Talk:Dark Angel (American TV series)

Similar to...

Did anyone else read the article/watch the show and say, "Hey. This sounds a LOT like James Patterson's Maximum Ride series!" I mean, both of the main character's names are Max and they're both girls, they're both human experiments from a secret facility, they both have multiple 'brothers and sisters', they have strange names for people (ex. Fang[MR], Iggy[MR]. Sketchy[DA], Herbal Thought[DA]}, some of them have telekinetic powers (Like Angel[MR]), both are groups of runaways, both try to live normal lives, both have numbers for identification, both have something to do with angels (DA's title, MR's characters.), etc. I personally haven't watched the show... But from what I've gathered, it may not just be a coincidence. (BTW, DA premiered on Oct. 3, 2000 while MR debuted April 11, '05) 70.112.45.107 (talk) 19:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

; ; From what I understand, Dark Angel came before the book series.Corsin5 (talk) 07

02, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes Dark Angel was way before Patterson's stories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.151.218 (talk) 00:34, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

To the nitwit who keeps changing the information on the main page:

There is NO CONTROVERSY, as anyone living in America should know; but some clueless fans of the comic think Dark Angel was lifted from a cartoon called CyberSix, when in fact there was an X-Files episode with the same essential plot as Dark Angel, which aired in December, 1993 [1]. The X-Files episode was part of an on-going story-line about the military's use of eugenics (referencing all-to-real experiments by Nazi scientists, which were just part of the history of eugenics), human cloning, and generally experimenting with DNA; and it includes the plot element of an extra chromosome making the clones "super soldiers", which was also present in Dark Angel, but not CyberSix.

It is more accurate to say all three stories were based on real history and previous fiction about eugenics, cloning, and experimenting with DNA (The Island of Doctor Moreau, a Twilight Zone episode about eugenics, the work of Phillip K. Dick, Star Trek, and too many others to list here). It seems possible certain elements of Dark Angel were drawn from CyberSix, and unlikely the X-Files was inspired by CyberSix, but it is simply not accurate to say Dark Angel "plagiarized" CyberSix, any more than one modern vampire movie plagiarized another. Moreover, some of the particular elements of CyberSix were undoubtedly drawn from another animated series, Aeon Flux, which aired on Liquid Television at the time of CyberSix's genesis. Liquid television was critical for graphic artists, and the similarities are significant. Few writers have ever created anything entirely new, but most don't even realize when they borrow elements.

Dark Angel is a typical piece of science fiction – a dramatic vision of a possible distopian future. The plot is fictional, but based closely on actual science. Almost despite the plot, the show's success can be credited mainly to Jessica Alba, whose genetic composition seemed to embody the future of humanity. Thanks largely to science fiction, humanity is struggling to reject the path which leads to such a future. Unfortunately, science fiction can also beget or precede real science (e.g., Minority Report begetting Leap Motion); but what truly lies in store for humanity, even super soldiers, has proven thus far to be much more mundane, while equally fascinating. Most significantly, the series Fringe recently pushed the questions further, clearly drawing from all of the above; and actual science is gradually catching up with age-old science fiction; yet there is much more to be explored by science fiction writers and engineers alike. One of the significant advancements has been the subtle emergence of constant communication, with near hive-like awareness, which was one of the many elements of Dark Angel. Hopefully increased intelligence is also on the horizon, and hopefully humanity can handle it. Obviously the CyberSix fanclub could benefit from it greatly (dumb comic => dumb fanclub).

All your edits violate several Wikipedia guidelines: WP:OR, WP:V, and WP:YESPOV. Please read them to familiarize yourself with how Wikipedia works before you make any further edits. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for your opinions of matters, which is what your edits consist of. Wikipedia is based on referenced content, which none of yours has as it's all your opinion, which is what Wikipedia is not. That section exists because it's backed by reliable sources, it's simply stating that there was a plagiarism suit against Dark Angel, it's not there as to state Wikipedia itself is claiming Dark Angel plagiarized something else, which is why you're probably making these edits. Your edit reads like a blog post, which again, does not belong on Wikipedia. It contains heaps of unattributed phrases such as "There is NO CONTROVERSY", "Dark Angel is a typical piece of science fiction", "the show's success can be credited mainly to Jessica Alba," among others. It contains tons of weasel words and phrases, "It is more accurate to say", "It seems possible", "but it is simply not accurate to say", among others. The question is, says WHO? What reliable source is saying these things? It's well-written, but it does not belong on Wikipedia for every reason I just stated. Please move on and understand Wikipedia polices and make constructive edits. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Max's id code

According to the Series (Episode 21, Seson 1) Max Guevara (X5-452) is an X5/599, Zack calls her this way, when he offers her a heart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.178.145.224 (talk) 18:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

X5-599 is Zack's code. He gives his code and says that he has a heart for her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.73.27 (talk) 07:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Synopsis and overview

I appreciate it would be removing quite a chunk of the article, but it looks to me like the synopsis and overview are more or less redundant, the overview being a shortened synopsis. In addition, the Max Guevara article contains more or less the same text as the synopsis here (with some fixes I did yesterday to clean it up.) Should we remove the synopsis? --Squiggleslash (talk) 09:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Cancellation

Story tag added for

"pussed out..."

71.231.162.174 (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

You can remove that kind of thing yourself if you want! It appears to have been drive-by vandalism from a week or two ago. I've also removed the stuff about 9/11 and the "downplay" of the "post apocalyptic setting" because, honestly, I think it's rubbish. Whatever role 9/11 may have contributed (if any), I see no evidence the "terrorist-created post-pulse third-world US" scenario was in any way down-played. If someone wants to put it back, they're welcome, but they should probably cite something. --Squiggleslash (talk) 15:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Link to other series

Is there any room for this bit of information? In Smallville episode 6.02, "Sneeze", Lex Luthor reveals a password as "Julian452". 452 could be a date, but in Smallville episode 7.09 we learn that Lex was actually doing experiments with his (dead) brother's DNA - and the 452 shines as a reference to Dark Angel. Albmont (talk) 17:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Or it could be 4 seasons and 52 weeks in a year (Julian calendar?) or 4 suits and 52 cards in a deck. Still, good catch... IF his brother's name was Julian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.77.67 (talk) 06:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a little based in...

Cybersix --201.255.59.78 (talk) 07:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC) sorry just now i not loged, but don´t break my comment, do a little read of what i say and maybe U will see some simil, bye

I can see the similarities, but a quick but by no means extensive search reveals no reliable sources stating that the Dark Angel writers used Cybersix as a basis for the show. The forums are, of course, rife with speculation on the matter, [2] [3], but most are opinion pieces and nothing reliable. 20I.170.20 (talk) 15:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone provide an english language source that covered the case of (alleged) plagiarism with Cybersix? Personally I don't see enough in common between the two to claim plagiarism, but the only sources I can find seem to be in Spanish; did anything ever go into details as to what was supposed to have been copied? Aside from both main characters being female and secret experiments the similarities seem to end there. -- Haravikk (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Saying Dark Angel plagiarized CyberSix is ridiculous. These plot elements have been around since way before CyberSix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.151.218 (talk) 01:16, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Neutrality

This line in Program scheduling regarding the show's cancellation that said:

"Joss Whedon's Firefly was ordered to series so FOX wouldn't have to pay for two big budget shows. Ironically, Firefly didn't last an entire season."

"So FOX wouldn't have to pay for two big budget shows" is not only unsourced, but there's almost a bitter tone to that statement. That's pretty much confirmed when the following sentence starts with "Ironically, Firefly didn't last an entire season." Ironic according to whom? And what's so ironic about a TV show not making it through an entire season? Happens all the time. In fact, some shows don't make it past an entire episode or even make it to the air at all. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 02:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Connction to Battlestar Galactica(ReImagined)?

I've recently been re-watching the Dark Angel Series and noticed a large number of minor characters in this series (at least 5 off the top of my head) are main characters in the reimagined Battlestar Galactica. There's got to be a connection, perhaps the same casting director or writers? I'm very curious what this connection is, and I think it would be relevant to this artical. 96.33.80.229 (talk) 02:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

It was filmed in Vancouver. Shows filmed in Vancouver have actors based in Vancouver. This is not specific to Battlestar Galactica (or Stargate, The Collector, or any number of other shows). Avt tor (talk) 20:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal of Logan Cale

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge into List of Dark Angel characters. --Gh87 (talk) 07:59, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

---

That article is still too short on its own and yet to be expanded. I need to hear your honest opinions, please. --Gh87 (talk) 21:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, Logan Cale is very stubby. I'd support merging it here. -Phoenixrod (talk) 22:05, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I support as the article hasn't been expanded at all in 6 months. Although, there's no real content to merge. Drovethrughosts (talk) 22:56, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Nothing to merge, redirect to List of Dark Angel characters, which actually contains information about the character. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 23:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

That seems like a better idea than a merge. -Phoenixrod (talk) 23:29, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Not possible; I tagged List of Dark Angel characters with templates. Merging to the main article instead of that article is more suitable at this time. --Gh87 (talk) 08:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I just created the redirect to the list of characters article. Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Max's Motor Bike is?

Max's Motor Bike is? i like it very much does enetbodey know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.180.214.15 (talk) 12:36, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

After a quick Google search, it's a Kawasaki Ninja. As for the model, not sure as there's lots of conflicting information. It's either a 250, 350, 450, or 650. Drovethrughosts (talk) 21:34, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Unreferenced awards

I've had to remove the following award nominations from the article as they are currently unreferenced. Freikorp (talk) 00:22, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Event	Award	Nominee	Result
2001 Kids' Choice Awards	Favorite Rising Star	Jessica Alba	Nominated
2002 Kids' Choice Awards	Favorite Female Butt Kicker	Jessica Alba	Nominated

Duplicate links

There are a lot of duplicate links in § Cast and characters. They are nowhere else in the article, so it seems deliberate, but I can't see why. Rather than delinking them, I thought I'd mention it here. Relentlessly (talk) 22:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Just an oversight on my part I guess; removed, Freikorp (talk) 08:45, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

DVD commentary

As noted in the article, several episodes on the DVD contain optional commentary. In improving this article I have not utilised these potential sources. I mention this purely for the benefit of other editors who may wish to expand this article further in the future. Freikorp (talk) 11:51, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Race

Just wanting to mention something interesting i've found that I may want to add to this article in the future. Sound warrior: Voice, music and power in Dark Angel - page 197. "As is noted in production interviews in the DVD set, the audience’s inability to categorise Alba’s ethnicity was considered to be a useful sf visual marker of post-racial futurity that helped to reinforce the diegetic notion of an imagined world less bound by racial distinction. Freikorp (talk) 11:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dark Angel (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141113020457/http://reconstruction.eserver.org/Issues/054/jowett.shtml to http://reconstruction.eserver.org/Issues/054/jowett.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:43, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Alleged plagiarism of Cybersix and Friday

At FAC, it was agreed that the information about alleged plagiarism should be removed on the grounds the sources did not meet the high quality benchmark for featured articles. IP edits have attempted to restore it back on multiple occasions, most recently with a couple new sources and an edit summary stating "It should be discussed at least if it is deletable again under this new form." This is a featured article, having been peer reviewed and accepted as among the best content on Wikipedia. As per Wikipedia:Featured article criteria, the standards for featured article are not just that the sources are reliable, but that they are also "high-quality". The old sources definitely do not make the high-quality benchmark, and the new ones don't appear to either. It's debated as to whether io9 even makes the minimum standards for a reliable source, let alone the high-quality for a featured article. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 22. And the Daily Radar wouldn't fill me with confidence even if it wasn't defunct. In order to maintain the integrity of the high-standards that featured articles should adhere to, I propose we remove this information immediately. Also just a word of advice for the person(s) trying to add this information: even if you do find a high-quality source, you still won't be able to use the lower quality ones alongside it - you'd only be able to cite what appears in the high-quality source. Freikorp (talk) 04:57, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's worth a new heading but just to revive this topic, there are issues with anonymous editors appearing and adding Argentinian sources outlining plagiarism claims about this show. I don't believe these sources are reliable, first of all. Second of all, I don't intend to be anglo-centric but I feel that if this controversy were notable about an American television show, it would have received significant coverage in American sources. I would say the same about a show from any country. I request that the various anon editors (unless you are all the same person) discuss here rather than edit warring. The material is disputed and this is a Featured article, so we need to keep it stable and of high quality. --Laser brain (talk) 11:38, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

@User_talk:Laser_brain While I'm not contradicting the rest of your argument, I hope you realize how problematic your blanket statement saying all sources from a particular country are unreliable is. Unless you're challenging the quality of the sources, in which case I would recommend using that as your argument rather than the country of origin. 122.45.103.220 (talk) 01:26, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Laser_brain never said all Argentinian sources are not reliable, and I think it's problematic you're misrepresenting what they did say. They clearly said the particular sources in question were not reliable. They then said, as a second unrelated argument, that if coverage was only limited to a single country that had nothing to do with the TV series, that lacked notability, not reliability. That second argument is much more open to debate, but it's a moot point since the first argument they made stands. Damien Linnane (talk) 04:24, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 11 July 2019

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

The result of the move request was: moved (closed by non-admin page mover) DannyS712 (talk) 21:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

---

• Dark Angel (2000 TV series) → Dark Angel (American TV series)
• Dark Angel (2016 TV series) → Dark Angel (British TV series)

– As multiple previous RMs have shown, country disambiguation is much more recognizable to readers than years. This isn't just theoretical, as I was specifically searching for the American TV series and even-though 2000 seemed a much more logical option, I didn't really know what year it was, only that it was "old". Gonnym (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

• Weak oppose I personally find both disambiguation methods about equally recognizable in this case, so I'd lean very slightly toward keeping the current titles per WP:TITLECHANGES and WP:CONCISENESS. But I'm fine with country disambiguation if others find it more recognizable. BTW, participants in this discussion may be interested in checking out this ongoing debate regarding whether WP:NCTV should advise that disambiguating on country should be generally preferred. Colin M (talk) 14:24, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
• Support. Per Gonnym.

One thing that should be mentioned in this discussion, regarding WP:TITLECHANGES, is that this article's title has NOT been stable. It used to be "Dark Angel (TV series)", until it was moved last September, and with no discussion/consensus to support the move I might add. I wasn't happy with that change, though I also wasn't bothered enough to revert it. Damien Linnane (talk) 03:55, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

• Obvious support is obvious – WP:NCTV RM's have shown a clear preference for "by country" disambiguation over "by year" disambiguation (per WP:RECOGNIZABLE). This proposal is actually one of the better examples of this. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
• Support - per nom. Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:31, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

---

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

Qualifications for theme referencing

It seems to be the theme section is citation of random people's opinion that's not pertinent to the show itself. There should be some type of standard by which to decide what sources to include and exclude. I think it would be best to include sources, and possibly further discussion from impactful news sources during that period discussing it, or of they interviewed experts, to include further points from them, even if in the future. Or, of there are comments from the author, director, producer, etc those self confessed themes are pertinent. However, currently there is too much random information within the section that are never addressed during or around the show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.216.189.178 (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

There is already an accepted standard for themes sections, and this article adheres to it. See MOS:FILM. It is also normal to build a themes section using academic research. I don't understand how you can consider academic research to be 'random people' and 'random information'. This section and these sources were also the subject of peer review when the article passed through its FAC, so you're currently on your own with having a problem with it. You're welcome to add more content though (as long as you adhere to WP:UNDUE and other guidelines of course), so feel free to go searching for sources yourself. Personally I think the section has more than adequate coverage and does not require expansion. Damien Linnane (talk) 06:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)