To be honest, just from these initial posts it seems obvious that there can't be a standard - as what looks fine for one series, could be wholy inappropriate for another.
I think the only thing we can agree on is that once a format has been decided upon for a particular series, then that is followed for all following seasons to keep it consistant. but what that format will be will have to be decided on on a case by case basis.

Another vote for "1. Episode Name" from me.

And I don't agree, northbloke. I would definitely like to see a standard.

Quoting Rander:

Quote:

Though I agree that the punctuation looks best, for "longer" episode-numbers (like in Star Trek) I very much prefer the colon...

So for Star Trek and the likes I would (and do) use

721: Encounter at Farpoint
102: The naked now

just out of curiosity, is this the way star trek episodes (and probably others) should be numbered? by number, i thought one meant by season order, not the number assigned in the end credits, or wherever (simply uninformed) that longer numbers come from.

did i just unwittingly create a new topic?

by-the-bye, i could easily be persuaded to hal's point about the numbers not necessarily being necessary....

krik

We already had this argument and agreed to a standard.  That being: 1. Episode name

Why are you trying to reinvent the wheel?  Extend the standard to the dividers and be done with it.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
We already had this argument and agreed to a standard.  That being: 1. Episode name

Why are you trying to reinvent the wheel?  Extend the standard to the dividers and be done with it.

As I recall, the agreement to use "1. Episode Name" was for the simple episode list that was to be included in the overview.

This question is about what to put in the episode divider, so it is not something with an agreed to standard....yet.

If you'd like to propose that it should match the simple episode list in the Overview, that's fine, but it is incorrect to claim that this is a settled issue.

As I've stated above, since the episode number is already in the "simple epidose list" in the Overview, I think it is redundant and bad use of limited space, to put it in the episode dividers as well.

Quoting TheKing75:

Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
I don't use cast/crew listings to see what episodes are on which discs... after all simple episode lists don'
t usually have the disc numbers in the list... in my opinion that would be more then a simple episode list.The disc tab or child profiles will tell me which episodes are on which disc.

The whole idea of the "simple episode list" was to stop people from putting overviews for every episode in the overview. I remember when there was ping ponging with Alias Season One when somebody wanted to put a description of every episode in the overview (and could only fit about 11 episodes). That's when the simple list came to be, to stop that, not to stop listing episodes by disc. Separating episodes by disc is still simple, and more useful.

I know... I was the one that ran the poll to get the simple episode list instead. I personally don't even see the advantage of a simple episode list at all. And as I said... In my opinion this would go beyond a simple episode list. and I still feel that way.

It is not said in the rules what a simple episode list is. so all we can do is go by what we believe to be one.

Quoting Rander:

Quote:
Quoting Krikarian:

Quote:
Quoting Rander:

Quote:

So for Star Trek and the likes I would (and do) use

721: Encounter at Farpoint
102: The naked now

just out of curiosity, is this the way star trek episodes (and probably others) should be numbered? by number, i thought one meant by season order, not the number assigned in the end credits, or wherever (simply uninformed) that longer numbers come from.

Well,, it's how they are numbered in the menu, the booklet and on every Star Trek website I've ever seen... 

i would not presume to deny such logic.

make it so...

krik

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:

Do you even bother to read what people post?  I said Extend the standard to the dividers and be done with it.  What didn't you understand about that statement?

Just incapable of a civil conversation, aren't you John?