don't get me wrong, but it's not by the USA for the USA, it's got a wider view. Of course, that view really isn't present to an extreme degree in the show itself (It's still American English they're speaking and the desired audience is American children), but it' there. JBK405 18:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I never claimed your argument was based on your opinion. I said your disagreement was based on your opinion. Both arguments have logical non-biased reasoning supporting them. It's not unthinkable for there to be more than one "right" answer.

Also, the animation is outsourced to Korea by American studios. It is clearly an American show. I'm not sure what language the text is written in has to do with that.

Again, I'm not arguing for one method of displaying the airdates or the other (if at all), I'm just saying that you're seeing bias where there isn't any. ButteredToast 00:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

If most people here agree that the airdate should be the date it aired anywhere, then who changed the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Renegade51 (talk • contribs) 08:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Just hit the undo button. Not every editor 'cares' about consensuses. 202.89.188.28 09:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the article is semi-protected, so no everyone can undo the changes. Could someone please undo the changes to the 17:12, 15 November 2007 version (last edited by MrPeerke, I think)? Is the last version that sticks with the global dating criteria.

Avatar Shorts

i changed the episodes of avatar shorts from '1' in2 'Short 1', since there is already and episode 1.
and changed chpater in2 N/A, since it is not really a chapter.
219.88.255.88 05:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Do the shorst really deserve their own articles? I mean they hold not plot relivence so they are really just for entertainment, and in such case it would be easier to just watch them if you want to know what happens in them. I'd argue differently if they pertained to the actual plot of the series and added something to that story, but they don't. They're humorous shorts off on the side. Maybe one article for the three of them if it's really necesary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.26 (talk) 02:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with you The Placebo Effect 23:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

As would I. Seems to be entries on the episode list are all those really need.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was animated in the USA. If it is it would make since (or at least there would be an argument) to have US air dates along with the original air date. If it is in Korea than maybe there should be Korean air dates? Smileyface 12 91 06:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Quick request

Not a big thing, but something I wanted to bring up: the next time we don't have info on any upcoming epsiodes, please don't just remove the section. That just makes it harder when that information eventually comes out. Instead, just comment it out, like so: <!-- Enclose all the contents you want to hide like this -->. Thanks.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

re: TVShowsonDVD

The information on future episode names I procured weeks ago from TVShowsonDVD and put up on the list page was removed at the time because someone was thought it unreliable. Of course, it turns out that information was completely correct. A consideration for the next time TVShowsonDVD provides episode names. --Choi9999 02:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Please read all of this Disscusion. The Placebo Effect 02:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I would argue that when TVShowsonDVD a) for a given news update b) is able to provide a copy of what the DVD cover will look like along with episode titles that c) the episode titles have at least some reliability associated with them that d) merits at least a status of "tentative." If we will only accept episode title information a) from Nick or b) when the episodes have actually aired somewhere in the world (as was the case with the UK episodes), then we should say so on the list of episodes page itself. Otherwise you'll just have people constantly arguing over the validity of one source over another. (Saying so in the discussion page seems less than useful, given the volume of information on the discussion page and the lack of ease of navigability of it. Somewhat reminiscent of the Vogons in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, who derided humans for not reading instructions posted on a closet orbiting another star.)--Choi9999 03:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Announced episodes

How to deal with the annnounced episodes from, e.g. IMDB, where the title of episode 10 and 11 are told?

Afraca 16:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Only TVguide.com and Nick,com are used when finding upoming episdoes. IMDB has been wrong, and tv.com gets information submited by uesre. The Placebo Effect 16:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Day of the Black Sun Parts

They are both out on the same day? This will be a night to remember! --Lucky135g 02:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Should they be merged into one article like The Siege of the North? Both are part 1, Part 2 episodes. The Placebo Effect 02:14, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

That seems alright. As long as the sections are named Part 1: The Invasion and Part 2: The Eclipse. --Lucky135g 03:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, if in the U.S. they are having 10 straight weeks of Avatar, then shouldn't the Day of Black Sun come out on the 23rd?? This is just a question that is bothering me...

No, it's being delayed due to a SpongeBob SquarePants marathon during Nick's Super Stuffed Weekend. Setherex 18:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't they both be listed seperatly? Like with episode 7 en 8 being 2 parts as well. Afraca 18:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Additional episode

It turns out that there will be an 21st episode in season 3! :D This isn't a practical joke; I saw it at [[10]] ! :) So, we should update this article accordingly. --Freespirit1981 (talk) 21:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I was just going to post this. On ASN some broke it down so its easier to understand. There will still be 20 chapters but there will physically be 21 episodes.

Chapter 10 part 1: Episode 50 OR 310

Chapter 10 part 2: Episode 51 OR 311

Chapter 11: Episode 52 OR 312

Chapter 12: Episode 53 OR 313

Chapter 13: Episode 54 OR 314

Chapter 14: Episode 55 OR 315

Chapter 15: Episode 56 OR 316

Chapter 16: Episode 57 OR 317

Chapter 17: Episode 58 OR 318

Chapter 18: Episode 59 OR 319

Chapter 19: Episode 60 OR 320

Chapter 20: Episode 61 OR 321 Rosario lopez (talk) 05:20, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

we have to wait to see how 312 will be named, either chapter 11 or chapter 12

if 312 is named chapter 12, than the episodes will be either like this

Chapter 10 part 1: Episode 50 OR 310

Chapter 10 part 2: Episode 51 OR 311

Chapter 12: Episode 52 OR 312

Chapter 13: Episode 53 OR 313

Chapter 14: Episode 54 OR 314

Chapter 15: Episode 55 OR 315

Chapter 16: Episode 56 OR 316

Chapter 17: Episode 57 OR 317

Chapter 18: Episode 58 OR 318

Chapter 19: Episode 59 OR 319

Chapter 20: Episode 60 OR 320

Chapter 21: Episode 61 OR 321

there is a small chance the last 4 episodes will be considered a 4 parter chapter --Verdad1963 23:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

We dont need to wait, Nick has confirmed the information already, and it is just as Lopez stated. Rau J16 23:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

at the end who was correct?, the western air temple was shown in Canada, and it showed as chapter 12 --Verdad1963 (talk) 10:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The Day of Black Sun

I just saw the episodes and it said the titles were:

The Day of Black Sun, Part 1: The Invasion
The Day of Black Sun, Part 2: The Eclispe

--Lucky135g 20:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be noted as well that Part 2 is considered to be as part of the same Chapter (chapter 10). Just take a look at the beginning of the episode when the title is introduced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.119.135 (talk) 23:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, i noticed that too, it made me wonder if it is one chapter, and that there are still ten more to come. Rau J16 05:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

They are 2 separate chapters. -Dylan0513 20:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The Day of Black Sun is one chapter, aired as a movie. When Nickelodeon aired it in both the UK and the US, the "title" pages clearly state the The Day of Black Sun, Part 1: The Invasion was Chapter 10, and the Day of Black Sun, Part 2: The Eclipse, was also Chapter 10. Also, the credits to both parts were shown together after both parts were shown. The credits are separated into Part 1 and 2 only because Avatar uses different writers and artists for each 30 minute segment of Avatar, since it takes roughly 8 months to produce one Avatar episode. This is also why Avatar should not be affected by the writer's strike, since the story has already been written, and any break in the episodes is due to the time needed to produce the episodes. Also, Nickelodeon clearly stated that the Black Sun episodes were being aired as an hour long movie in both the US and the UK. TV Guide in the US confirms this as the episode was shown on TV Guide the night of the 30th as: Movie: Avatar: The Last Airbender The Day of Black Sun. Hope this helps. Jazzsax917 00:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I just saw them both too. I'm doubting this, but is it Ok if I the plot and some notes in their respective articles? Or is it too early to do it?Stormfin 05:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

They are considered one chapter; the intro for both episodes shows it as chapter ten, in comparison with other two-part episodes, which each have their own chapter. It's the first chapter to fill an hour-long slot on TV.--69.252.221.116 12:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

the invasion fails because they were prepared. Iroh escapes of the prison and Zuko decides to be allied of the Avatar after facing its father. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.164.119.37 (talk) 01:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Somehow I suspect the firelord being killed by Iroh instead of the avatar, and then aang & company squaring off against azula & company. At the end, that is. I also suspect MUCH awkward humor between zuko, sakka, and momo to come.--anonymous 16:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Haven't they already been aired? They're online...--86.138.21.25 20:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

No, actually. The online ones were just leaked somehow.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I heard they both first aired on November 13th in the UK. No, I don't have a source. ButteredToast (talk) 07:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

The ones that leaked were crappy .flv's but some tv quality .avi's have surfaced, perhaps this does mean that they aired. Rau J16 19:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

People attention. If you would like to watch episodes 10 and 11 then go to youtube and search Avatar Book 3 Fire Chapter 11 or chapter 10 and click the ones from the user named avatarman100. His submission is in 3 parts for each chapter. Watch it quick before it gets deleted! 76.113.129.216 (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Or you would just download them or go to one of the many sites dedicated to episode streaming, and also, please keep this discussion on topic, please. Rau J16 19:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

One: take you're spoilers and discussions elsewere this not a forum, two in the dvd section the day og black sun appears devided, with the second part in a diferent dvd. We should change it.--Tosta mista (talk) 19:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I live in the UK and the episde was shown yesterday. 8:31(GMT) Saturday 24th November —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathmore (talk • contribs)

Somebody divided the ep in two chapters, and it's only one, big, episode/chapter, not two.--Tosta mista (talk) 10:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Never mind...--Tosta mista (talk) 10:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Also the old page The Day of Black Sun is still there. somebody should delet it ( i don't know how)--Tosta mista (talk) 12:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The page deals with the chapter, its fine, when the episodes air they will both be put there. Rau J16 23:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well now they put "The Eclipse" on upcoming episode and "The Invasion" on the aired episodes. Even if they are not one chapter they still air together: If one as aired so as the other.--Tosta mista (talk) 19:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the invasion aired by itself in the netherlands. The Placebo Effect (talk) 19:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, guys, since we are always accepting avatarspirit as a reliable source, we should, thus continue and add ep50 to the aired list, with the dutch airing date. (I truly don't understand the difficulties some people tend to have with the current airdates.)-Catneven (talk) 10:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The episodes are one chapter, that as been confirmed by that press release that said the the 3rd season add 21 episode but only 20 chapters, so we put then together--Tosta mista (talk) 21:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

There are more sites that list both episodes as 2 rather than 1, however it yes yet to air in the US. I am confident that they will air the episode this Friday as a continuation episode without the commercial break, from the end of "the invasion" to the start of "the eclipse"; the episode is listed as a "tv movie" @ tv.com. The air dates has to follow the lead of next arcticle, "an important proposal," consistency between first air date, US air date, and "original air date. I second a split and list several air dates to satisfy the public. With the leaks available on the internet, [it] does not deter me from analyzing the complexity of the differences between the two, US air date episode vs. World air date episode, if there exists any! Jkdz100 (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

TV.com is not a reliable source, and if we add all of the dates the page would become cluttered, ugly and too large. But both episodes have aired, so they are 'currently' in the aired section, unless some on can prove otherwise. the only problem with the current state, si the lack of a date for the second part, Avatar spirit only has an estimate. Rau J16 20:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Since when was clutter and appearance and issue? They have NOW aired worldwide Jkdz100 11:04, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I dont think that they aired world wide yet, just in a few countries, airing in America doesnt constitute a "Worldwide" release, and clutter and appearance will affect the grade the article receives and if its bad enough, even eventually have the list be put up for deletion, so to avoid that chain i still move to keep just the one column Rau J16 22:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Did User:Jazzsax917 just post in the middle of a section, what purpose did that serve, i mean we already concluded that they were one chapter. Rau J16 00:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Part 2 is Chapter 11. Part 2 just aired in Canada and the title card read it as Chapter 11. And I've got proof: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v348/Greymon/ch11.jpg Now someone should fix the table. Modem (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah....and everywhere else in the world they were both one chapter. Doesn't add up.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Most places had them air the episodes together. Canada has the EXACT same version as the U.S. It's 100% positive that it's chapter 11. I mean seriously, look at the screencap. You can't screw up something like this. There's no possible reason you could deny this. Modem (talk) 09:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Except in the US, it says "Chapter 10" as it has everywhere else in the world. Until we get either offical confimation from Nick or the next episode comes out, then we can change the Chapter #. --The Placebo Effect (talk) 09:22, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Plus you digital camera shot of your TV is hardly reliable, that could easily be photoshoped to say "Chapter Eleven". Where as avatar spirit says that it is one chapter, and they are more reliable than your word of mouth. Rau J16 21:36, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Meh, whatever. You'll see that I was right whenever they reair the episode individually or whenever Nick's official Avatar site updates their Book 3 page. It's not like Avatar Spirit is 100% correct all the time. Modem (talk) 05:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

It told you so. Nick's official site has it as Chapter 11. http://www.nick.com/shows/avatar/index.jhtml And if you can't see it, then here: http://img401.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ch11hafq3.jpg Modem (talk) 05:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, well, ONE: see b.y.w's post on the episode's talk page, he reached an understandable conclusion there, i have also made a point there(though not as good or resounding as b.y.w's). also, to keep this part of this discusion constructive, lets keep it on the other talk page, more people are responding there. Rau J16 06:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

An Important Proposal

Ok, I dont know if this has been talked about but I feel this is important. While I do know that the matter of UK aired epsiodes has been discussed, I feel that this needs to be settled. I propose the creation of a new section or a new article with the various international air dates of Avatar: The Last Airbender. There is so much confusion on the world wide web about which Avatar episodes air when and where. Some of us know this is because people in various countries for example the United States want to know when episodes air in the UK, because the sooner they air, the sooner they know they can watch the episodes illegally online. I feel doing this would clear a lot of things up for a lot of people by providing a place where anyone can check when episodes will air in their region. That is what wikipedia is all about. After all it is an encyclopedia and should be a reliable source of information for anyone who needs it. Im not going to go into an entirely different subject but, the information that is available should not revolve around the schedule of the United States like it currently is, and I live here, and it is personally quite irritating. Please comment. Ebmonkey2 (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that this would be like a TV guide. Good luck explaining at the AFD for this article that it is needed for the wiki. The Placebo Effect (talk) 17:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

They did reach a conclusion, it was to put the date that it aired anywhere first, any time you see the U.S. dates as the 'original' the page has been edited by people who dont use the talk page, i checked the page before writing this, and those are the "First Ever" dates, with 6-9 having U.K. dates(you can tell because they are so close) Rau J16 20:15, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

However, and addition to the episode listings which includes the US air dates would considerable end all unnecessary further questions relating to this topic Jkdz100 (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Come on guys. Are we making an encyclopedia here or are we making an avatar fan-site, being careful not to step on its fanbase's toes. The bias towards US, UK or what country else -should- go. Why should a UK or US airdate have any significance to any other part of the world? People, who are just frustrated they haven't seen the eps yet, should not participate on such a note in this article. We should also remove the US and UK airdates from the template on each individual ep's page (avatar is one of the only series with such a contruction in its template), altough I do not know if this is the right place to discuss this matter.-Catneven (talk) 09:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, they should be removed from the articles, and if you would not discuss it here, then where, if you did it on the episode pages the discussion would be too wide spread to contribute any merit. And i also agree that the country doesnt matter, look at naruto, only about half of the series has aired here, and they list all of the episodes, even disregarding language. Rau J16 19:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Why not just remove the airdates altogether if it's going to be this much of a problem? I doubt anyone comes to Wikipedia for the purpose of looking up the original non-country-specific airdate of Avatar episode #18.74.73.7.57 23:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

That's not an option. We don't censor a page because of bad edits. If somebody puts in the wrong airdate, they can be reverted. See? No problem.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

"people in various countries for example the United States want to know when episodes air in the UK, because the sooner they air, the sooner they know they can watch the episodes illegally online"-is there no greater insult? Keyblade Mage 00:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

(REINDENT)Concerning this topic, no, there is no greater insult. but Fyre is right, plus it says on the list "Original Airdate" which implies anywhere at anytime, as long as its first; not even necessarily in English. Rau J16 04:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

"Come on guys. Are we making an encyclopedia here;" why wouldn't a multiple listing of air dates be more beneficial? this is not a US vs World debate, i believe it is more beneficial to the public to list multiple air dates, regardless of previous trends. Jkdz100 11:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC) Yes, we are, but i think we should stick to just "Original Airdate" its not biased, and it is informative, and very simple(or at least it should be) Rau J16 22:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Chapter 11?

Okay there has been some confusion in this, The Invasion AND The Eclipes both say chapter 10 on the title card making it seem like they were both chapter 10. But the title card for the next episode The Western Air Temple says chapter 12. So did they skip chapter 11, or was there an anamation error on the title card of the Eclipes of one on The Western Air Temple, because I want to know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trueblue584 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Once nick or where ever you watch your episodes, start to show re-runs everyone will finally see that The Eclipse, when aired separately from The Invasion will have the title Book 3, Chapter 11 The Invasion. If it is one thing I have noticed about title pages of Avatar episodes is that they are never set in stone.69.47.132.49 (talk) 03:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)Kels89

Some remarks about "upcoming episodes"

"The Day of Black Sun" has already aired in some countries, this means the release date should be adjusted (30 November is only in the US) and it should be placed in Season 3. The Next Episode is "The Western Air Temple". The Western Air Temple is situated nearest to Fire Nation territory. It exclusively housed female Airbenders, and is the only temple not yet seen in the series. It is mentioned at the end of The Day of Black Sun, after the invasion failed, that they would go there for safety. Some theorize this episode will contain mayor revelations concerning the main characters, though this is hypothetical of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.194.224.134 (talk) 23:41, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

A reliable, and verifiable source would allow this change to be made, but with out one, it is nothing but speculation. The reason that the Thirtieth is placed there is because this is the only date that we have a source for, no other date has been confirmed, there for we cannot assume that it has been aired somewhere. Without a source of course, you provide one(a good one) and then we can discuss how to handle it. Rau J16 02:26, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

This is actually really annoying. Both parts have aired in the Netherlands, but finding a decent source saying so is a bit of a headache. AvatarSpirit mentions both aring, doesn't give a date for part two, though.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Avatar Spirit says a 'a day or two' so, i figure we should just list them as the same date, because well for one, its easier; and two, the post was on the 24th, with the episode airing on the 23rd, so i think that it would be safe to assume that the second part aired after the first, which would put the date on the 23rd(assuming that the post was edited on the same day that it was posted. Rau J16 19:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

these are the titles of the unanounced episodes that were discussed in a chatroom with some of the makers of avatar

12. The Western Air Temple
13. The Dragon of the West
14. Firelord Ozai recruts
15. The Prey of the Face Stealer
16. The Combustion man returns
17. The avatar state: P1 - Seeking another Guru
18. The avatar state: P2 - Chakras again
19. King Bumi
20. The Search (triple length)
21. Firelord Zuko (triple length) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.9.45.142 (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

when, and where were these announced, because they seem like fan-fiction to me, because Iroh is next in line to be Fire Lord. they already had an episode called "The Avatar State" and it is unlikely that they will have another. Combustion Man is no longer a threat because Zuko doesnt want Aang killed any more. i doubt King Bumi would get an episode title. Why would Fire Lord Ozai recruit, he has the most powerful army in the world. I can see 15 and 12. but the others, no, i cannot. plus "discussed in a chatroom with some of the makers of avatar" isnt very reliable, nor verifiable. plus i doubt they would release them like that, Nick would hold a press release. Rau J16 06:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

it has already been stated officially that book 3 will have 21 episodes, and the finale would be 2 hrs, and since 318 is listed as "avatar state, part 2", that would prove that the info is false --Verdad1963 (talk) 13:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know rauj16, Iroh is not next in line for the throne. Once the current king has offspring, they automatically becoming the next in line for the throne. So since Zuko is the oldest sibling, he is techinally the next in line for the throne and failing that, his sister Auza will be the next FireLord (providing the FireNation believes in Women Leaders).Wild ste (talk) 21:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Why can't Ozi recruit anybody? That late in the season who knows what happened. I disagree, I think it is very possible for them to have another Avatar State episode if that is what the episode is about. Now the source is a little shady but I don't completely dismiss these Ideas. I think Zuko will get the throne, even if it is offered to Iroh (which I doubt will happen) he'll decline and Zuko will become fire lord.69.47.132.49 (talk) 03:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)Kels89

Ozai already has an entire army, there is no need to recruit any one else; who said Iroh wasn't next in line; They would never use the same name for two episodes, regardless of what it was about; and thee source isnt just a 'little' shady', its down right ridiculous, there is no way you can connsider this or be true, there is no good source to back it up. Rau J16 04:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Western Air Temple

Someone keeps adding the episode, but i was under the impression(after checking the sources) that the episode has not been announced. I tried removing it, but i cant hide the coding(dont know how) and the little hidden comment said to hide it, so i figured i would come here and ask someone who knows how to do it to remove it. Rau J16 03:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The actual episode has been announced, but where did the release date come from? Arogi Ho (talk) 03:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Where was it announced? Rau J16 03:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It's been leaked. Watch-Avatar.com claims it will have the episode by today so we can confirm the name then. Still doesn't mean we can do the page. Hell I don't even know if we'll be allowed to use the name. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 16:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The episode has been listed at IMDb for quite some time (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0417299/episodes#season-3) --M.A. (talk) 06:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

tv.com has also followed and listed the next episode as "The Western Air Temple" (http://www.tv.com/avatar-the-last-airbender/show/28841/episode_listings.html?season=3&tag=nav_bar;3) Jkdz100 (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

neither one of those sites are to be used as sources, both are user driven. and the episode hasnt been leaked, i checked the same site that i found DOBS on and its not there yet, perhaps it will soon, but it hasnt yet. Rau J16 19:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

however at the end of "day of black sun: the eclipse" there is evidence that leads to the relocation of the adventure to the western air temple. regardless what the episode is named, it is located at the western air temple. 71.195.9.253 18:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

While that is very true, that is not the discussion, the discussion is of the episodes existence, and how it should be handled; and honestly, i think some one over at Avatarspirit should just call nick and settle this once and for all, but unfortunately, i dont have contacts to ask them to do that. Rau J16 04:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

New information is over at avatar spirit which clearly confirms the episode. Rau J16 21:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think avatar spirit is a reliable source. The episode should be officially announced by nick before we can include it in the article. So I'll go ahead and revert your edit. --Slartibartfast1992 21:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, One, we have used them as a reliable source before, and two, did you look at the information, how can that not be reliable? Rau J16 03:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, when I followed your link, the only info I got was "server not found", and I decided to look for it by myself out of common sense. When I found it, it was a box, claiming that the Western Air Temple was going to come out. No link to any official Nick info or anything. And, in case you haven't noticed, <!-- NOTE!!! ONLY TVguide.com AND Nick.com ARE USED WHEN FINDING UPCOMING EPISODES. Please read Talk:List_of_Avatar:_The_Last_Airbender_episodes#Announced_episodes for information as to why.-->. Nothing about avatarspirit. And, somehow, "How can that not be reliable?" doesn't quite convince me. --Slartibartfast1992 21:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[REINDENT] i was reffering to the new post on their home page, if you read it, its kinda hard not not consider that reliable, heres the statement:

"Next up was a few breathtaking background shots from some unaired season 3 episodes. Dave confirmed most of them were from episode 312, "The Western Air Temple." " that is taken directly from the post, also, to me, this constitutes as an announcement made by the creators, which is more reliable than Nick. Rau J16 01:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

First off, who ever said we only use Nick and TVGuide was wrong. We've used numerous other sources before, those two sites hardly have a monopoly on legitimate reporting. Usually, they do end up being the best, but not every time. Saying it in HTML comments doesn't make it true. Now then, the article being referred to above is here. Reading this, we have an announcement from a named representative of Nickelodeon at an official function. Refusing that because of the site its on is just pedantic, pointless bureaucracy.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

So.... do we include it? (Also O.o big words....) Rau J16 21:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I misinterpreted the message on the edit text. But I anyway didn't judge this page as reliable (which is the one I found). The page you gave the link to (which I had been unable to find before), however, makes me doubt. I didn't see the pictures they were writing about, but if they say that they saw them, they probably did. So... I don't know. Just think of my opinion now as neutral, I guess. Maybe you were right, Rauj, when you said "How can that not be reliable?"--Slartibartfast1992 23:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Everyone makes mistakes, im just happy we reached a conclusion, i hate when these things drag out for too long. I'm going to add the episode now. Rau J16 11:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

YTV has already aired the episode today. Maybe a page should be created now. Oh and by the way, it's Chapter 12. Modem (talk) 02:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yea, seeing as they had it different from everyone else, lets wait until the chapter airs elsewhere before editing the information on the episode. Rau J16 02:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Uh what? So it was totally alright for the UK watchers to edit the pages with little uneasiness when they got the episodes first, but it's not alright for Canadians watchers? This is getting ridiculous. Modem (talk) 02:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

If Canada hadn't been different, then i would have no problem, but they have had differences with the other versions, therefore i feel it best to compare and contrast on this one. Rau J16 02:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Because they aired DoBS separately unlike the U.S. That's the only difference. Can you give me one other country that aired the English version of DoBS separately and do you have the title cards to back it up? Then maybe I'd believe you that YTV is supposedly editing the episodes, even though it's ridiculous to think so. Modem (talk) 03:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The difference is that they had it chapter ten and eleven, where every where else had it chapter ten only. No, i do not have title cards, i dont have those versions of the episodes, i have the correct American version. Rau J16 03:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Except they didn't air them separately. Until they do, there's no reason to treat them as one chapter when the exact same English version that did air them seperately listed them as two separate chapters. This was a week after the U.S. broadcast too. And how do you know the places that aired it separately listed them both as Chapter 10? Modem (talk) 04:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't, aside from the people who saw it vouching that that is what it said. Hmmm..... perhaps you are correct, i am being biased. Seeing as you have seen this episode, and no one else appears to be arguing this point, i will leave this decision up to you. Rau J16 04:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok.. this has got to be a contender for stupidest edit war ever. There is information released, from a "legal" source, its been BROADCAST even. And the potential difference is a NUMBER for an episode? Please. Post the episode information. And IF we find out later new information.. we can *gasp* EDIT THE PAGE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.231.172.40 (talk) 06:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

OK; one, read the discussion before you post; two, the discussion is over; three, look up 'edit war' this was not one; four, it was never about legitimacy, but the chapter number; five, where was the information released, and what 'legal' source are you citing? Rau J16 06:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright here's the title card: http://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=vlcsnap231836pn5.png If you need any other proof from the episode, I can get it. Modem (talk) 08:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I need not, read my last post that was directed at you, (not the one directed at the ip) i am not contributing any further to this debate, i have conceded defeat on this matter. Rau J16 01:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Unaired Pilot

This is going to sound trivial compared to the whole "Western Air Temple" thing, but why is the "Unaired Pilot" listed under "Book One: Water"? Although its part of the Season 1 DVD, it is still not part of the continuity. --Hydrokinetics12 15:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

It's there because even though it is not part of coninuity, it is still a version of the first episode, placing at number 01a(where "Boy in Iceburg" is 01b) which paces in it book 1 Rau J16 23:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

DVDs section

it has already confirmed that there are 21 episodes, yet it still lists only 20

second, there is a need to confirm since nick made both the black sun episodes part of "chapter 10", if the whole one hour episode will be part of DVD 2 or that episode will be separated between DVD 2 and DVD 3

there is a chance DVD 1 is chapter 1 to 5, DVD 2 is chapter 6 to chapter 10(including 311)

than it comes the complicated part, is 312 chapter 11 or chapter 12?

depending on how it will be named chapter wise

DVD 3 will be chapter 11 to 15 or chapter 12 to 16(312 to 316)

DVD 4 will be chapter 16 to 20 or chapter 17 to 21(317 to 321) --Verdad1963 23:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

We already know that 312 is chapter 11, you are the only one making it complicated, the DVD section goes by chapter, so it only lists twenty, and there is no chance that the finale will be a four part chapter, because there is no reason to suspect that. and if it is separated on the DVD(which is unlikely) we will make the change when more information becomes available. Rau J16 23:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I just will let you say who ended up being right

I maintain that the only REASON that 311 was put as chapter 10 part 2 was so it could be included in DVD 2 --Verdad1963 (talk) 10:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Air Date

The air date for Book 3 Chapter 10b (episode 51) The Day of Black Sun Part 2: The Eclipse has TWO comment tags, one after the other, that aren't very clear:
1) Date is approx. If you find an exact date, please add it. NOT THE 30th!!!
2) Aired in Netherlands on this date, DO NOT CHANGE!
The date in the article is November 23, same date as Part 1 of the same chapter. It looks as if the person who added the second comment forgot to remove the first comment. Does anyone know the actual date this episode was first aired in the world? --Secretss (talk) 09:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

You are close, it was the second comment that was to be removed. I forgot to remove it when i added the one before it. I added it because the date was an estimate, originally i had it as the 24th, but i figured it was reasonable to have it as the 23rd as well, so i didn't change it back when some one changed it to the 23rd. I still do not know the date, hence i have not changed it. Rau J16 19:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

New Template

While i think that a new template was a good idea, and i like the one that is there now, i do have some questions.

(1)If the template removes the chapter number, some people might not like that.
(2)If it goes by episode number(this is for you placebo) why is DoBS marked as 50.1 and 50.2, those aren't the episode numbers, the numbers are 50 and 51.
I would like to discuss this before anything happens(because i see something very well may). Rau J16 19:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah..there need to be some changes here. The chapter numbers really should be there, for one. And, also, as above, that 50.1 and 50.2 is a complete invention. And, frankly, the whole thing looks, well, ugly. It was more readable before, IMO.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Let me explain myself. First of all, i switched to this new template because with the season 1 episodes beong marked as not meeting WP:EPISODE, Parent and I have started making an article for Season 1. Since this article will be all 20 combined, I assumed that the directors and the writers would not be included on that page and that it would be a good idea to add it here. Now about DoBS, both said Chapter 10, so they are the same episode, what is happening is that their will still be 20 episodes, but 21 half hours. DoBS was merged into one episode, so it is necassary to know this. And as for the chapter number, all it involves is taking the episode number and subtracting either 20 or 40, or looking at the production number, it shouldn't be that hard. The Placebo Effect (talk) 20:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you're wrong about DoBS. Its two episodes, but one chapter. And I'd like to object most strongly to mereging the episodes. We discussed that before and soundly rejected it. Did WP:CONS stop being policy while I was napping or something?--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

No ,but other polices override consensus. Take a look at the WikiProject talk page. The Placebo Effect (talk) 20:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. Why do we even have talk pages if we just ignore them completely?--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Er yeah I'm completely lost as to why the page no longer has summaries of the episodes and the pilot isn't listed. Hello2112 23:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Nvm. Hello2112 23:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I know! honestly, im satisfied with current template, but it just needs to be revised a little. first thing to be changed it the inclusion of the Production Code and the Episode number, are they both needed? why not replace the production code(or episode number) with chapter number. Also, i like the inclusion of the director, and writer, but how about only have the HEAD director and HEAD writer, that would clean it up some and make it more readable. Rau J16 02:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Rau. I prefer having the books and chapters on the page. The introduction of the article state that The series classifies each season as a "book" and each episode as a "chapter." I think the episode tables should definitely reflect this. What are production codes for anyway? The individual synopsis pages for the episodes have the production codes, so I don't understand why they need to be on the list page. And I agree that just one name each for writer and director would suffice. And anyway, "episode" differ from "chapter". DoBS is one chapter (10) that spans two distinct episodes (50 and 51). Currently with the production code on the page, this little nugget of information isn't shown. --Secretss (talk) 09:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Production codes are what the episode is refered to by the producers before it has a name. And you can change the number, IT is just that, because the Season 1 articles are in the proceess of merging (See the Wikiproject Talk Page) I did this to add Writers and Directors since that information I belived would have been gone. Like the WikiGuideline say So fix it! I am no more important than any of you in this matter so you are free to change it to the way you believe is right. If we like it, then it will be left alone, if not, then it will be disscused further here. The Placebo Effect (talk) 16:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Next Episode

When does it come out? --Lucky135g (talk) 15:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

When some one know, it will be here, until then just sit tight and keep the discussion on the article. Rau J16 21:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Western Air Temple - Add it

Avatar Spirit Setherex (talk) 00:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Setherex. I actually found another page on avatarspirit. But that page anyway contains no information other than that the episode will be called "The Western Air Temple", and I don't even find that reliable. We only use official Nick releases as reliable sources. --Slartibartfast1992 01:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, see the discussion titled "Western Air Temple". --Slartibartfast1992 23:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Question - wats the episold after western airtemple? is it " The Great Joker " ... 125.237.111.27 (talk) 05:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, the episode was leaked again: http://www.avatarchapter.net/75/avatar-book-3-chapter12-western-air-temple-online-leak/ It is still yet unknown whether this may be 11 or 12. As it unclear, but it the plot for this episode has been leaked as can be clearly seen Gamloverks (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

yea, sorry if i dont trust that site, seeing as the provide no source for their information, and if it leaked they would have it on there, not just a summary. And tot he guy about 'The Great Joker", we dont know yet, when we do, it will be on the page full time, with out reverts. Rau J16 19:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

SPOILER Azula they wouldn't kill Azula like that so early.--Tosta mista (talk) 22:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Please do not post spoilers, that is for a forum, not a wiki. Also, unless otherwise noted, that is hardly a trust worthy source, considering all it does it stream the episodes and provide no source for the information that they post. Rau J16 23:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll remember that next time. I was just trying to find some useful information, and how you know this information can get leaked very easily. 76.251.241.185 (talk) 00:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

regardless of how easy it will can be leaked(which isn't as easy as you seem to think), leaks aren't official sources, because they leak, and sometimes, things get changed between time of leak, and time of release. Rau J16 02:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

By now this argument can be laid top rest with one simple question: Did it air or not?

This article lists its air-date as December 14, which has been over for about thirteen minutes by my clock (I am, of course, referring to EST. Further east the 14'th has been over for considerably longer, and to the west it hasn't ended yet), and if it did not air then this is not its proper air-date, regardless of what any source says. It should be removed from the aired-episodes section, and any information from any site which gave today as the air-date should be viewed with even more suspicion tha usual since we know at least part of its info to be incorrect.

So, did it air or not? JBK405 (talk) 05:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S. If it did air....well then I might very well put my foot through my TV, because my TV-guide channel did not list today as a new Avatar day and I did not watch whatever episode did air today, and if I missed a new ep for no reason....oy, what a kicker.

It did, but not in the U.S., in Canada, see the "western Airtemple" section for more, i am waiting for the upload, can't wait for the episode. Rau J16 05:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

well it did! u missed out rau! and lets talk again about the episode name! jk! im bigger than dat, but simply be more "open mind, and open heart" as iroh would say! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.195.9.253 (talk) 09:51, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it did air in Canada so it should get a full article I guess (although I believe there is some thought that they're going to a more limited version of the summaries so I'm not sure what the plan is). Derekloffin (talk) 10:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I am open minded, but i need some sort of reliable proof to believe something. Rau J16 17:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The Firebending Masters

http://dongbufeng.net/ has posted the name of season 3 chapter 13 as The firebending masters, can we add it to the list or not? Noian (talk) 19:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Not from that, its not considered a reliable source. What we would want is some sort of official announcement from Nickelodeon, be it in the form of something on their own site or a press release to other sites.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

they tend to be correct, but it can't be considered confirmed until Nick, Avatar creators or Viacom says it is

and I say that is far more likely than "the big joker" --Verdad1963 (talk) 06:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Can this be considered a reliable site: http://www.tv.com/avatar-the-last-airbender/show/28841/episode_guide.html?season=3&tag=season_dropdown;dropdown;2 ? Scroll down to the end of the page. Besides: This site shows the same title, so it's obviously right: http://www.avatarchapters.org/episodes.html . Same here; scroll down. - Aresius, Freelance Writer, 29.12.20,07;20:36

Just because you find it at two sites doesn't make it right, and we have already discussed that tv.com is not reliable; nor is any fan site that doesnt cite their sources, or reliable sources. Rau J16 20:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Just some suggestions: Can someone shorten the summary of Chapter 13 Book 3? It should be consistent with the others. And the writers/director info is missing. I do believe that was released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.168.248.193 (talk) 19:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

The Great Joker

SPOILER WARNING

if this is the episold after "the western airtemple" i got a summary 4 all u fans.
This chapter “The Big Joker” involves the escape of King Bumi, and the plan to overthrow the throne. Iroh and Jeong Jeong have had a plan that was long mentioned ago in the episode ” The Desert” where they met and had a discussion to overthrow the throne. If you remember the Swords Master that Sokka was tought by in the episode “Sokka’s Master” he had given Sokka a white lotus chip, which Iroh and Jeong Jeong both used to communicate. Zuko and Aang land at their first stop to start Aangs training for firebending.
also can some1 plz find out the air date of this epsold asap... (i think its expected to air in January) 122.57.220.101 (talk) 21:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

BTW I found the list of episolds after "the great joker" on dutch wikipedia-

Chapter 14, Close to a Wedding
Chapter 15, The Preparing
Chapter 16, A New Attack
Chapter 17, The Great Fall
Chapter 18,19,20 I dont kno
Chapter 21, Fire lord Zuko (i think)

Seeing as you can't even keep the title consistent ("Great Joker" versus "Big Joker"), I doubt anyone here will even bother looking for a source for something whose creator admitted was a joke (notice the title? The guy made it up as a reference to people who make up Avatar titles) on0lyShadowUltra (talk) 02:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL calm down... I copied this off a forum XD. i knew the names were different but i couldnt b bothered changing it. ppl on the forum said it was from dutch wikipedia so i copied and pasted. i thought it was quite interesting and wana share it with u guys. geez no need 2 get angry 122.57.215.211 (talk) 08:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as you didnt even find it, then this really is untrustable you 'copied off a forum' and they said it was 'from dutch wikipedia'. please this is almost assuredly a hoax. Rau J16 11:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

lol i can give u the link if u dont trust me... btw, where does TV.com get its sources from.122.57.218.249 (talk) 01:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

OK... fine... i admite that i might b wrong thinking that the next episold is called 'the great joker'after looking through TV.com. but it is true that i copied that of a forum. the forum that i "copied off" for Rauj16 (oops sorry, previous 1 was a dead link, its fixed now)122.57.218.249 (talk) 01:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Users, like wikipedia, only they dont have rules, if you say it, they post it, and thats hardly reliable. Rau J16 01:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Please place you posts at the bottom next time, also, the link its self says that it only might be true. Rau J16 01:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

ok. 1st of all, i was writing that link b4 u posted that comment, after i copied the link and posted my comment i realised u already wrote something, so my comment was above urs. 2nd, u said the forum said "it only might be true." at the beginning i also said " IF this is the episold after 'western airtemple' (refering to The Great Joker)" i never said it was 100% true. and 3rd, i just prooved u wrong, u said i made this up myself and u doubt that i copied off the forum. Last point, i never wanted any1 to write these chapters on to the article, i said "i thought it was quite interesting and wana share it with u guys" and only keep it in the discussion. ok Rauj16? got any more questions about this feel free to ask. 122.57.218.249 (talk) 02:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I never said you made it up, i never doubted you copied off the forum, simply that a forum is unreliable. And do not get upset, it was merely a comment, that sort of thing has happened to me as well. So, yea, you didnt prove me wrong. Rau J16 02:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

No comments regarding the content of the discussion; just a note: talk pages on wikipedia are not discussion forums. We may all be extremely obsessed Avatar fans but still, information that is merely "something interesting I thought you guys might want to know" do not belong here. Talk pages are for discussions regarding the article. Advice: people incapable of typing properly are generally not taken seriously on wikipedia. Peace. --Secretss (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

ok fine... @ Rauj16. LOL!!! @ Sceretess 122.57.218.249 (talk) 06:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Page Protection

I feel we need protection on the avatar pages, does any one else agree? Rau J16 01:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I do, but I feel we can't guarantee that DOBS will be split between DVD 2 and 3, and we can't be sure what episodes will be part of DVD 2, 3 and 4 of book 3 --Verdad1963 (talk) 06:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The back of the DVD v2 case confirms that, but that is off topic. Also i want more people to contribute in this discussion, because this page has been having numerous nonconstructive edits, mostly by ip's, but also a few accounts. Rau J16 06:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Protection isn't really necessary, there's not that much vandalism or anything going on, watching and reverting is enough to take care of it. Anybody is free to make a request at WP:RPP, of course. Also, just to clarify what I've been saying in edit summaries, protection templates shouldn't be put on any page until and unless an admin protects it. The templates themselves don't cause the page to be protected, they're just used when a page is protected to inform people.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to discuss it before i requested it; the reason i feel it needs it is because of the pointless edits, they make it harder to sort through the edit differences, and find the true vandalism; and are normally edits that get reverted anyway, and page protection would reduce that. On a final not, since you said 'anybody' im going to request it now. Also, didn't this page used to be protected? Rau J16 22:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Its been protected a few time in the past. In general, pages are only protected for fairly short periods.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

That was fast, they protected it for two months already.... this discussion took longer. Rau J16 22:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The Awakening

Ive added a synopsis which I saved in my user page.

Dar book (talk) 11:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Table problems

It seems that something is wrong in the table coding - it's messed up. Can someone fix it, please? Trey7 (talk) 17:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I've fixed the table. -- Maybe we should put that page on semi-protect? --Lucky135g (talk) 17:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Archive

Some of that should not have been archived, what if those become relevant again, do we just watch the archive and have the discussion there, or use it as a reference point, i seriously think some of that should have stayed. Rau J16 22:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I am surprised of some of the stuff that was "archived" yet the thing of the "great joker" stayed, which is almost guaranteed to be a joke

it is pretty much confirmed, even in YTV that 313 will be "firebending masters" --Verdad1963 (talk) 11:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

'Pretty much' is not an actual conformation. Rau J16 17:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

but is more than the "great joker" which is still here in the talk part even though it has no actual conformation either --72.129.107.139 (talk) 03:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

And because it has no conformation, it is not on the article, neither of them are, both for the same reason. Rau J16 17:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Chapter 13: The Firebending Masters

The next episode has officially been confirmed. Dong Bu Feng is revealing episode titles from Chp. 13 to Chp. 18. The next episode is called The Firebending Masters —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.233.29.211 (talk) 01:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Where are these oninuous names at Dongbu Feng, you're talking about? -Aresius, Freelance Writer, 29.12.20,07;20:49 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.89.79.192 (talk) 19:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

They do not count, what they say isnt official. Rau J16 01:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

what would be legit source according to your guidelines rau? avatar spirit? because avatar spirit currently has it listed that there are 4 seasons of 71 episodes which nickelodeon only plans on 61. i would simply have to say some sources had been reliable in the past and "predicting" the following episodes name. *cough* tv.com. and before you rant on about it being a non-legit source. reference "the western air temple!" Jkdz100 (talk) 04:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

The two most often used sources are tvguide.com and Nick.com. Tv.com recieves it's info from fans, and as such, can not be relied on, because it recieves info the same way wiki does. The Placebo Effect (talk) 04:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

A legit source to me is one that gets its info from nick. And nice to see you take stuff at face value, Avatar spirit counts their "specials" section as a season, and there are ten episodes in there. The only difference between wiki, imdb, and tv.com is that wikipedia has rules as to what gets posted, the others do not. Rau J16 17:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

i would have to disagree placebo! all sites are user-interlinked. there consistently is a person updating the webpages, is that not biased. if u would only read tv.com's stand: "Any current summary of this episode that is out there is pure rumor and is not true, so please stop adding it to the guide. When Nick releases an official summary, it can be added here, but until then no summary or recap should be added." direct citation from the site on the stance on the "the western air temple." and rau! just thought u should count the episodes listed under avatar spirit's webpage. there exists more than 10 specials! just thought u might want to know dat! and who are you to say that the other sources do not have rules and regs? and another tidbit, as previously cited, tv.com does take information directly from nickelodeon corporations! please re-read citation if u disagree. a webpages's reliability should be considered through past experiences and as tv.com is part of cnet co., where cnet has provided consistent unbias reports , a site should not be overlooked on pure judgment calls! Jkdz100 (talk) 02:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

And yet tv.com still lists "The Firebending Masters", and avatar spirit only has ten episodes under specials, the rest are recordings. and i miss worded what i said about rules, i should have said they have different rules. and sites like that are maintained by PROFESSIONALS who are unbiased, seeing as they wouldn't be professional otherwise. Rau J16 03:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

TV.com's source comes from "a guy" at Nickelodeon. Its not an official release of information, its just one unnamed guy. That doesn't fly. What we need (as I explained already in one of the many prematurely archived topics here) is some sort of official announcement from Nickelodeon, be it in the form of something on their own site or a press release to other sites. That's the key: official releases, not just "some guy".--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Wikialexdx has provided a source for The Firebending Masters, i cannot view the page (freakin comcast internet), can someone verify it. Rau J16 05:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

all it says is that Avatar will be on from 6 PM to 9:30 PM(7 episodes) but doesn't say what are the episodes' names --Verdad1963 (talk) 11:06, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed it. As said above, all that source said was that it would be on, gave no further information of any kind.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for verifying. my internet sucks........ Rau J16 16:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

rau - a professional is a mere mortal whom simply gets paid for what he/she does. no where in that definition does that mention ability or adversely says whether or not that man/woman is not BIASed

fyre - u r neglecting the fact that "a guy" is better than no guy! if per se tv.com would site there reference, hmmmm, that guy would no longer be a professional eh rau! Jkdz100 (talk) 02:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

"A guy" is no more reliable, or official, than "no guy". Also, how does telling a website an air date contradict what i said; that is in no way, shape, or from, being biased. Now, what i meant by "PROFESSIONALS who are unbiased, seeing as they wouldn't be professional otherwise" was that he would not be very professional if he was biased (probably should have included the word very in there). Also, please try to remain civil, we are. Rau J16 02:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

So the episode aired on YTV today, someone should be up to making the summary more...readable. 99.226.44.161 (talk) 03:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Last week for Jan. 4 I set my Comcast DVR to record, and at 5:30 and at 8:30 NO AVATAR! No Chapter 13, the Firebending Masters. So I hope for it to air this week (Jan 11) and it's preempted by zoe 101. If Avatar is supposed to be loaded up on iTunes *shortly* after airing, how is it that as of 01/12/08 the last episode available to buy on iTunes is Day of Black Sun? No Western Air Temple, which I had to watch off BitTorrent because Comcasts OnDemand doesn't make them available most of the time, and certainly no Firebending Masters. You say that iTunes loads them up shortly after airing. Or is it that Western Air Temple and Firebending Masters have not aired in the U.S. and therefore not available on iTunes yet? Betzstump (talk) 17:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

They haven't aired in the U.S. yet. Rau J16 20:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Leaks

how is it that these leaks on upcoming episodes are first in other countries while nickelodeon is an american based operation? not that i mind, i enjoy both episode airdates, world vs US air dates. double the FUN! Jkdz100 (talk) 03:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

What? what leaks, the only one i know of is DoBS, nothing else has been leaked to my knowledge. Rau J16 03:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I think he sees WAT as "leaked" by Canada, and probably saw the "week" at the UK as leaks, which technically can be viewed as that under the eyes of NICK USA --Verdad1963 (talk) 08:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

No they cant, seeing as they were released, by nick or otherwise. And last time i check, if something is released before it hits the internet, its not a leak. And going by that, then of course all of the leaks would be overseas, seeing as that cant happen in the US. Rau J16 11:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

last time i checked nickelodeon studios is located in CA, but maybe im wrong. while WAT is seeminly stuck in limbo in the states, our neighbor to the north has an airdate! hmmmm, that would b a leak since it DID hit the net b4 an official US air date! no way am i insinuating that its wrong to have similar interests globally and sharing. i just find it weird dat episodes are released elsewhere before hitting the states! Jkdz100 (talk) 02:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hitting the internet before an official US air date does not make it a leak, hitting the internet before it airs anywhere is a leak. Rau J16 03:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

No matter where it is, IT IS OFFICIALLY AIRED and therefore not a leak. A leak is an UNOFFICIAL release. Thats the difference. It's that simple. End of argument. Akuzio (talk) 06:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

How about we stop arguing about the "leak" technicality and think about the actual question. It is true that various Avatar episodes continue to air in other countries prior to the US, while Avatar is indeed a show meant, at least originally, for US audiences. And, they surely know that the episodes will end up on the internet shortly after they air. I find this very odd, and I think it almost ruins the show for the intended US audience, as anticipation is dampened when there is no known release date, and the next episode can show up randomly online before it's even announced in the states. It would be nice if both the Avatar production team and Nick got a handle on what they're doing, and set the schedule for the show far in advance (perhaps timing it favorably with the releases in other countries). Maybe that way we would have actual legal releases to look forward to. 69.114.152.94 (talk) 10:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

They probably have planned it out, it just doesnt match the other countries, didnt they do this last season? they only played one through ten, and then they took a break for a while. well what if that is what they are doing this time? Rau J16 18:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah Rau, they released the first ten episodes in season 2, then started taking a month break between episodes, then they started releasing pairs of episodes that sort of fit together as monthly "movie events". Hewinsj (talk) 17:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The reason why they air in other countries before the US is because the US likes to spilt shows in half. From what I've seen, you like to see the first half of one season and then show the other half after a period of a few months. Places like the UK tend to show it all the way through. For some shows like Lost, we have to wait since they haven't been filmed yet, but for shows like this and Ben 10, we just show as many as we can (i.e. all the ones that are finished and ready to go).Wild ste (talk) 17:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand why it would be targeted the US audiences. If anything it would be at countries that have nickelodeon as a channel. Or english speaking countries. --Samuelhale (talk) 19:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

It is targeted at the US audience because it is made by a US corporation for their main network. Rau J16 20:33, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that applys to cartoons though. Cartoons are targetted at an age group more then a country.Wild ste (talk) 23:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

That applies to all television, because standards as to whats appropriate for age groups differs from nation to nation. Rau J16 23:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Western Air Temple

DO NOT POST ANYHTHING THAT IS UNWANTED HERE

all i want to know is if it aired in the US, yet. if so, can i find it on youtube?Igglybuff63 (talk) 02:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

NO, it has not, if you want to watch it, go to --link removed-- and watchit. now please, this is not a forum, dont ask for this kind of thing Rau J16 02:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Link redacted. Please don't link to copyright violations. Thanks. --Bfigura ^(talk) 22:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Legit

Once again, some one has cited ytv as a source, but i still cannot verify it. Rau J16 17:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Same thing as before (once you fix the link, anyway). No episode name, no indication its a new episode. I've removed it.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, haha, whoops, i just copied it from the article. Rau J16 21:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

According to my close friend in Canada YTV has shown a trailer of episode 13 The firebending Masters.. Should we now Add it? --Master_Hio_Cin (talk) 18:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't, unless you can find said trailer on youtube or the like. I live in Canada and I haven't seen this trailer yet. Doesn't mean it hasn't aired, but we've been getting enough fakers trying to use false claims to YTV as a source (ie YTV says nothing while they claim it does) that it is better to leave it off until the episode airs in full. Derekloffin (talk) 18:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

the episode did air in Canada, and I already saw it

right now it can be viewed in removed

please don't link to copyvios. Thanks --Bfigura ^(talk) 22:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

and there is a very high chance that 314 will air 1-11-08 and according to dongbufeng.net which was the one who revealed first "the firebending masters" one of these should be title of 314

The Lake The Royal Family The White Lotus The Boiling Rock The Escape The Enlightened The Capture The Dragon of the West The Necklace The Bloodbender

and it will be revealed which one it is in the morning of the 11th of January --Verdad1963 (talk) 11:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

they are not a reliable source. Rau J16 19:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Synopses for "Western Air Temple" and "Firebending Masters"

I think, for the time being, we remove the synopses for the aforementioned episodes until they air in the US and/or the UK, then the articles can be reverted to their current forms, plus the date(s), so as not to spoil the episodes for us unforetunate souls in the US and UK who haven't seen them yet. Also, possibly instating a 2/3 majority of premiere airing (any combo of US, UK, Canada) before synopsis posting? --WTRiker (talk) 23:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia; if the information exists, and is noteworthy, then it belongs, regardless of where it came from. We do not make exceptions based on the boundaries of man, we work globally. Rau J16 23:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

As happaned when the UK aired it, we add the information. The Placebo Effect (talk) 01:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

If you don't want to figure out what has happened, stay away from the summaries of the episodes (which are now easily found in the character pages or the Avatar Wikia) as I have. The only exception to the information exists rule is when it is illegally leaked. Then it can't be posted. SkepticBanner (talk) 04:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Where does it say that, just because its illegal does not mean it doesnt exist. Rau J16 04:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Episode Synopsis Removal. Why?

Somebody removed all the episodes' synopsises from wikipedia. Look Im trying to be polite but what has been done is very wrong. So Ill say this very clearly: there are some fans of Avatar that do not have the pleasure of seeing it on tv or online because of many different reasons. For us these synopsises are as close as we are going to get for years so I humbly request that the guy/girl who took down the synopsises please stop thinking about himself/herself and return what he/she deleted. Thank You.

They were removed because they don't meet the criteria for inculsion in Wikipedia. If you want sinopsys, look at tv.com or the avatar wiki (don't remember the site name, google "Avatar wikia") The Placebo Effect (talk) 04:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Well that's certainly strange. For two seasons and a half, the synopsis on each episode was perfectly fine - and well written, to add. I can't find explanation in the sudden change of "criterias", especially when other "anime"s, "cartoons" and not to mention TV series have their episode synopsis just fine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.106.45.100 (talk) 06:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I find that the synoposises are extremely helpful in understand some of the things viewers might have missed when watching the episodes. The trivia, for example, explained some of the events that are meaningful which to fans of this series would enjoy knowing. As another has said, countless series still have their synoposises such as The O.C. and Scrubs (TV series). Why should this one be any different? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.110.189 (talk) 07:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Well I didn't really like the merging movement (the merging of individual episode synopses* into one big table) either, and I loved the trivia section, so I understand what you guys feel. However, wiki is wiki, sometimes we may need to put aside our selfish passions in favour of professionalism. Besides, episode synopses belong in fan sites, (although admittedly they update very slowly). I can't speak for the other TV series, but it may be that the editors working on those projects haven't gotten around to cleaning up the articles. Wikipedia articles have various standards. It may just be that we, the editors dedicated to A:TLA, are more fussy about this than others. I know that wiki is probably the only source that gets updated daily and has trivia sections, and I'm sorry about your lost of information (hey, I'm in the same boat as you are!) (*Plural of synopsis is synopses according to dictionary.com) --Secretss (talk) 08:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Before make a comment, Could someone tell me which of wikipedia's guidelines has been violated by providing synopses? Because on other film, I see a lot of Plot/synopses. Some plot are written in a crystal clear description so help me understand the film. Thank you - PAGE Status is not protected because of vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.78.196.66 (talk) 08:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

It was more than just the synopsis that was removed, the entire articles were removed. If i am not mistaken, the pages were in violation of WP:EPISODE. Also, even though i conceded defeat on the trivia matter, I still believe that that should not have been there; just saying. Rau J16 10:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

If we cant make seperate articles for the episodes. Why won't we expand the synopsis in the table. HEY, THINK ABOUT US WHO ARE NOT IN THE US, we haven't watched the episodes yet because were still in BOOK 2. Also, the Avatar Shorts articles has been taken out, not that too. Dar book (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

THe shorts are crap anyways. If you want a wiki about avatar, go to http://avatar.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page and contribute. THe fact is, the episodes NEVER met notability standards and someone finally decided to do something about it. None of the episodes pages said anything about what why the eopisode was notable, and therefore, did not meet standards. In reality, i dont think their was any way to fix that. The Placebo Effect (talk) 12:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

look dont you realise things like this are the reason we come to wikipedia we come for knowledge but if you cant provide that whats is the point how dare you ask us to donate when youre not meeting our wants and needs what is the point in wikipedia now youve taken away all the good about wikipedia we want articles not crapy notes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhysno1 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

For episode summarries, go to tv.com or [11], wikipedia is not supposed to be a place where EVERY episode of EVERY Tv series gets an article. The Placebo Effect (talk) 18:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Then don't come and don't donate. We didn't decide these policies, and believe you me if I was dictator of Wiki I'd make a LOT of policy changes, but I'm not so we're stuck with the guys that are in charge of policies and such. Start frequenting places like the Avatar Wiki instead. Derekloffin (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

What can I say, I think it sucks royally and is a crock of bovine droppings, quite frankly, but there's nothing to be done for it. Any arguments, you just get WP:ABCs shoved down your throats and told to go find somewhere else, Wikipedia doesn't want your contribs. C'est la vie. What we can try to do, at least, is work on these season pages, at least. The whole thing sucks, but something=better than nothing.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

And stop taking it like its a personal attack against you, because believe it or not, we don't not like you(well ok i dont like you but....). We did this because of policy, its black and white; the little man who comes here for stuff he cant find elsewhere doesnt matter. Also, how is this supposed to improve the article, just saying. Rau J16 23:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the point is well made. Encyclopaedia's are not hear for simply providing synopses of tv episodes. They must point out the significance of the episode for people. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Streetcar_Named_Marge. This article provides information about the significance of the episode with respect to other films/books and information about how people reacted to the episode. This is what is neccessary for the avatar episodes. And if there is nothing to comment about than unfortunately there is no place for an article in the encyclopaedia. I'd like to see articles for the episodes but they really need to be of a much higher standard. Its about time action was taken. 220.233.188.149 (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Well said. Rau J16 11:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont believe this. Wikipedia is a site where people from around the world enter information on every topic of every subject from the highest to the lowest AND it is supposed to be completely free. Let me tell you some thing about information and knowledge flyboy there is NO limit to it. So the guy/girl who did this has done something very, VERY wrong even if they believe to the contrary and besides Avatar the Last Airbender is one of if not the best Animated shows to date so it deserves a place in history as well as Wikipedia and the one who deleted all the data ought to be ashamed of what he/she did because I for one am very disappointed with him/her. I ask all the fans of Avatar to support me in this. We cant let one or two people who have no appreciation for what millions of people love ruin this for us. Too mmuch has been ruined already. I was the one who9 started this discussion and I am APPALLED at what has been done here. So there! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.2.162.26 (talk) 11:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

How was the page any different to the Lost season 3 or Simpsons season 8 pages? These are featured articles demonstrating how good season pages are supposed to look. I think the avatar page was very similar to these examples.Lozregan (talk) 16:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

One; it doesnt matter if you started it, and even if you dont like it, this is what the topic was about so if you're appalled, keep it to yourself. Two; Policy is policy, regardless of what you think or want, it is the rule of wikipedia. These did not meet the requirements, so they have been redirected. And as much as we may disagree with it, it was not wrong, it violated nothing. And yes, information has no limit, but notability does, and if i am not mistaken the episode pages lacked notability; therefore, they were removed. Only notable information goes on wikipedia, with out specifying that, it was bound to happen. all we can do now is make the upcoming season pages all the better. Rau J16 19:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• • Everyone keeps saying the Avatar episode articles don't meet the criteria, but they fail to mention what specificaly about it didn't meet what critertia. I'd be happy to hear someone explain how Avatar is less important than the Simpsons or Scrubs, who each have articles for their own episodes. It just seems like people are saying "individual episode summaries don't belong on wikipedia" as justification for removing Avatar, but yet they have no problem leaving other TV shows' episodes up. Why the double-standard? I'm an Avatar fan who thinks the episode articles should be restored, as they were well-written. But I'm not against redirecting them to season pages if someone can just give a good explaiation why they should be redirected in the first place. Avatar isn't any more special than other TV shows, but why are they getting preferred treatment over Avatar?--Piemanmoo (talk) 20:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

its not a double standard, and if you read my post i gave the reason that have been turned into redirects. the reason the other pages are left alone is because this was a Wikiproject decision. That is why it is only happening (that i know of) to avatar episodes. Rau J16 20:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

(edit confict) Because the simpsons episodes have been proven to be notable due to books being written talking about the simpsons episodes. The only real source we can use is the episodes themselves, which does not meet the "multiple secondary sources" criteria. THe problem is, people create this articles and then no one goes around checking them until its too late and people will get mad. If we make an article for the season, it is easier to get the required sources. The Placebo Effect (talk) 20:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but here was me thinking that an encyclopdia is a collection of knowledge. Maybe we should be looking at what criteria wikipedia presents as acceptable. In the meantime the synoposises should restored for the sake of knowledge. Bendragonbrown47 (talk) 22:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

They didnt meet the standards, what part of that do you people not understand. Wikipedia accepts information that has notability, these did not; "millions of people like it" is not a good reason for notability. Rau J16 00:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

At this point, aren't you just splitting hairs. If the episode articles themselves aren't notable then the character articles, bending articles, and other associated minutae articles aren't really notable either. These all have the same problem as the episode articles, they are self referential only to the show. Basically there would be the main article, and the episode list, which, being just a list, should probably be nixed as well. You have to pick one, either it all goes or none of it goes. If you keep the character articles, then the episode articles should come back.56.0.143.24 (talk) 17:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It would have been nice had anyone involved with the removal of the episode synopses warned the Wikipedia community first. That way we could, I dunno, have taken that information and supplemented Avatar.Wikia or AvatarSpirit or anyone willing to volunteer with it, instead of having a vast nothing to work with. I suppose that would have involved civility and common sense, which is too much to ask for. Smart move, guys! --Choi9999 (talk) 00:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

They dont have to warn you, its not like you dont know about it. Also, the work isnt gone, its just lost in history. So if you feel like it, go ahead, go through the history, add it to what ever site you want. Rau J16 00:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

So it's the rules. Big whatevs. Can't we just change it back anyway? It makes the entire article a lot more accsesable. Bad move in my opinion, no matter what the one person who has decided that is unchangable user:bendragonbrown47 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.239.215 (talk) 15:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

This is the guy who started this discussion. I thought you guys knew better. Do you know the old saying that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, well guess what, so are standards and notability. and I honestly thing that the guys who did this are just a bunch of misers and you can take that to the judge with you. And yes im still shocked, dissapointed, appalled and all the other words that I cant think of at this moment. And I say this in the kindest way i can given the inferno of rage I feel for those misers right now for what they have done. What a bunch of low lives. Taking away something so precious. At the very least you could have waited untill two to four months after the show had ended, but noooooooooooooooooo, you had to go and ruin all the fun. Any way those of you who are still die hard fans of avatar and want to help, I beg of you that if you cannot change the minds of these, these, ohhh I cant even say the Names that I want to call these people because that wouldnt be polite, anyway. If you cant change their minds then the fans who were doing such a good job, before those people ruined all their hard work, I beg them to go to Avatar Spirit or tv.com and continue writing the episode synopises there. As I always say, where there is a will there is a way. These people can have their precious space that they are trying to save and their precious so called notability. Please the people who cant see Avatar on tv or online are counting on you and we cant waste time on deaf ears. Peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.2.162.26 (talk) 19:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

No, we can't just change it back anyway, if we could then what are the point of them in the first place. The reason the episode pages were removed was because they weren't notable enough, not at all. And this wasn't supposed to even happen yet, seeing as the season articles haven't been completed (we're two out of three). And honestly, we don't care(or at least i dont) what you think of us, so dont bother telling us. And once again, you all think that the work is gone, but its not, just hidden; try looking for it before saying its gone. Rau J16 23:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Another wikipedian has brought it to my attention that i might have been a little condescending. To rectify this, I have a solution for all of those who want to view the old avatar pages, simply follow the steps on this page. This should hopefully help ease some of those who are miffed about this situation. Rau J16 03:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, to save space, there should just be one page and just have an overall summary of each season. That makes it seem more professional and less fan-site-like. Sorry, didn't realize where I posted. =p: Pakaru

Thats what they are doing, and next time post at the bottom. Rau J16 02:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Why were these episode synopses removed when WP:EPISODE itself lists the Buffy the vampire slayer page as an example of a good article. Take a gander at the episode list. It's as bad, if not worse, in its profusion of synopsis pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.79.5.64 (talk) 03:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The list is an FA; the episode pages were no higher than start, if that. The list is even in the 'good articles' list on that page. Rau J16 03:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

but if the page is referenced on WP:E, which was cited here, and the list that links to the synopses is a GA, shouldn't those synopses be summarily deleted? or conversely, shouldn't the avatar synopses have not been deleted through similar application of policy? - 68.79.5.64 (talk) 05:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

No, they are different article with different ratings, the episodes were not notable enough to have their own article, but the short versions of the summaries on the list page helped it get to FA, if they were removed the quality (and rating) of the article would go down. If that made anysense at all. Rau J16 05:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I've discovered a new technique; type http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Firebending_Masters&oldid=182734708. Viola! You'll get the old version of the Firebending Masters before it was merged. I'm still trying to get to the other epiosde articles so I or we could simply save them into our hard drives. Its like you went back in time. Dar book (talk) 09:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool. That could help with th Season 3 page. If anyone wants to contribute, it is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Avatar:_The_Last_Airbender/season_3#Episodes ~Pakaroo (Pakaru) (talk) 22:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Reading removed pages

Another wikipedian has brought it to my attention that i might have been a little condescending. To rectify this, I have a solution for all of those who want to view the old avatar pages, simply follow the steps on this page. This should hopefully help ease some of those who are miffed about this situation. Rau J16 03:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool beans! So the old episode synopses are there for anybody to read -- if anyone wants to contribute to new ones, go to Avatar.Wikia perhaps, which is a more logical home for episode synopses. Wikipedia shouldn't hold the whole of the Internet -- lots of other sites for that. --Choi9999 (talk) 03:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

YES. Choi, I totally agree with you! Some people don't get it. --Secretss (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding notability

I think the discussion regarding the removal of the episode synopses got offtrack once "notability" got tossed around -- people started getting emotional about whether this or that was notable or not notable. Instead, I propose thinking of it this way -- just as you expect encyclopedias to be informative but not contain every book ever written, so too is Wikipedia not meant to contain the entire Internet. If you want an informative overview of Avatar, then Wikipedia as a wiki encyclopedia is a great place to go. If you want a detailed blow-by-blow read about Avatar episodes, you should go to a wiki devoted to Avatar. I mean, when you read William Faulkner's entry in an encyclopedia, you don't expect there to be a copy of The Sound and The Fury there, right? And again, if you want to read old episode synopses, you can do so by following the steps on this page, and if you want to read or write new episode synopses, go to Avatar.Wikia, which seems to really need people who care about it. Just my two cents.--Choi9999 (talk) 05:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Another example would be words in a dictionary. Each word has its own meaning and they're all knowledge and information and all of them are just as important. But you don't see wikipedia holding articles for every single word. We have online dictionaries for that. Just because it's information/knowledge doesn't mean it may necessarily merit a wiki article.--Secretss (talk) 09:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how anyone can justify episode summary for Seinfeld, Lost, Alias, et al., as is the case here on wikipedia. The frank truth is that "notability" is a very vague definition, which can be morphed to justify the removal or addition of any number of entries based on the whims of WP moderators. Apparently Seinfeld fit that definition while Avatar did not. Consistency in Wikipedia is sorely lacking, a fact that is shameful given the importance of Wikipedia as a source of knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.206.105.49 (talk) 12:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

That is a different project, the events of this wikiprojects articles have no bearing on the other wikiprojects. Rau J16 20:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The Forsaken Lady?

Someone added the episode The Forsaken Lady to book 3. I checked the talk page and used Ctrl+F to find any discussion on that episode title and couldn't find any so I used the comment tag to block the episode out. That's the first time I've seen that title for episode 14 and I have to say, I prefer that to Close to a Wedding and Fireload Ozai Recruits, which are the other two candidates I've seen. If you see fit then remove the comment tags. --Secretss (talk) 08:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

It's fake, and even if its not, they provided no source for us to check to make sure it is real. I have removed the episode. Rau J16 10:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Onward

Well, now that the thousands of hours of volunteer work making up Wikipedia's Avatar episode synopses have been removed without any warning whatsoever by Vogons, we'll have to work on Avatar.Wikia [12], I suppose. But I think it's fair to say that site needs a lot of work. It's really nowhere as good as the Wikipedia pages were. Anyone up for it? Not that we have any choice now. --Choi9999 (talk) 00:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Or you could quit complaining and help with the new avatar articles here, its not like the episode pages were removed with out a plan in place. Also, this is not a discussion of the improvement of the article, so this thread should not continue. Rau J16 00:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It's just a plan that no one warned anybody else about -- which is why I call the lot of you Vogons. I don't even disagree with the notability issue, and I'm not saying you're obligated to give due warning. Sure whoever removed the synopses has the power to do so, and maybe the right -- but if you do something by fiat without warning, you're a half-wit if you don't expect others to complain. Wikipedia's supposed to pride itself for the intelligence of crowds, for building knowledge as a community, right? If a lot of Wikipedians have spent time working on something, it just makes sense to let them know ahead of time what might be in store. That way you avoid complaints, and maybe even get people to work with you and not just flame against you. That's called being a good administrator. --Choi9999 (talk) 01:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

And even if the episode synopses aren't part of Wikipedia anymore, they're still the hard, beloved labor of the Wikipedians who helped contribute to this and other Avatar pages. So yeah, to me, discussing what we do with all that work that was originally done under the Wikipedia banner seems worthwhile. --Choi9999 (talk) 01:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Well one; they are still there, just lost in the history of the page, if you need it try looking at it. Two, I figured there would be complaints, but it is getting ridiculous, they keep saying the same thing repeatedly, never changing.Rau J16 01:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Look, we're not working on the Avatar pages because we're getting paid for it, because, well, we're not. We're all doing it because we love it. And when you remove something that someone loves without any apparent warning or any easy way to get it back, people will get pissed off. I think the best way to resolve these complaints isn't to reverse the synopsis-removal decision and bring the pages back, but to show people how they can get that info they worked hard on, and where and how they can make it come alive again. I'd recommend showing people how they can see the synopses (because a lot of people won't think to look at the history pages), and point them toward an appropriate wiki (in this case, Avatar.Wikia) where they can paste that info up. Funnel all that negative energy to building something new. --Choi9999 (talk) 01:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you help work on the season articles instead? The Placebo Effect (talk) 01:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Personally speaking, I liked the episode synopses. I liked reading the play by play; I especially liked reading details that others caught that I initially missed; I liked reading how certain details in one episode connected with details in past and future episodes. Season articles are good overviews, but for me, Avatar is a great work painted in small strokes. I mean, I don't like reading Cliff Notes, either. --Choi9999 (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

We have told people where they can find them, and the appropriate wiki that they can go. And I’m certain that some of that stuff might translate over unto the new articles, but still, not even all of that stuff was supposed to be permitted. Rau J16 03:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Wait a sec, did you people get rid of the individual articles on each episode? Just arbitrarily wiped them out without a consensus or anything? Man, that is *very* wikipedia of you. King Jimbo would be proud! It's very important to have absolutely no clear standards for establishing notability. Heil Wikipedia! Heil Jimbo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.203.88 (talk) 11:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Um, yea thanks for reading whats been going on above this, thats real *wikipedia* of you. its all explained(several times) up there. Rau J16 11:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Look the episode articles is the only reason I ever come here. Removing them does nothing but make this place useless for a lot of people. I don't know what kind of logic behind this is, but taking away features such as this is like buying an ipod and not being able to listen to music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.14.133.73 (talk) 15:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, then i guess you are out of luck. Unless of course you actually listen to what we say and that there is a replacement coming (not as good but better than nothing). Rau J16 23:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Put the episode articles back up. No reasons given so far are good enough. They were useful, and removing them reduces wikipedia's info on Avatar to irrelevancy for some people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.14.133.237 (talk) 04:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

We are working on a solution to that. You can help too, go to Season One, those pages should help return some of the info to wiki. Rau J16 04:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The fact that the episode articles were on Wikipedia was fun while it lasted. Still, I don't think Wikipedia's meant to contain the whole of the Internet. Before Wikipedia came along, fans still put up episode synopses (my favorite was the Babylon 5 Lurker's Guide). Sure the episode synopses are not part of Wikipedia now (if you want, you can view the old Avatar pages by simply following the steps on this page), but there are other wikis out there. In fact, there's a wiki devoted just to Avatar right here [[13]]. --Choi9999 (talk) 04:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

OMG PPL!! The episode synoposes are right here!: http://avatar.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Avatar_Episodes#Book_Three:_Fire There's no point in arguing through this. They are there, though the Trivia hasn't been added, it's just like the old one but in a different place. I don't think there should be anything to dispute about because they are right there! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.110.189 (talk) 08:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

People are complaining about the lack of discussion prior to the episode merge but hey, just because you weren't informed doesn't mean there was no discussion! >.< I received the heads up about the merging movement and there was a discussion page for that. The notice was placed on the usertalk page of all the wikipedians involved in Project Avatar.--Secretss (talk) 09:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I got that message too, from both Placebo Effect and the project itself. Rau J16 20:09, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Book 3:Fire,volume 3

From what I hear, it will come out this April, but I feel that we shouldn't add this info until January 22nd, or until we can find a good source. Inside each individual volume, there is a flyer that states when the next one is scheduled to come out. Volume 2 of Book 3 will come out in about two weeks (12 days from now to be exact). But, for now, this is just a rumor. (Yes, I know this isn't a forum, but I thought I'd let the Wiki community know about this so that when the news is announced, we can add it.)--Freespirit1981 (talk) 19:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey ... I found a source confirming a release date for vol3 - http://www.freewebs.com/avatarad/index.htm is showing off this image - http://www.freewebs.com/avatarad/avatar.jpg ... it clearly shows April 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgy12 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! :) We might be able to use this, but I'm not 100% sure that it's Wiki acceptable. What does everyone else think? Can we use one of these sites? :) --Freespirit1981 (talk) 00:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you can, that page with the scan of the Nick magazine was created by a member of TV.com to show confirmation of it. but if you want to make sure, I can ask the member if he doesn't see a problem linking the image to wikipedia if that is the issue, the source is not the website itself anyway, it is Nick magazine, and that should be acceptable source --Verdad1963 (talk) 09:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

If Nick Magazine isn't an official source, then we need to rework what is. Rau J16 20:09, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The scan of the ad is now on dongbufeng.net. RauJ13, I know that you don't believe that they're a reliable source, but they haven't been wrong yet about episode titles, so I think that we can trust that site.--Freespirit1981 (talk) 20:24, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Just because they haven't been wrong, doesn't make them reliable. Until they provide a source for their info, i won't trust them, if others think that it is time for us to, then go ahead. Rau J16 20:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Chapter 14

We should wait until it airs to add it. Just a reminder. --Lucky135g ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Canadians, did it air, or was it a rerun? Rau J16 01:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Rauj16, this isn't a forum. But no, I hear that it didn't. The 1st one of Book 3 did. And I have the titles for episodes 314 & 315. They are "The Boiling Rock" parts 1&2. My source? Dongbufeng.net--Freespirit1981 (talk) 01:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't asking because i want to see it, i was asking to see if there was info to add tot he article. And Dongbufeng isn't reliable. Rau J16 02:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

all I will say is that they were the ones who revealed the 313 title "the firebending masters" first(about a week earlier than any other), it might not be an "official source" but it is as close as it can get to that without being it; and when 314 airs, it will mean they will be 3 of 3 for the last 3 episodes(as 315 is part 2 according to them), unlike certain sites who say 313 was big joker, 314 was Firelord Ozai recruits, 315 the prey of the face stealer and 316 will be The combustion man returns, that place is one that is definitely not reliable AT ALL --Verdad1963 (talk) 10:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, in my opinion, until they name a source for their info, they are just getting lucky with the names. Rau J16 20:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Nick gives info to one of them, as long as they don't give too much info, they gave the 313 title, but not that the firebending masters would be the dragons, nor the appearance of the sun warriors in it --Verdad1963 (talk) 04:16, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Uh-huh, and the name of their informant is..... Rau J16 04:20, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

thinking of fishing the info so you can give info to Nick just in case Nick heads didn't give approval? and than they can cut the source? I think that if Nick didn't like inside info going to that site, the source would have been stopped weeks ago (if not months ago) --Verdad1963 (talk) 05:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Riiiiight, no; i just dont trust things that i do not know about, such as, this mystery informant. Plus, who says nick even knows about the site. Rau J16 11:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Why isn't anyone here add "the Boiling Rock", it has been confirmed, and can be added, and some rumor said it will air this Friday, on .Seanroylv (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)YTV

Dongbufeng does not count as an offical site to confirm a title. More often then not, it will be nick.com, tvguide.com or when the episode airs that the title will be confirmed —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Placebo Effect (talk • contribs) 22:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

This website here confirms the titles for 314 & 315: [[14]].--Freespirit1981 (talk) 00:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Just like last time, this isn't a good source. They get there titles from the same place as last time (dongbufeng.net). Until they show me an image with the back of the DVD with the titles, they aren't a good source. The Placebo Effect (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Moral of the story is that it is better to add no information than to add wrong information. Until we are completely certain that the information is right, there is no reason for us to spread information that may be completely incorrect. Xagest

This means that the SUGGESTED and SPUPPOSED "OFFICIAL" airing dates for this chapter shouldnt be written till real release date? Tambaso

Nope, unless they have a source to prove the information. Rau J16 16:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

But there muss be a source of original and official airing dates, or does nobody wants to know why are they delaying so much? :Tambocho (talk)

There is. Nick Press releases. Unfortunately for us, they have not had one(to my knowledge) that has had the next airdate, or a reason for the delay. And yes, i would love to know why they have delayed. Rau's talk 11:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I See :Tambocho (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 13:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Episode Info

what happened to the detailed info/article for each episode? Muhammad(talk) 06:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I know i told someone i wouldn't be condescending, but, look above you, jeez!!! Rau J16 06:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think Jesus would have liked your behavior. Muhammad(talk) 16:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Guys...let's not get into one of these arguments, I think we all know full well it won't go anywhere productive.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, no arguing please. Ok? :D I mean Fyre's right. --Freespirit1981 (talk) 20:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Fyre is right, but still, he had that one coming. Rau J16 20:31, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Instead of telling us it violates that WP:EPISODE why doesn't someone tells us EXACTLY what the violations were? --Lucky135g (talk) 23:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

They lacked the required notability to have their own articles. I do believe that was mention in some sort or another, but its gotten so long, no one can even make heads or tails of it. Rau J16 00:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

In 6th grade language please? O_o (I'm not in sixth grade, I just find that that would help.) --Lucky135g (talk) 02:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

In the big picture, they were not remarkable enough, although i do not think that is the right word. Rau J16 03:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah -- "inapplicable" (as in "inapplicable for Wikipedia") is how I think of it. Like how you don't have football players in cricket matches -- right in one context, wrong in another. --Choi9999 (talk) 21:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia. Instead of deleting, we can improve the articles. What do you think? Sorry rau Muhammad(talk) 05:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

We are currently merging the episodes into articles by season. Want to help? The Placebo Effect (talk) 05:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Plus i was improving the articles, just not in the areas that needed it. I was bored, what can i say. Rau J16 06:13, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the nature of Wikipedia is to provide accurate and unbiased information, correct? So, therefore, I have to wonder exactly which material in the articles happened to not fit Wikipedia's standards. Honestly I don't know the problem due to my lacking memory; I can't for the life of me remember all the rules OR the content of the now-missing articles in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.7.242 (talk) 02:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the episode articles were very good. It's a shame someone decided they were not and deleted them. Nytemyre (talk) 12:52, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I am confused as to why my dvr says that the ext US Avatar is this saturday...

For the most part, the information was accurate and unbiased. But, that was not why they were removed. Like previously stated several times above, the episodes were not notable enough for their own articles. That is why they were removed. Rau J16 03:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

They weren't notable enough for whom, Rauj16? "Notable" sounds to me quite subjective; I personally found them notable enough to reference them multiple times. This forces me to ask the question "what is the criteria for 'notability?'" Sure, it's pretty much obvious when it comes to shows such as The Simpsons; why not give it a whopping 410 pages when it is pretty much the most popular show in existence? But then I look and I see episode articles for The Wire, a show I love like no other but nevertheless "has failed to draw an audience commensurate with its press." Avatar: The Last Airbender seems to me a show at least on par with The Wire; both are award-winning and critically acclaimed and draw an avid fan base. The Avatar episode articles were accurate and unbiased. What more is needed to allow for their existence, confirmation from the President? 02:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.36.86.79 (talk)

Well one, i wasn't even there for this decision, i just decided to follow the decision and make the best of it, not complain for weeks on end about it. And this decision only affects this project, not the others, thats why the wire isn't being changed, and the Simpson's probably doesnt warrant an article for each episode. WP:Notability defines what is notable for wikipedia and what is not. Rau J16 10:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

There is one issue with the deletion of the episode pages... the season pages are incapable of providing the same information. And if you want to go so far as to say the episode pages are irrelevant, then one could argue that the season ones are too. Nothing on them could not be included on the Episode List page, and not much on them is not already on the Episode List page. Furthermore, the loss of the episode pages means the loss of information. The trivia sections are gone, and while I know it is against policy to have trivia sections that are not incorporated into the main body of the article, what is the point of looking up an episode of a television show if not for the trivia? The massive plot synopses probably were not necessary, sure. But now, people looking up 217 will not know that Lake Laogai is named for the laogai, the chinese equivalent of the gulag. Is that not a notable fact, showing that there are real-world references within the cartoon? The pages also had literal translations of the characters found in the episodes... for instance the way the programme's creators render 'earthbending' in Chinese. The whole point of Wikipedia is the dissemination of knowledge... and this is knowledge that people may not be able to discover for themselves or be able to find in other locations.121.45.109.217 (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

If we are(obviously) not going to be re-creating those articles some of us spent hours upon hours creating ever since the beginning of this series, and are obviously being dictated our orders by some newcomer, why don't we just place a link for the Avatar Wikia Episode listings page? Many of the more dedicated WikiProjects (Such as Star Trek) place a link to their Wikia (in this case, Memory Alpha) on every single page. Aang-kai (talk) 05:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I do not believe that it is a reliable source. And do not play that "they have it, why cant we" game, if I am not mistaken that is WP:Pokémon test. Rau J16 11:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as a link added at the end of the article to an Avatar Wikia is obviously not Wikipedia, then surely people will not expect it to be as reliable as they would expect Wikipedia to be? Surely it'd be better than the nothing that exists at the moment. 121.45.129.168 (talk) 12:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Unreliable is worse than nothing. Rau J16 19:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Not knowing about something is also worse than nothing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.47.29 (talk) 04:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

It is the same thing. Knowing nothing, is not knowing something. Only difference is where the negative is. Rau's talk 04:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, here is some more info. First off, the episode articles were not deleted for notability, they were deleted per WP:EPISODE. To explain, this policy (and its parent policy WP:WAF) state that information should be written out-of-universe style, meaning it is written from the point of view of the real world and not the POV of the show's world. Since the only information for the episodes were the plot summaries, this meant that all of the information was in-universe. The only way an episode article can be in existence is if there is some out-of-universe information, like production info, that is specific to that episode. Otherwise, plot summaries are usually deleted. As for links, the current standard is to link the references to AvatarSpirit.com. The easiest way to do this is to simply place the template {{subst:avatarref-PRODUCTIONCODE}}, replacing PRODUCTIONCODE with the production code (such as 301 for "The Awakening"). This template adds a reference with everything in it. There are only one bug, which is that the end of the template has a line break which need sot be removed on a subsequent edit. I hope I cleared some things up. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 04:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That is very helpful: Much better than the condescending answers provided by this Rau character. Thank you Parent.Aang-kai (talk) 02:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Parent5446 for clearing the reason up. I remember though that there was some production information on the episode pages, and that it seems that those that had information other than synopses were deleted along with the episodes that did not have the information, (ie. the references within the episodes to real-world things such as the laogi in Maoist China being referenced in "Lake Laogi" and things like literal translations of the Chinese characters that appear in episodes, things people would not find out elsewhere.121.45.73.160 (talk) 10:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps the translations could be added to the season articles. But the "Production Notes" section on the episode articles were normally how one episode relates to all of the others. And references to real world thing could probably be integrated into the season articles as well. Rau's talk 11:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

This is just silly. An article which doesn't have enough info or has info that is wrongly phrased etc. should be tagged so people know where to improve it. These articles had the ability to be improved, but now that entire process is halted because someone thought it neccesary to delete the articles. The point of a wiki is to constantly improve the articles. If you delete articles for being sub-par, wikipedia would have 130 articles! It is not hard to change the phrasing to be "out-of-universe", and add extra production info for each article. --liquidGhoul (talk) 11:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You do not understand. They were not phrased the wrong way, all the informating was useless plot summaries and speculation. It had been determined at the discussion about whether to merge the article that the episode articles could not be improved and since they could not, it would be easier to just maintain three season articles without the long plot summaries and with the very useful production information. The only argument that can be held is that plot summaries are important in Wikipedia. But to argue that, I suggest you argue it at WT:WAF (The MoS article for fiction.) Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 13:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:WAF does not state the plot summaries are unimportant. The only thing they state is that they should be phrased so as to prevent in-universe perspective. The plot summary is used in almost every episode article on wiki, they are just phrased to be out-of-universe. Secondly, there was translation information and some production information in most of these articles. This information is no longer available. The argument I am using is that the articles can be improved, greatly, but they can't any more because they have been deleted. As time goes on, more production information will become available, and more info will be able to be added to the articles. --liquidGhoul (talk) 22:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, one, the articles aren't deleted. They have been made into redirects. And two, with out that information now the articles could not stand. There was not enough real world information for it to warrant an article. But, in the future, if much more information becomes available, episode articles can begin to come back, but only if there is enough to warrant an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rau J (talk • contribs) 00:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Episode Page (The Article this Chat is on)

Is this page really going to be necessary once the other two seasons pages are finished? For the Chibi shorts, other media and pilot, I suggest we have the 3 seasons, and then move" Avatar Media" to that media page. What do you think? ~Pakaroo (talk) 03:04, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I think this page is here to offer all of the information in one simple place. I dont think it is necessary, but that it is a good idea. Rau J16 17:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The Boiling Rock

YTV has annoced this episode as tomorrom's episode at 8:00 in canada can someone help me fix the episode box Please --Master_Hio_Cin (talk) 15:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought YTV wasn't an accurate source, so how can you add it? --Lucky135g ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Ytv is an accurate source, but the link has to be shown in the resources. Otherwise its just fan spec. ~Pakaroo (talk) 21:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Than why bother having the TBA link for upcoming episodes? We don't know if the episode on January 18th is going to be a new episode, and therefore shouldn't be there yet, right? 76.240.208.113 (talk) 02:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

That link is just there because no one has bothered to remove it. The reason YTV isnt being used is because it is offering no new information. Rau J16 03:13, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

It has been proven wrong now, it did not air. --Lucky135g ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, how sad. But when will it air? Dar book (talk) 11:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Forum, do not ask for airdates. if there is one confirmed you can find it in the article. Rau J16 11:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The Firebending Masters

Hey, who deleted all the articles for the episodes?? and BTW, they did air Chapter 14 —Preceding unsigned comment added by AtomMan365 (talk • contribs) 00:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Since when did Ch14 air? Arogi Ho (talk) 21:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It didnt, unless he can provide a source for it. Rau J16 07:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Book 3:Fire, volume 3

According to avatarspirit.net, the release date for volume 3 is now May 6th, 2008. Here's the link:[[15]].--Freespirit1981 (talk) 23:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I fixed this section, and updated the episode list for this volume. Tvshowsondvd.com confirms the titles for episodes 314 & 315, so I changed the reference so that it goes to that particular website. :)--Freespirit1981 (talk) 00:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't you remember last time they "Announced" episode titles? they may have been right, but they were not a reliable source due to the wording last time, "Should be" which means that i doubt that they know for sure these are the titles and are getting them from dongbufeng.net. The Placebo Effect (talk) 02:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Chapters 314 and 315: The Boiling Rock

AvatarSpirit.net has announced that episodes 314 and 315 will be titled "The Boiling Rock". Is it okay to add that? Aobaru (talk) 01:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't. They are getting their titles from the tvshowsondvd article, and it is worded in a way that implies that they don't really know the titles and are getting them from dongbufeng.net, which, just as last time, it was decided that we should't add them. The Placebo Effect (talk) 02:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Messy Links

The article about the last episode of the third book, The Firebending Masters, now redirects to an absent article called The Awakening (despite being a completely different episode), and that article redirects to the disambiguation page for the word awakening. What the heck is that about? Fyrius (talk) 10:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Its called vandalism, wikipedia has about three articles on it, read up on it. I fixed that page btw. Rau J16 16:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Annoying isn't it? Gamloverks (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I see. I guess I was wrong in not assuming malice where ignorance would suffice. Fyrius (talk) 23:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

large gap since last aired episode

does anyone know why there is such a large gap in time since the last aired episode? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph mitchell9 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

one, this isn't a forum; and two, its only been three weeks, its been almost two months for supernatural, so, yea dont complain. Rau J16 19:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Airdates Question (Please Help!)

are chapters 12 and 13 aired in the US? because i havent seen any commercials for themIgglybuff63 (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

No they have not. Rau J16 12:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Please read the articles, it'll usually explain what is going on episode wise. Gamloverks (talk) 15:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

However, I think we can assume (using the date from avatar spirit post above) that if the date is correct in the DVD release, the episodes will air sometime before the month of may. Gamloverks (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

While i agree with you, it is not %100 Dragonball Z tapes and DVD's were always released before the episode aired, so even though i agree, we should wait until dates are announced, because as my dad always said "Don't Assume, it makes an ass out of u and me. Rau J16 19:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds about right. Gamloverks (talk) 14:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I love that quote.... Rau J16 01:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a very good quote. I've actually used it a couple times. Gamloverks (talk) 17:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Book 3 disappeared!

Where did the episode list for Book 3: Fire go? Did a vandal erase it? --Freespirit1981 (talk) 00:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Not a vandal purse`, but rather someone whose internet likes to play games with them, its being fixed as i write this. Plus it was more than book three. Rau J16 01:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed, thanks for fixing it though Gamloverks (talk) 17:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

avatar wikipedia

does anybody here know the new wikipedia avatar site, the one that still had the page information about the episodes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rkyne (talk • contribs) 21:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, one, there is, and always will be, only one Wikipedia; the site you want is Avatar Wikia. Two, how is this relevant to the improvement to the article. Rau J16 00:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL @ Rauj. The second point is so true. But anyway, Rkyne, here's the wikia you're looking for.--Secretss (talk) 13:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE!

This is not a forum, these pages are for bettering the articles, please treat them as such. Gamloverks (talk) 01:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

can some tell me when a the avatar will come back in the usa with new episode —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.117.144.103 (talk) 15:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

This is not a forum as explained above. Nobody has confirmed dates for when any new episodes will release. Thank you. --Lucky135g ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Chapter 21

where is it confirmed that there will be 221 chapters in the third season? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Igglybuff63 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I dont know about 221, but 21 was confirmed by Nick around the same time as the DoBS chapter controversy. Avatar Spirit called them, and Nick said that there would be 21 episodes. Whether that means DoSB was 1 chapter, or there are 21 chapters total, is unknown to me. Rau J16 03:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

They posted it on their website on November 21st.

After some debate in the ASN forums, we decided to contact Nickelodeon to see if we could get confirmation on a few things surrounding the "Day of Black Sun" movie event and the rest of season three. Consequently, we have confirmed with Nickelodeon that season three of Avatar will have 21 episodes, rather than the 20 episodes that seasons one and two had.

DoBS Tidbits: The "Day of Black Sun" movie event is two separate episodes broadcast together, somewhat analogous to the way "The Secret of the Fire Nation" event was handled in the second season. The two episodes for the "Day of Black Sun" are episode 310, "Day of Black Sun Part 1: The Invasion" and episode 311, "Day of Black Sun Part 2: The Eclipse".

In a confusing twist, though, although the episodes are separate (numbers 310 and 311 respectively), both are part of "Chapter 10" in Book Three: Fire. Up until now, each chapter has been an episode, but with "Day of Black Sun" this is no longer the case. Thanks to ASN forum user Jimothy for pointing this bit out to us!

Season Three Finale: Also revealed was that the Avatar season three (and show) finale will be comprised of episodes 318, 319, 320 and 321. No other information on episode titles or broadcast dates was available.

JadziaLover (talk) 06:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

That just says that there are 21, but not what twenty one is. Rau J16 11:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

It does, but we know that the two episodes after the Day of Black Sun, The Western Air Temple and The Firebending Masters have already aired in Canada. According to TV.com (I'm not saying this is accurate.) The next episode (Not Official Yet) will supposedly be The Boiling Rock Pts 1 and 2 (Which will be episode 14 and 15 of Season 3 if DoBS is two episodes) and the Southern Raiders (Which would be episode 16 of Season 3 if DoBS is two episodes) The five episodes after that Season 3 Episode 17 to Season 3 episode 21 haven't been announced or posted on any trustworthy websites. We cannot, however, use these titles because it is not an official release. The two episodes that haven't aired in the US, Western Air Temple and The Firebending Masters, have not aired and have not been shown as a promo on Nick and therefore we must wait for the US release. As for the other episodes that have not aired. We cannot, at this time, verify that these episodes are correct names because TV.com is not a trustworthy source. If you have any questions about these episodes, go look it up, don't use this place as a forum for your questions. It's for bettering the article. Gamloverks (talk) 15:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

This is for the betterment of the article. And all of that made no sense. If anything that was confusing as hell. Basically what you said was that if TV.com is correct then we know the episode titles up until 16. Even if DoBS was one episode, they would still be the 14, 15 and 16th episodes saying all of that was just confusing. Rau J16 20:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

True, it is kind of confusing, but we know TV.com not to be a reliable source, so we can't base information on when the next episodes will be coming and what their titles are. Besides the two that have already aired in Canada Gamloverks (talk) 16:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but we have already established that. Also, that had nothing to do with the question. Rau J16 19:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I suppose it didn't, but it did clear up episode stuff for those soon to air. Gamloverks (talk) 15:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, considering we had already established all of that, and you said it so confusingly, i dont see your point. Rau J16 19:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Neither do I, my logic must be flawed, I'm sorry, I've been sick the last couple of days, and my logic was a bit affected... Gamloverks (talk) 00:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

The red lines for Book/Season 3

This is merely an aesthetics thing. Would anyone object to changing the format of the table for Season 3 from having red lines to having no lines (white lines) like in Seasons 1 and 2? I find the red lines distracting. 143.115.159.53 (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)Newbie

I thought thats how it was, but i guess it got changed, i am going to change it back, the red is distracting. Rau J16 19:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

really? I actually liked it, I even thought that someone was planning to make book 1 lines blue(water), and book 2 lines brown(earth) to go with Red (fire) --Verdad1963 (talk) 18:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm all for the white lines, less distractions. Gamloverks (talk) 18:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

White was still a distraction for me, so i made it gray; feel free to revert. Rau J16 20:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you serious? I thought it was a really good addition. What happened to concentration? If coloured lines are distracting, I would be worried about you guys driving! --liquidGhoul (talk) 12:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

It wasnt the fact that they were colored, it was the color itself. Also, when driving the only time the color is going to be that vibrant, and that close, is when i am in an accident, and by that point worrying about it is pointless. Rau J16 19:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

So what do you mean by distracting? Do the lines interupt your reading? Do you zone out and start staring at the lines? And driving in a city, you can have 90% of your windscreen taken up by much more vibrant lights. --liquidGhoul (talk) 09:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Depends on what time of day you drive. At night, yes, During the day, no. It's just the lines stick out more than we would want them to. Therefore, it's better for them to be less distracting to the reader.Gamloverks (talk) 15:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

When did Boiling Rock get sourced?

I noticed that Placebo did not remove them, and he is normally good at this kind of thing. Are they sourced, or is this just an error? Rau J16 20:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Uhhhhh, the second one? The Placebo Effect (talk) 20:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Does this validate the Boiling Rock?

Nick.com's New Game of the Week - Avatar: Boiling Rock Rescue Rau's talk 10:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I am going to have to say no. It doesnt say anything about it being a title of an episode. The Placebo Effect (talk) 11:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I really hope that Nick confirms the name so people will stop adding it to the episode list. Parent5446^{(Murder me for my actions)} 12:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, just checking. that way when people use it as a source i know it to be false. Rau's talk 18:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

doesn't confirm "the title" (even if chances are great that "the boiling rock" is title for 314 and 315) but it does confirm that "the boiling rock" is a jail and will be part of one of the episodes--72.129.107.139 (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Boiling rock is an episode is confirmed!

For a long time there have been rumours about "the boiling rock", and they are true! Here is a link to a new avatar game called "Boiling Rock Rescue": http://www.nick.com/games/nick_games/avatar/av_boiling.jhtml

It says that "Now allied with the Avatar, Prince Zuko has infiltrated the fearsome Boiling Rock Prison on a dangerous rescue mission..." when you click on instructions. Now i think this is enough proof to show that the next episode will be "The Boiling Rock" and maybe part 1 and 2. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.216.40 (talk • contribs)

no it is not. It just says the infiltrate a prison, that does not nccesarily mean that is the episodes title, for all we know, it could be "The Prisonbreak" or "The Forgotten Prisoner". The Placebo Effect (talk) 22:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Placebo, while there is very good odds that it is indeed the name, this doesn't actually constitute a confirmation. Remember, this is not a race. When the episode airs or is properly announced it will get up there, just as of yet that hasn't happened. Derekloffin (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree, there could be Numerous different titles for these two episodes. As for now, let's just sit and wait, chances are someone else will see it before we do in a different country, or they might wait until the americas catch up. Who knows? Gamloverks (talk) 14:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The Back of Volume 3!!!!!!

I have found a couple of websites that show the back of Book 3, Volume 3. The back shows the list of episodes.

Here's a site: http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/avatar-the-last-airbender-book-3-volume-3.html

And another: http://news.tvonmedia.com/tvom_news_by_show/Avatar-the-Last-Airbender-Book-3-Fire-Volume-3.shtml

I hope this is enough proof that the next 2 episodes are The Boiling Rock Part 1 and The Boiling Rock Part 2. 7rasengan7 (talk) 17:44, 16 March 2008

It is good enough for me. But there are others who might object. To avoid an edit war, wait for consensus before adding it. Rau's talk 18:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

FINALLY, someone finds a source, just be sure to use a citaion template when adding so others know it is legit. The Placebo Effect (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

One of sites says that the date that it put the pics up was feburary 28! So that means it should've been found a long time ago. Did anyone even search for it? All I did was search "avatar book 3 volume 3 back" on google. 7rasengan7 (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2008

Actually one of them was January 28.... We should have tried harder..... But i added proper refs and removed the speculation. Can someone check what i put it, because if its wrong, then i probably wont notice. Rau's talk 18:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I found this also a couple of days ago on a facebook group:

UPCOMING EPISODES

Episode 12: The Western Air Temple -Canada aired it Friday Dec 14th -Nick plans to air this episode on Friday April 4 (NEW)

Episode 13: The Firebending Masters -Canada aired it Friday Jan 4th. -Nick plans to air this episode on Friday April 11 (NEW)

Episode 14: The Boiling Rock Part 1 -Nick plans to air this episode on Friday April 18 (NEW)

Episode 15: The Boiling Rock Part 2 -Nick plans to air this episode on Friday April 18 (NEW)

Episode 16: The Southern Raiders -Nick plans to air this episode on Friday April 25 (NEW)

Episode 17: The Ember Island Players -Nick plans to air this episode on Friday May 2nd (NEW)

Yes, there is a week pause before the 2-hour Finale

Episodes 18,19,20,21: Sozin's Comet: the Final Battle (Subject to Change) -Nick added an episode for the Finale so 21 episodes in this book for this Season Finale -Nick plans to air this episode on Friday May 16 (NEW)

With this new schedule, the Sozin's Comet Book (which releases May 20th) will be on-time with the tv 7rasengan7 (talk) 19:06, 16 March 2008

I know we've been a bit sketchy about reliable sources in the past, but facebook is definitely not reliable. Rau's talk 19:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Is dongbufeng.net considered a reliable source? Because their titles of upcoming episodes are 100% accurate. 7rasengan7 (talk) 19:20, 16 March 2008

I am a regular at dongbufeng and I would have to say no. And they did not give any definite dates fore rearing, just predictions. The Placebo Effect (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Glad to see someone finally found a source for The Boiling Rock. As for the other episodes, I don't know yet, As for dates, a facebook group is obviously not an accurate source. Gamloverks (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Chapters 16/17 titles

I honestly have no idea if this is reliable enough, but upon doing a quick search: http://www.tv.com/avatar-the-last-airbender/the-southern-raiders/episode/1173334/summary.html http://www.tv.com/avatar-the-last-airbender/the-ember-island-players/episode/1179743/summary.html So, if that's good enough, I'll just leave you folks to put those in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elithrion (talk • contribs) 16:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, its not. Thank you for coming to the talk page first, instead of just adding it like all of the others do. Rau's talk 18:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, tv.com isn't an accurate source. They're usually right, but there isn't anything to show where they got the name from. We do appreciate you trying to help though. Gamloverks (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I think User:Elithrion deserves to be applauded as one of the only people to actually read the comments and discuss something first. If only everybody did this... — Parent5446 ^{(t n c e m l)} 14:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

IMDB now agrees with what I think is most probable dates

Season 3, Episode 14: The Boiling Rock Original Air Date: 18 April 2008

Season 3, Episode 15: The Boiling Rock: Part 2 Original Air Date: ????

Season 3, Episode 16: The Southern Raiders Original Air Date: 25 April 2008

Season 3, Episode 17: Ember Isle Players Original Air Date: 2 May 2008

Season 3, Episode 18: Sozin's Comet: Part 1 Original Air Date: 16 May 2008

Season 3, Episode 19: Sozin's Comet: Part 2 Original Air Date: 16 May 2008

Season 3, Episode 20: Sozin's Comet: Part 3 Original Air Date: 16 May 2008

Season 3, Episode 21: Sozin's Comet: Part 4 Original Air Date: 16 May 2008

http://imdb.com/title/tt0417299/episodes

--Verdad1963 (talk) 03:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Only one problem, IMDB is user submitted info just like Wikipedia, ergo, we can't use it as a source. The Placebo Effect (talk) 03:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I know that, just putting "possibilities" up; NOT EVEN TV GUIDE can be considered a reliable source unfortunately for the air dates

they had "306" airing today at 8 PM since 10 days ago, but instead nick showed Drake and Josh

Nick site changed it to 306 appearing at 8:30 PM Thursday(which TV guide thinks is SpongeBob) --Verdad1963 (talk) 12:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Could anyone clear this up

Ok so there has been a large gap before boiling rock (if that is its confirmed title) I remember hearing that it was because the people who make avatar have been working on another project does anyone know what it is and do you think info about it should be added to the article for the big gap just wondering what you guys think? Also in the article it said that Book 3 is the series finale but i didn't see in the source article that it was the series finale i just read finale which could mean season? sorry if i sound like an idiot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Demiser (talk • contribs) 01:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure about what other project you are talking about. However, the third season will be the series finale, as shown here (about halfway down the page). — Parent5446 ^{(t n c k e l)} 14:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Nowhere in there did it say the Show was going to be over after the 3rd book, and they have the live-action movie coming soon, we'll have to see what happens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamloverks (talk • contribs) 14:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

It says specifically:

BK: Our goal was that we just really wanted to tell the story all the way through. We really just wanted to get to the end of the story.
RM: The three seasons?
BK: Yeah. Luckily it's taken off on an even bigger life than that. Keeps growing into other things. So we feel great. Since that was our goal, and it was a pretty high goal, the rest is icing.

— Parent5446 ^{(t n c k e l)} 14:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Book 3 the final season?

People keep taking out the last part in this saying of book 3, "The final four episodes compromies the season finale [and the series finale]."

Isn't this the final season?--Wikialexdx (talk) 02:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

People are mixed on this, because it's not been totally confirmed that they aren't going to do a Season 4, I am unaware of it is or not. the last four episodes will at least end Book 3, but after that I don't know. The creators have thought about it I'm sure, but no confirmation yet. Gamloverks (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it is the final season. See this interview. [16] The reason the phrase is removed is because we have no source that the finale will be a four-episode premier. — Parent5446 ^{(t n c k e l)} 14:55, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Umm.... The Summary of the Panel at NYCC states that it is a 2 hour finale. Any other questions? The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 15:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that. In response to Wikialexdx's query, though, I would like to ask what you are talking about. The comment is in the article right now. — Parent5446 ^{(t n c k e l)} 20:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

When are new episodes going to air in the U.S. Why hasn't there been any new episodes (IN THE US) for three months and other countries have aired new ones? Was the series affected by the writers' stike or what? Maybe, if anyone knows the answer to any of these question, it should be put in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.226.114.69 (talk) 03:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

When we know when new episodes will air anywhere it will be on here. As for why no episodes have aired; well, no, we do not know. The series was not affected by the writers strike, it was already written before the season began airing. No, none of this is notable, or has sources for the information, and therefore does not belong in the article. Rau J16 04:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

is likely but I can't put an official source anywhere, that in the USA 312 will air early April, and that Canada will air 314 in mid April(they doing each chapter in order per week again, and this week they will air 307 ) the only thing that should be for sure is that the finale has to be done May 16th or earlier, as the book by Simon and Schuster "Sozin's comet: the final battle" comes out May 20th --Verdad1963 (talk) 07:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Where did you hear this Verdad1963? I'd really like to know when 312 will air so I can check your source out. Maybe we could add it to the article if it's official. :)--Freespirit1981 (talk) 20:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

There are some dates that can be used to calculated "no later than" information. One is the book mentioned by Verdad1963, the other is when the DVD for Fire Book 3 (Episodes 11-15) comes out. For example, Nickelodeon would not want Episode 15 to first be available in the US on DVD before they could watch it on Television. They would not want the book to come out before episode 21 airs. Yes, for Dragonball Z, the episodes were available first on DVD, but they were a lot more screwy in that regard. We should also get some feeling for when truly brand new episodes come out since Western Air Temple and The Firebending Masters haven't even come out in the USA yet, but have shown in Canada.Naraht (talk) 20:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no source the book is official, and no source that says that they wont release the DVD first. With out a source, everything you've said becomes irrelevant. Rau J16 02:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I theorized that maybe there will be another promotion of Nick which was similar to the "1 episode per week at 10 straight weeks" maybe a month before the end of summer. Also, I think book three will end "by the end of summer" since Aang must defeat the firelord, right? I kind'da got that idea from the air dates of book 2. Dar book (talk) 08:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, we have received word that the last four episodes are to come out in one two hour movie. Also, it is entirely possible that Boiling Rock will come out as a one hour combined episode. At this point, about the only thing that is trusted is Nick PR statements...Naraht (talk) 09:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

April 18

no episodes aired as of yet, and no reason to think they would air at a later time this day, so i have removed the original airdate of april 18th from this article for the boiling rock episodes. shadzar-talk 00:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I removed any mention of a date altogether. Its pointless. Rau's Speak Page 00:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

you seem to have beaten me to it. yes seems very pointless if the information is true and the only way to see further episodes is on the DVD that finalizes the series. very poor form of Nick to do that, sounds more like something CN would do. shadzar-talk 08:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually CN has done that. Remember GT? Rau's Speak Page 16:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

that is what i meant. CN does that all the time, but Nick has up until now not pulled some nonsense like this before. they had shows with no end point that jsut ended, but Avatar should reach a natural conclusion, it is the whole premise of the show for what the purpose of the Avatar is, and why he ran away...not something Nick would really do that often. shadzar-talk 00:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Fix

Reference 6 needs fixing or removal (citation noob). Carnelain (talk) 00:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

DVD Release Date

So it looks like the DVDs for eps 311-315 are coming out before all those episodes air. If this happens and no other country has aired them yet, we will put May 6 as the date released. Does that sound off? Also, i think for season 3, if not on this page, then the Season oage there should be a column for how and where the episode was aired first. Would I assume fansites would be a good source for that info? The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 14:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, we could always put it right next to the air date like "... (DVD)" or (US) or (Canada) etc. In addition, the template that is used for the episode list supports a parameter for an alternative air date (when it aired in the US), so it would be helpful if we had both the original and the US airdate. — Parent5446 ^{(t n c k e l)} 15:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, for this article i don't think that would be necessary, but for the Season 3 article, that should be done. The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 18:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

We also have to be watching for moving back dates. They might do a seperate DVD release, but I sincerely doubt that when Boiling Rock hasn't aired in Canada yet. So I think the date for the DVD will be pushed back. Gamloverks (talk) 01:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Scratch what I said. "Privately, a Nickelodeon PR representative confirmed that the release date for the third DVD of the season will not change from May 6, 2008, meaning that several episodes of the show will be available on DVD well before they air on television." this is according to the Toon Zone panel report. http://news.toonzone.net/article.php?ID=23164 It looks like the Boiling Rock may hit the internet well before it hits TV. Gamloverks (talk) 15:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Release Date

I changed the template to reflect original release date. Which will allow for May 6th to be used for Boiling Rock with out affecting the other dates. Rau's Speak Page 21:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Air Dates for New Episodes

It is officially confirmed by Nick that the new episodes will start Monday July 14th. Should we update the dates accordingly? --Dcelasun (talk) 19:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

What dates need to be updated? Rau's Speak Page 21:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, The Western Air Temple will air in the USA on July 14th, so the upcoming episodes will be a week after each other, right? So, I think we should update the air dates for The Boiling Rock, The Southern Raiders, The Ember Island Prayers and Sozin's Comet (a week between each episode). What do you guys think? --Dcelasun (talk) 17:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Honestly we have no clue in airdates anymore since Nick removed the banner that said when it was returning, so we no longer have any proof of when it will return. All we have is the DVD dates and that it ends in July. The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 18:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

And even then, if they were on a weekly schedule, it would not end in July. It would end in the beginning of August. Rau's Speak Page 18:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

NYCC

Hey guys, (warning, contains spoilers) http://www.livevideo.com/video/71EB9790CB5D42A78A650F01402ADA4B/avatar.aspx

It's a video taken from the official New York Comic Convention where the creators screened footage from the final parts of season 3. "The Ember Island Players" is the title given for chapter 17. Should this be added, even though there's no concrete proof for chapter 16 yet? Erebos12345 (talk) 03:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, according to the trailer for the second half of season 3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P45kPVxOEk0) new episodes are starting July 2008. It says at the very end of the trailer.

It says new episodes end in July. it said "The Journey Concludes July 2008" which means thats when the finale airs. Ane yes, we can add the name for Chapter 17. Rau's Speak Page 04:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Added. Also changed the name to NYCC so that it can include all information from the event. Will add the AvatarSpirit information soon, which is only a better reference than the one I wrote. Rau's Speak Page 04:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

we can also add to the BR episodes description that Zuko and Sokka enter the prison and are able to rescue Suki(she is in 317) and fight ty lee, mai and Azula, all the rest of the scenes would be speculation but what I wrote is pretty much facts --Verdad1963 (talk) 08:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

We can probably speculate that for the Boiling Rock episodes that Sokka goes undercover in order to free Suki, but until it's actually proven, we can't state that as fact. We do know from the game that Nick.com did, the Boiling Rock is a jail and it's kind of easy to put two and two together from other parts of the series. We knew that the Kyoshi warriors were attacked. We knew that Azula had caught her and put her in some kind of jail. I think that's concrete enough for us to put it in. Although, I am a little confused. We saw a good majority of the characters, but the one we didn't see was Iroh. That's the undetermined factor in all of the finale. As for the other episodes, it's good that we're finally getting some of these sourced. As for the trailer for the finale, I looked at the screenshots, is Zuko's mom returning? Azula looks pretty...disoriented. The Play clip from avatarspirit.net was also really good. I love his face at who he finds out is playing him. The whole clip is very good, funny and a bit outrageous. Something also to consider was that Nick could have been waiting to air these episodes until the summer months so the series would cooperate with what it was like outside, probably why the July 2008 end to the series happened. And if the series ends in July, We should be expecting a couple of episodes to probably start coming our way on Nick for friday nights. I'd probably be bold enough to say new episodes start like middle of may or June. That's my assumptions though. Gamloverks (talk) 01:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I just checked out nicks Avatar page and it says that new episodes will return Monday July 14. I don't know why that is different from what they said at NYCC, but that is what it says.Smileyface 12 91 (talk) 23:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Which gives us a date for the US airing of Western Airtemple. Which is utterly useless.... Rau's Speak Page 23:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, seeing as it'll already be out on DVD, and the episode is all over the internet. I don't know if they'll keep that release date if it's supposed to start airing again in July. Gamloverks (talk) 09:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Which episode is all over the internet? Rau's Speak Page 23:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The Western Air Temple and The Firebending Masters have both aired in Canada bot not here in the US, with the release on DVD, The Boiling Rock (Both Parts) will be on the internet. Gamloverks (talk) 14:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, alright. I thought you were saying that Boiling Rock was all over the internet, because if it was, I'd be pissed that I missed it. Rau's Speak Page 18:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, both parts 1 and 2 are out on the internet right now. As for how they got there, it may have been leaked on by someone who got their hands on the DVDs. Honestly, I'm not up to reading whole blocks of text off tv.com, so I haven't figured it out yet. Nevertheless, I believe the policy is that it shouldn't be added here (airdates etc.) until it's been legitimately aired, right? So, did they actually air on TV, or was it leaked? Anyone know? Erebos12345 (talk) 07:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

What. Where? Hazelfo (talk) 09:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Hint hint. www.tv.com. ;) Somebody probably won't be happy if I posted the direct links, but search the show on tv.com, then enter the forum for the show. One of the threads will tell you. One of the threads also seems to imply that part 1 has aired, and part 2 will air today.Erebos12345 (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I did find the videos of The Boiling rock online. I'm not going to say where for now, but at least we get to see it. Gamloverks (talk) 11:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

• ding* They has not aired on TV. Someone found the DVD at blockbuster. The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 11:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the first episode has been spread across the internet, the second one however has yet to be seen (beside random videos that have that title just to get hits on the video.). Part 2 should be up tomorrow possibly. I'd also like to know, how did we get the Southern Raiders episode confirmed? Because last time I checked, we weren't sure that was the actual title. Gamloverks (talk) 15:14, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Boiling Rock

Does the clip of Suki when combined with the Nick.com game confirm that "The Boiling Rock" will be about a prison break? I think it is safe to assume that, but I wanted other editors opinions on it first. Rau's Speak Page 23:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 23:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Ditto Gamloverks (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

If you want more info on it, just go look for it online, although someone has already put up all the information, I don't know where the information from part 2 came from however. Gamloverks (talk) 15:15, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Its online as well. It's on Demonoid and that site does not allow fake files. Rau's Speak Page 16:01, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Here's the links for chapter 14 and 15 streaming:SPAM LINKS REMOVED

Sound needs to be checked near the end of the second episode, but I have to say, those were some twists. Gamloverks (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Do not post links. Rau's Speak Page 18:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Sozin's Comet is 4-Part Finale.

According to TV-Guides info, the finale is indeed Sozin's Comet. Is there anyone against me changing it to Sozin's comet? Gamloverks (talk) 16:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that was a TV.com Blog, which makes me VERY skeptical of using those names. The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 17:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, no, its not a tv.com blog. Its on TV Guide's website: here.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that is a blog, but it is an actual editor's blog, not just anybody, so I think it is credible enough. For now I say we give it the benefit of the doubt. If it proves to be incorrect, so be it, we just at TV guide editors to the unreliable list. Derekloffin (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but i doubt nick will make all 4 episdoes titled the same thing. And a blog is a blog. The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 00:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree. We're talking about an editor of TV Guide here, not just some random joe. And if you look at it, its really an article, "blog" is just what they call it. Its not really a blog in any traditional sense.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Players

To avoid confusion, I have taken a snapshot from a video on YouTube that should suffice as a source for the title. If not, you will just have to watch the video for yourselves. Rau's Speak Page 23:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that should work. Gamloverks (talk) 15:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Boiling Rock Information

The matter of using information from a leak was brought up during October 2007 when The Day of Black Sun was leaked onto the internet. This leak however, was not acquired legally. To my knowledge, the episode was stolen. With The boiling Rock however, this is not the case. The episode was obtained through a DVD that had a premature release. This might not have been planned but the episode was obtained legally. That being said, is it okay to use the information? Or does it still go against previous consensus? And if it does, is it time for new consensus? Rau's Speak Page 03:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Since this is the actual DVD, I think we should use the information, regardless of the fact that this is a leak and not a release. If anyone doesn't object to the legality of this, I think the info should stay. About the consensus, I believe we need a new one, since the upcoming DVD releases (both part 3&4) will be out before the actual air dates, meaning we will encounter similar issues in the next couple of months. So lets discuss and decide now. --Dcelasun (talk) 08:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I'd wait till the official date it was supposed to air. Since DVDs coming out early can't really be controlled, it helps to have the date that everyone was frsta able to see it legally. The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 12:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree with TPE, I'd rather wait until the epiosde actually broadcasted legally instead of the DVD dates. I think putting the info up is okay, just as long as we don't spoil anything for anyone. Gamloverks (talk) 15:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yea, we don't play the spoiler game. And I am not talking about changing dates, I'm talking about summaries and aditions to character articles and sections. Also, if we wait for it to be broadcast then we won't have any new information until July. And this was a release, simply premature. To my knowledge, it was one-hundred-percent legal. Rau's Speak Page 17:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)