Talk:Sliders (TV series)

The sliding timer's geographic radius in season three

I've seen some dueling edits today on this topic, so I thought I would give the background on it. The new radius of the sliding timer grew out the early season three episode "Double Cross". In that episode, Logan St. Clair had developed a timer which had a 400 mile radius with her lab in San Francisco as the center point. By the conclusion of "Double Cross", Logan had swapped out her parts into our heroes' timer thus sticking them that 400 mile radius from there on. In the early season three episode "Dead Man Sliding", it is again stated that the timer has a 400 mile radius.

The confusion arises due to one comment later in season three. In the mid-season episode "The Exodus Part 1", it is stated that the timer has a 500 mile radius. That comment is just one of many mistaken details that plagued the script; and this is proven as the later season four and five episodes go back to saying 400 mile radius. As anyone can attest to, the standards for the series dropped in the last half of season three; and adhering to continuity wasn't much of a consideration.

So what's the answer? It was a 400 mile radius.DBHughes 15:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Brad Linaweaver's uplifting adjectives

Not sure what's going on with this, but I've noticed several users who keep editing the main article to say "famed author Brad Linaweaver" or "noted author Brad Linaweaver". What is the deal with this? Are the edits being done by Brad himself on some kind of an ego trip?

Just a bit above Linaweaver's credit, the "Connection to Other Works" section talks about Piers Anthony and George R. R. Martin; but some want to ignore those guys to put "famed" and "noted" next to Brad Linaweaver's name?

I may be wrong, but Wiki isn't about marketing an author. If Linaweaver is so famed and noted, then the readers of the article are going to know it without us telling them. Right? DBHughes 21:36, 09 March 2007 (UTC)

S3 Continuity Error

Someone just added the idea that the uses of 'Earth Prime' after S3 aren't really Earth Prime at all because Quinn judged it was his actual Earth based on the fact that the gate squeaked, which was fixed in S2.

I'm thinking this should be removed, as

• There's no 100% confirmation that the S2 episode took place on Earth Prime (sure it was heavily implied, but you can't be certain)
• A gate that's 'fixed' temporarily could easily begin squeaking again in a year's time.

Now, it might be prudent to mention somewhere that, really, given how parallel worlds work, there's no way to really know they arrived on what was Actually Earth Prime, as opposed to an Earth that was extremely similar (right down to having its own group of missing Sliders), but saying that the S3+ Earth Prime wasn't _really_ Earth Prime strikes me as a fan who has a particular axe to grind (and believe me, I know that feeling particularly with this show), and not something that should be in the article as a whole.

Thoughts? Wandering Ghost 13:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I concur with you and have been bold and reverted the addition. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 13:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

At the end of the season two premiere, "Into the Mystic", the Sliders did return home. Writer of the episode and Sliders co-creator Tracy Torme' has confirmed it to myself personally (I operate Sliders - The Dimension of Continuity), but Torme' also stated this fact in a past interview. I will need to do some digging, but I can eventually cite the interview. That's something I'm sorting out for Wiki; actual cites to the source interviews where the information was divulged.

However, I still agree with deleting the "wrong Earth Prime" information from the main article. The truth is that after Torme' left the series, the season three producers wrote "The Exodus" with the intention that Quinn found his way to Earth Prime. In season four, the producers set up a storyline that would have revealed the Earth Prime of "The Exodus" was not really the Sliders' home; but the season four producers shelved the idea without killing it.

The truth is that the "wrong Earth Prime" idea is a sound theory backed up by the behind the scenes wrangling; but it's still just a theory. As I understand, theories are not appropriate for an article at Wiki; and any explanation of the behind the scenes I noted above would belong somewhere other than the main article (possibly as a behind the scenes note in the relevant, individual episode Wiki articles). DBHughes 19:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Adding sources

I just added the section "Episodes aired out of order." I know all this info because, well, I watched the show at the time. But I assume I need to prove that it's verifiable, so I would like to reference the book "Sliders: The Classic Episodes" by Brad Linaweaver. However, all of the references/sources on this page are for other websites. How do I make a reference for a book? Thanks. -- TOM-H-CRGL3 17:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

<ref name="Booknamehere">"[[Book name here]]", author name here, Page: #xyz (publishing year here)</ref> Deus Sum (Matthew Fenton) (talk • contribs) 17:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks! :) -- TOM-H-CRGL3 22:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Season 1 Cliffhanger

Why is the Season 1 cliffhanger left completely unresolved? For some reason Quinn gets shot by the lotto people but it's completely ignored in 2x01. -- MC Survey

It's not completely unresolved... they just kind of glance over it. "Oh no, Quinn's been shot and is bleeding to death! But now he's all better. Let's move on." But the reason is pretty much thanks to Fox. Despite the fact that fans made campaigns to renew the show for a second season, the suits didn't actually think the same folks would be able to remember the cliffhanger. Thankfully Tracy Torme went to bat - after all the crap they put him through, it was the one thing he fought for. Unforunately, they screwed him even with this, and he was allowed only a certain room and time to resolve it. Yes, it's a joke, but at least there was an effort.--Bacteria 15:31, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Same thing I noticed with the pilot and the beginning of 1x02. That gronk is Quinn's father in the universe he thought he slided home to, and he drops the wine glass in shock. Episode 2 makes no mention of this at all - they're just in some other universe right away. M.C. Brown Shoes 21:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it happened sometimes...

In the end of the second episode (Fever - supposed to have been aired 5th) they were seen in a tent and mention a bunch of cannibals who were about to eat them. But it was never seen how they escaped.

It isn't a problem - many first season episodes ended with the Sliders sliding to a world in which the resolution was never given. It was just a funny way to end an episode. It did then lead to problems later in the season with Rembrandt incorrectly stating how many slides they had done up to that point - he said it as though it was one slide per ep, but the on screen evidence showed that more than one had happened.Mmm commentaries 12:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

My problem with the season 1 finale and season 2 premiere is Professor's hair. In the premiere, it says only a few days have passed. There's no way his hair can grow that much in a few days. Maybe in 3 months, which is what it was in real-time. Jeanlovecomputers (talk) 21:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Clean up

Hey. I'd like to clean up the article a little. I'll not delete anything, but I think some rearranging and some expansion is in order. I've done all the changes, including images, etc, and they're saved on my computer. If I get the go ahead, I'll edit the page. It can only benefit the article, but if you're not happy with the changes I make, go ahead and revert, or build upon it... I'd eventually like to expand the entire Sliders project on Wikipedia. -- Avengers fan 23:28, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Well... I got impatient... Lol! Hope you like it! -- Avengers fan

Requesting Help

Hey. Me again. I'd like to request that whoever's interested in expanding the Sliders articles on Wikipedia discuss together and get something done. Get a page for each of the main characters, not just the season 1/2 cast? Maybe some more episodes? If we can come up with maybe four or five approved headings to include in each character profile, I think it'll all be a lot neater... -- Avengers fan 19:36, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

I've changed the link to Roger Daltrey (2) back to Roger Daltrey, for two reasons:

1. we don't use numbers for disambiguation here; [[Roger Daltrey (actor)]] would have been more correct
2. according to IMDb it is in fact the same Roger Daltrey as the Roger Daltrey article is about, so no disambiguation is required

—Paul A 01:13 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

What similarities does Sliders supposedly have with Quantum Leap? -Branddobbe 00:27, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

• A physicist travels between various different time/space realities and has a fixed amount of time in which they stay in that reality.
• Each reality's stay usually lasts for the duration of one TV episode, with the exception of two-part episodes.
• There are 'evil leapers' in both- who are trying to undermine the work of the protagonists.
• There is an emphasis placed on significant events in Earth's history. In Quantum Leap, Sam attempts to change significant events for the better; in Sliders, they experience the after-effects of significant changes in history in alternate quantum realities.

- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:12, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

Actually, I think there was a parallel (no pun intended) in that both shows, especially in Sliders' first season, that each episode ended on the start of a new adventure. Each episode of Quantum Leap ended with Sam in a new time and place, uttering his catch phrase "Oh, boy..." I think the best example of a comparison was in "Fever" where they ended on the cannibal world - a dead-on Quantum Leap moment. Another similarity was that both sets of travelers were just wanting to get home, lost in the trans-dimensional fabric. It's also interesting to study the terms used to coin both sets of respective travelers and their their travels - Leapers, Leaping; in comparison to Sliders and Sliding. A difference between shows that I believe is worth noting is that it was Sam's mission and purpose to change things before he can leave with a hope that it will get him closer to home. The sliders, however, could leave regardless, and they often debated among one another if they should interfere with the locals, to use their own terminology. They could just as easily stayed out of trouble and slide on time, but if they did that, it wouldn't be a very interesting show, would it? --Bacteria 09:31, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Retcon?

I watched the pilot of Sliders and I remember one of the initial elements of the premise was that something would happen if they didn't all slide together when the timer opened the vortex; if one of them said "Man, this world is nice, I'd rather just stay here than take my chances continuing to hop around," it would doom the others in ... some way I can't remember. Of course, later in the show the make-up of the group did change, starting with Arturo getting killed and Maggie joining -- did they ever mention what this did to the whole "We have to slide together!" part of the premise, or did they just ignore it? -- Antaeus Feldspar 22:51, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The details of what happens if they "miss the slide" changed a couple of times. If you watch season 1 in its original airing order (instead of the order the writers intended), it's more confusing because episode 2 (which tried to explain the timer) didn't air until 5th or 6th. In the beginning, the timer had to be activated when the display hit 0:00:00 because that's the only time the gateway would be accessible. If it was not activated, the group would be stranded on that earth forever. Later on (I'm going by memory in this part so please CMIIW) the story became that another gateway would be available in something like 27 years.

That must be a non-season 1 reference - nothing in the first season indicates that anothe rportal will be there in 27 years. In the season finale, Quinn states that it may tax the device to send more than four people. But they end up being able to get through with one extra guy (and a dog!) with no problems.Mmm commentaries 12:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember anything about the whole group having to go together. In fact, side characters came and went pretty freely. There was a throwaway line early on about the timer being set for 3 people but actually transporting 4, which might cause problems with the hardware, but that plotline wasn't explored further.

Mike 09:36, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

It's a common thing for pilots to contain elements of a TV series that don't make it into the general show if it's picked up. After all, in the pilot, it was suggested that the Sliders have to return to the point where they first entered that universe to have any hope of returning home. It's just something that happens... for that matter, look at the pilot for Star Trek: TNG and compare how the characters are handled to the rest of the show.--MythicFox 07:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

If you watch the first season episodes in the aired order, you'd notice that the vortex can be opened at will only in the first episode. The idea, as intended, was that when Quinn activated the timer prematurely in pilot episode on that frozen world, it compromised the timer. It was then re-rigged (in "Summer of Love") so as to count down to the nearest window of oppertunity. If they miss it, they'd have to wait 29.7 years (or a miraculous oppertunity such as the timer in "Slide Like an Egyptian").

The timer was used twice on the world with the killer insects, the episode where the team got seperated but by an incredible fluke ended up on the Summer of Love planet. The indication is there the timer can always be manually operated, but it can have disastrous consequences.Mmm commentaries 12:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

"Summer of Love" was supposed to be the episode aired right after the pilot movie, but Fox aired everything out of order as rating stunts (Fox thought "Fever" would get better ratings as the first one hour episode since the Dustin Hoffman movie "Outbreak" had recently been popular at theaters).

Because of Fox's tampering, the producers decided to edit out a small portion of "Summer of Love" since it only worked as a second episode line. The line explained how the only way to avoid destroying the timer through burn out was to wait for a "weak spot" between realities; and that long equation Quinn and Arturo had worked out on the apartment wall was a mathematical equation plotting a spiral chain of these opportunities as the Sliders traveled with the flow (and down the drain). The problem was that if they broke the spiral (i.e. missed a slide), then it would take 29.7 years before the spiral showed the next opportunity on the world where they stayed. In other words, 29.7 was the constant of the equation.

Incidentally, this weak spot is also the explanation for the fluke you mention. The reason it landed them on "Summer of Love" earth is because that reality hadn't moved far away yet. Quinn and Arturo ended up in a different geographic location because the teather (tunnel) between the two dimensions had been severed and reconnected. It's all based on a "bubble reality" approach where realities are like a ball pit at Chucky Cheese with the balls constantly shifting as they roll over each other's surfaces.

Anyway, that's how the creators intended the timer to work; and the 29.7 year rule was mentioned many times starting in season three (even though it was never explained well). -- DBHughes (talk) 05:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The thing about being together was simply that if they wanted to get back home, or if, at the least, they didn't want to be stranded, they had to stay together (which was a major hole in logic in "Slither"), otherwise those with the timer had to slide without all four, or risk missing the slide to regroup. It was a choice, as noted in "The King is Back" wherein which Remmy wants to stay and the others have to slide without him in respect of his decision. The timer was set for three people. Rembrandt tagging along was stretching it, and they were warned that more could do them damage when sliding as it would put a strain on the vortex. This was kind of an inconsistency, mainly because when they all first slide, they picked up Rembrandt's cadillac as well, which would guarantee that they were ensured enough mass for at least a fifth person. --Bacteria 21:31, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Sabrina Lloyd

The article claims that Sabrina Lloyd was allegedly fired. According to [1], she (allegedly) quit, telling David Peckinpah, "It's me or Kari." Q0 12:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

The newest article on Sabrina Lloyd is highly inaccurate as well, and needs to be cleaned up. The ONLY reasons for Sabrina leaving the show, is because A) Her manager decided it would be great for her to go on to other things AND B) She was extremely upset at the producers of the show, involved John's firing from the show because he offended one of the producer's wives at some christmas party. Additionally, the ONLY reason why she came back to do a voice role, was because Cleavant Derricks asked her to, in which she agreed. ALL of this information comes directly from Cleavant Derricks himself, in several interviews. IceSage (talk) 00:42, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

At the time, I read an article claiming she quit because she wasn't getting enough character development and Wade was just Quinn's girlfriend. Bizzybody (talk) 07:46, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Hitchhikers

The article claims that in season 2, the sliders agreed as a rule to no longer accept hitckhikers. When did this happen? I remember hitchhikers were taken/invited in the following episodes:

• The Luck of the Draw: Ryan
• Love Gods: A married couple
• El Sid: Sid and Michelle
• Murder Most Foul: Trevor was invited
• The Other Slide of Darkness: Quinn's double was invited
• Mother and Child: Christine and her son Jonathin went with the sliders, even after they were on a safe world.

Since they kept inviting people, it doesn't seem like they made it a rule to not accept hitchhikers. Q0 20:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, I do recall this being a subject with the sliders, but I can't say for certain in which episode this was adressed. I should comment, however, that making a rule and sticking to it are two different things - especially since they did in fact make it a rule not to interfere with the "locals" very early in the first season. And I think we all know how that turned out. --Bacteria 21:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

From what I remember, in the episode "El Sid", Arturo warned Rembrandt about the dangers of taking more people along with them, and that every time they add a body, they increase the risk that they will all be finely spread like jelly across an infinite number of dimensions. However, I'm not sure if they actually made a rule against hitchhikers; I think Arturo might have simply been warning about the dangers of taking more people. Q0 21:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't recall El sid, but he also said something like that in "The Luck of the Draw" when Rembrant suggested allowing some beautiful black woman to slide with them instead of being executed. (By the lottery) OzOz

Wade gang raped by Kromaggs

It says in this article that Wade was "sentenced to be gang raped by Kromaggs" - did I miss something, or is it just the charming way of the writer to describe the breeders' camp?

Holy shit; you're right. It must have been something that get in there when someone wasn't looking, and didn't go over the article to find it later. I have now rephrased it to something more appropriate. --Bacteria 18:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

That is the funniest thing i've read all day! HarveyDanger 05:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

My theory on the breeder camp thing is that the actress that played Wade had a falling out with the producers, so they sent her to the "breeders' camp" as punishment, which includes being humped by all the kromaggs and impregnated. This is what happens when you have a falling out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.116.212.32 (talk) 21:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Episode List

There are plenty of TV shows on Wikipedia, and they tend to have episode lists. As i sit here watching my sliders dvd, i have to question why this page does not.
I am hesitant to create an episodes list at this time, because i do not know if there has already been one that has been deleted. i cannot find anything about it. any opinions before i start? Jeremys779 04:25, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

There is one at List of Sliders episodes. Q0 05:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

yes there is. i wonder why i could not find it before. i am going to link it from the main page. thanks! Jeremys779 07:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I notice that Season Two on the list of Sliders episodes is not in the viewing order the producers intended; the list is instead in the order Fox aired the episodes.

Sliders fans have debated the subject for many years, and the consensus is that the producer's intended viewing order is the one that should be promoted. The main reasoning behind that choice is two-fold. Fox only aired "Invasion" next to last because many Fox Execs hated the episode; so "Invasion" was scheduled to first air in the dead of summer when the Fox Execs felt no one would be watching television anyway. Also, Fox only aired "As Time Goes By" as the Season Two finale because the Fox Execs were honestly confused by the episode (which isn't a surprise if you know the Fox Execs). Much like "Invasion", the Fox Execs scheduled "As Time Goes By" to air in the dead of summer the week after "Invasion"; the reasoning was again because they felt no one would be watching television at that point.

The below order is how the producers meant Sliders Season Two to viewed; and it makes more sense in several regards even though it's not fatal to view the Season Two episodes out of order.

Into the Mystic

Time, Again and World

El Sid

Love Gods

The Good, the Bad and the Wealthy

As Time Goes By

Gillian of the Spirits

Obsession

Invasion

Post-Traumatic Slide Syndrome

In Dino Veritas

Greatfellas

The Young and the Relentless

I've planned for some time to add some more information to the Sliders Wikipedia entry, and I'll try to get around to it soon. I've operated http://www.dimensionofcontinuity.com since 1998, and I've talked to practically everyone who worked on producing Sliders; I even have a collection of well over 100 props used in the show's filming along with a copy of every script written. However, everyone who has worked on the Sliders Wikipedia entry has done a great job; and I'm glad to see the show represented so well at Wikipedia. --TemporalFlux 18:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

---

I don't know where to exactly put this and it's been some time since I've seen the show but I remember in an episode of season 1, the groups made a slide to San Fransico. This San Fran was deserted and they looked at the bay and saw a giant tidal wave coming towards the city. i was thinking that would make for a great episode but it was never explored. Does anyone also remember this?

539

This was at the end of the episode Summer of Love (Sliders). Q0 02:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

And the beginning of the episode, The Prince of Wails. The episodes were aired (and DVD-ized) out of order. 15:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Page move

I didn't noticed this at first, but Sliders was recently moved to Sliders (TV program). This slipped by because not only does watching a page not cover moves, and I'm a bit bothered by the fact that an announcement or vote on this talk was avoided. So given how the title of this page relates to the disambiguation and such, I was just wondering if I'm the only one who think it was just fine the way it was and should be moved back, or, at the least, it be moved to Sliders (TV series), per naming convention? --Bacteria 10:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I also think it was best the way it was before, when it was just named Sliders. However, if it has to be moved, then it should be called Sliders (TV series), not Sliders (TV program). Q0 19:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for moving the page back. I was going to do it myself when I realised that a week had passed, but I guess I was a day too late. I don't think the mover is familar with usage of the word "slider" vs. "sliders", and a brief look at the articles that link here give the impression that most, if not all, are referencing the series. It's no more confusing than the "Quantum Leap"/"quantum leap" thing. --Bacteria 08:48, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization of the word 'earth'

I think the word 'earth' should be capitalized in the same way that the words 'mom' and 'dad' are capitalized. If a specific person is called 'Mom' or 'Dad', then the words are capitalized. However, if you say "my mom", "the dad", "some mothers", etc., then they are in lower-case. In the same context, I think "the earth", "an earth", "most earths", etc. should be in lower case, but when 'Earth' is used as the name of a planet, without an article like 'the' attached to it, it should be capitalized (as in "I returned to Earth." or "I returned to the earth."). Therefore, I think Earth Prime should be capitalized because it refers to a specific earth and does not have an article like 'the' attached to it. Q0 03:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

In the context of this article, where 'Earth' is always used in the context of other planets (other Earths), isn't Earth a proper noun referring to the territory that is our world? If we were referring to Russia on alternate worlds, wouldn't we refer to them as alternate Russias? Or, going to a galactic scale, alternate Milky Ways?

Wikipedia's Manual of Style (capital letters) has this to say:

The words sun, earth, and moon are proper nouns when the sentence uses them in an astronomical context

This article seems to refer to Earth as a planet with respect to all the other planets called 'Earth' in other dimensions in almost every case. 15:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

References

I noticed that the article is tagged as needing references. Could the episodes themselves count as references? Q0 03:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Sabrina Lloyd (again)

The article states, "Sabrina Lloyd began starring on ABC's Sports Night during the hiatus between switching from Fox to Sci-Fi Channel". I thought that although there was a large gap of time between when Fox aired its last episode and when Sci-Fi aired its first, the production of the fourth season (the first on the Sci-Fi channel) began in the fall following the last season on Fox. There does not appear to be a hiatus in production of Sliders between Fox and Sci-Fi. Q0 21:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I should say that my understanding is that the sequence of events is as follows:

• Approximately February-April 1997: Production of season three of Sliders ends.
• May 16, 1997: Fox airs the last first run episode of season three.
• September 16, 1997: Sci-Fi Channel begins production of season four.
• June 8, 1998: Sci-Fi Channel airs first episode of season four.
• September 22, 1998: Sports Night first airs on ABC.

Sports Night did not air until around a year after Sliders production began on the Sci-Fi channel. Though I do not know when production of Sports Night began, it is my guess that it is like most shows and produced about two months in advance. Sliders was unusual in that it was made a year in advance. Q0 21:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

• I'll clarify it. Here's my source, which I'll also add to the article. [2].--M@rēino 15:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you fore the reference. However, some assertions in the article are still undocumented in the source. The article claims, "During the fourth season, fans began petitioning for Lloyd to return, as were writers such as Marc Zicree. Sabrina Lloyd signed a contract with ABC's Sports Night during the hiatus between switching from Fox to Sci-Fi Channel, and was now filming." The reference does not say that fans or Marc Zicree were petitioning to bring Sabrina Lloyd. The only mention of Marc Zicree in the reference is that he wanted there to be a reason Wade was sentenced to the breeder camp. Also, the reference does not say that Sabrina Lloyd signed a contract with ABC during the hiatus between Fox and Sci-Fi. If she did, then it would mean she signed the contract with ABC at least one year before Sports Night began airing on ABC. Q0 20:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• On the contrary, the source does say that fans were petitioning to bring back Sabrina Lloyd. "In season five, production decided to resolve Wade's character due to fan inquiries and demands."[3]--M@rēino 15:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess I missed that part. However, I still can't find anything saying that Marc Zicree wanted Sabina Lloyd back; all I found was a claim that Zicree wanted there to be a reason for the Kromagg breeder camp. Q0 19:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

UK vs. US airdate in the infobox

The infobox gives the following information:

network = Fox/Sci Fi Channel
first_aired = March 22, 1995
last_aired = December 29, 1999 

I think it is misleading to list the network as being Fox and Sci Fi (United States version) but then list an airdate based on when the show was aired in the United Kingdom. I think that if the U.K. airdate is going to be used as the "last_aired" parameter, then whatever network was the first to air the last episode in the U.K. should also be listed along with Fox and Scifi in the network parameter of the infobox. Does anyone know what network first aired the last episode of Sliders in the U.K.? Q0 15:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Possible inspiration for the series?

Read "A Greater Infinity" (1982) by Michael McCollum and you'll find the book very similar to "Sliders", it even has a Kromagg type race which humans are fighting across multiple Earths.

Spoiler warnings

David Gerard removed the spoiler warning tag. which preceded the "Plot" section heading, with the following justification in the edit summary rm redundant - plot summaries obviously contain plot elements.

Q0 reverted with the explanation: for some it is important to avoid spoilers. It might seem obvious to some but not to others that the section contains spoilers. It's better safe than sorry so I think the tag should stay.

While I agree with Q0 that it's important for some people to avoid reading about plot elements, the section heading "Plot" is clear enough. Having a redundant warning is bad style, and David is right when he says that plot summaries obviously contain plot elements. I've removed the tag again.

Please leave a note here if you decide to restore the tag. --Tony Sidaway 17:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Vortex color explanations

I noticed that information was just added to the main article about vortex color, but I was wondering how far we want to take that information? The producers and FX people have told me that they were just throwing colors out there to shake things up, but there is an unintentional rationale to the color progression - gravitational red shift. You can read more about it in the below article that I penned:

http://www.sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?id=106

I do think that the information is interesting, but it may not be appropriate for the main article given its speculative nature. Off hand, I do not even have a professional article or interview to cite for the producers' intentions on this issue; my offerings even on that issue would be hearsay.DBHughes 11:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted the good faith addition of the text as it's too speculative. Matthew 17:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

There should be a graph

Showing the progressive deterioration of the show. After the character Maximillian Arturo died, the show just wasn't the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.63.78.91 (talk) 22:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it was all downhill from that point onwards. --203.55.211.33 (talk) 22:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Episodes aired out-of-order

Why is this under the cast section? It either needs to be given its own section, or merged with something else (maybe create a production section). Though I think a reasonable course of action would be merging it with the List of Sliders episodes article since that's the most appropriate area for the time being. --Bacteria (talk) 01:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this. I think it would fit best in the plot section as Item 2.6 (listed after the season five synopsis). After all, the episode order most affects the plot of the series; but the section as written fits best as a footnote to the season by season plot discussion. Just my opinion, though. DBHughes (talk) 02:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Arturo fired?

The article makes an assertion that Rhys was fired by the network - and cites a magazine article as its source. Reading that article just now, it makes no mention of him being fired (certainly disatisfied with the show and its producers, particularly one producer who left after S2), but it doesn't state he was fired, merely left due to disatisfaction with his role and the series in general (which was my understanding as well). I would like to change it to merely say he left the show (and perhaps mention the disatisfaction) but to say he was fired is wrong.Mmm commentaries (talk) 02:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of what that article says, it's a fact that he was fired. An interview Cleavant Derricks brings this to light quite clearly. If that's not considered a creditable source, then I give up. --Bacteria (talk) 02:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty common knowledge about JRD's firing, but it is a different magazine article that corroborates the information. The October 1998 issue of Sci-Fi Universe featured an interview with John Rhys-Davies, and JRD is directly quoted as saying he was fired. There doesn't appear to be scans of the article online, but I'll work on getting scans together so that they can be added to http://www.earth62.net 's magazine archive. Original scans of the article are an unquestionable and instantly recognizable true source for the information.

The link given by Bacteria is to a personal interview that would be considered original research under Wiki's guidelines, and as such, it is not usable as a source.DBHughes (talk)02:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Not wanting to dispute JRD, but it looks like he had long standing beefs with the production staff, so anything that came of his departure from the series might not be particularly impartial. There is a big difference between being fired and not having your contract renewed for example. As i said, happy to be proved otherwise, but surely an interview such as that would not be particularly creditable and 100% reliable?Mmm commentaries (talk) 04:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

That is a slippery slope. Under you thought, nothing said by anyone would ever be reliable. The information concerning JRD's firing has been tested and verified countless times over the past 10 years. I have verified the information myself through several producers and actors. However, the only thing Wiki will accept as a legitimate source with regard to the firing is that Sci-Fi Universe article I mentioned.

I can understand that you don't like this information about JRD; your bias there has become quite clear. However, your personal reading between the lines is not a legitimate source under Wiki standards. But if we are going to look "between the lines", I would like you to take note of something. Professor Arturo had his brains sucked out, was shot through the heart and then left on a planet that blew up; do you truly believe that kind of exit was written on amicable terms?DBHughes (talk) 05:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't have any sort of bias - I merely want the truth to be accurately represented - and according to Wiki standards it hasn't. If anyone has a bias it is somebody like yourself who talks to actors and producers from the show. It is difficult for somebody like myself who can only generously count himself as a casual fan to have any sort of bias.Mmm commentaries (talk) 01:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The source has been added; the reference to the firing can be found near the top of Page 57. Again, this magazine article is just a direct, appropirate source to information on the firing; multiple production sources over the years have corroborated to myself and many others that JRD was indeed fired.DBHughes (talk) 03:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

No, wait, are you seriously telling me that an interview from someone who was a first-hand witness to the behind-the-scenes going-ons is "original research"? I'm just going to put that question out there because there's no reason to elaborate. Like I said, if that's not considered a good source, then I simply give up. Not just on this article, but on the wiki in general because that's just the kind of bullshit bureaucracy that makes idioits of us all. --Bacteria (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• As a completely impartial observer, I concur with Bacteria: this is not original research. An argument could be made that the source is not reliable, but I for one think it is a perfectly valid and reliable source. --Kweeket ^Talk 21:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

And how do you know it's an interview with a first-hand witness? You take the word of a fan? That's why Wiki has the original research standard. As mentioned in Wiki standards, there is no reason to point to a questionable web based interview when we have a published article in a reputable magazine that gives the same information. I now have the magazine article in hand and will be scanning it tonight.

As I stated earlier in the conversation, JRD was indeed fired; that information is true. However, it is not easy to validate other information presented in the web based interview Bacteria mentioned. Let's be honest, what are the criteria being used to find reliability of the web based interview? Volume of information on the site? Glitzy presentation? Age of the site? Is that all it takes?DBHughes (talk) 21:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, the info shouldn't come from a fan site to begin with. Your upcoming scans with the pertinent information will be welcome, and I presume the mag is well known enough to be considered reputable? Personally i had never heard of it. Look forward to reading the article.Mmm commentaries (talk) 01:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Sci-Fi Universe was a prominent sci-fi magazine on newsstands throughout the 1990's. In 1997, Sovereign Media (who also published Sci-Fi Channel's official magazine - Sci-Fi Entertainment) purchased Sci-Fi Universe, and the magazine was eventually phased out in favor of Sci-Fi Channel's official magazine. You can find news of Sovereign Media's purchase in the archives at Sci-Fi Channel's official website (see bottom).DBHughes (talk) 03:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I Googled this topic and found this Sliders 'Prof Arturo' cast article that might help this topic: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CheckingtheGate/message/1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.168.45.83 (talk) 17:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall where I read it, but in an interview JRD complained about constantly fighting with the writers about the bad science on the show. the last straw was the pulsars. If a pulsar came anywhere close to the Solar System it'd be wiped out. The writers would not budge on that so JRD told them to kill Arturo. Bizzybody (talk) 07:58, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

That's pretty much already in the article. The science is atrocious and remained bad right to the end. I remember one episode where they used freon to escape from a refrigerator by using it to shatter the metal lock. An overlooked realistic way to escape would have been to let the freon bleed out so they wouldn't freeze, giving them plenty of time to dismantle a shelf and use the metal bar to force the lock (not to mention that all freezers have an internal lock overide in case of accidents lol). Minimum temperature of freon is -40F (you can hold it in your hand for short periods without harm) so I think they confused it with liquid nitrogen. Wayne (talk) 09:10, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

S4 opening ep not on Earth Prime?

Article states there are clues in the opening ep of S4, to indicate that the Earth Beckett and Quinn find Brown on is not their home world. i just watched it the other day again but I couldn't pick anything in it to indicate that it wasn't. It would also make a mockery of the S4 mission, to rescue Earth Prime from the Kromaggs (search for Quinn's homeworld and the supposed superweapon thereon), and Quinn's resolute "we'll be back". So what evidence is there to say it isn't Earth Prime, when the entire story, drive and future ep setup indicate that it is?Mmm commentaries (talk) 02:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

To my knowledge, the S4 conspiracy plot was never stated in a magazine article; all information has been obtained through original research by fans. As such, mention of the clues (even though they exist) do not constitute valid information for Wiki. However, you can view a run-down of the planned S4 conspiracy and its production history at this forum among other places.DBHughes (talk) 03:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting thread, if only from a fan perspective. But I stick by the "if it ain't on screen, it ain't canon' theory. Sure, there are a lot of nice ideas in the "roads not travelled" concepts for S4, but since they weren't travelled they can be considered nothing but fan fiction. Back to my original point - I would like to know what supposed clues are present on screen in Genesis to indicate the possibility that that Earth is not Earth Prime. Otherwise, the reference to it possibly not being so should be removed.Mmm commentaries (talk) 04:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You will note that I clearly stated the "wrong Earth Prime" reference was not valid information for Wiki. The forum thread I linked to lists out the information the prior Wiki contributor was alluding to; and while the behind the scenes information is true (I spent years researching it), it is solely original research that is not valid by Wiki standards.

There is much of the main Wiki article I have not read even though I keep meaning to, and the narrative of the seasons really does need a good bit of cleaning up. However, I have applied a fix to the section in question that should be acceptable. The truth of the situation is that the Sliders believed it was Earth Prime. The caveat I would leave in the discussion here is that beliefs can be wrong, and Quinn truly had very little evidence that was indeed Earth Prime he found in "The Exodus". A necklace under the mattress is practically as bad as using a squeaky gate to test whether one made it home or not.DBHughes (talk) 05:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit, but I feel it doesn't go far enough. Nothing in the Sliders TV show contradicts the assertion that the S4 opener takes place on Earth. The whole episodes drive, narrative and also the future arc works off that premise. Now, if the proposed S4 storylines did come to fruition (mind control, deceit etc) then it would be right to say "believed to be home earth". But since the series never contradicts it, and the characters in the ep say it is, and the season arc from that point on works off that, the text should change to be something like "Kromaggs have invaded Earth Prime".Mmm commentaries (talk) 01:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

We'll just have to disagree then. This is a similar situation to the "first aired" debate. Most at Wiki seem to believe that the first date anywhere in the world is the first aired date, but many others think it should be the first air date planned by the studio that actually produced the series. I'm not saying who's right or wrong on that issue, but there was a constant battle of edits on the article as people disagree on the air date issue. The answer was a kind of compromise - the article now presents both pieces of information in an appropriate way thus stopping the edit battles.

The Earth Prime issue is another example of area in debate. It's great that you think you have the hard answer, but it isn't so black and white to the rest of the world. I agree that the original wording you pointed out was faulty, but this notion of making it a hard answer is what led to your protest; others will protest your hard answer, and this will be tied up in edit battles forever.

My effort with this specific Earth Prime issue was to pose the information in a way that was accurate yet would avoid edit battles. The Earth Prime issue was never satisfactorily settled on the series; the characters were operating under a belief based on a necklace hidden under Quinn's mattress. The mattress belief is what we were shown, and that can be taken in more than one way.DBHughes (talk) 03:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Vortex

The section:

Quinn refers to the vortex as an "Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky bridge," a fictitious term that may have arisen out of a confusion between the actual term Einstein-Rosen bridge (a type of wormhole in physics) and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox (a famous thought-experiment in quantum mechanics, which is unrelated to wormholes)

strikes me as a little... uncertain. The term "Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky bridge" may also have arisen out of a *deliberate* mixture on the part of the writers, between the two terminologies, taking into account that we know next to nothing about what theories or technology Quinn puts into place to create said vortex! I just think we should remove the reference to the fact that it may have arisen out of confusion, as it may as easily have arisen deliberatly. All conjecture. --Jaye001 (talk) 23:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I tend to agree with you. It would be better to say something like,

"Quinn refers to the vortex as an "Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky bridge," a fictitious term that combines the theories of the Einstein-Rosen bridge (a type of wormhole in physics) and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox (a famous thought-experiment in quantum mechanics, which is unrelated to wormholes)"

Such phrasing would cover all the bases; the reader would know that the ERP bridge is a fictitious term and subsequently what the term refers to. In the end, it's not really important how the fictitious term was arrived upon. DBHughes (talk) 22:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Cast

Aren't Charlie O'Connell, Tembi Locke and Robert Floyd main cast members, ie: listed in the opening credits during a whole season of the show and not in an "also starring" or "guest starring" role? It's been years since I've seen seasons 4 or 5, but I don't remember seeing just Cleavant Derricks and Kari Wuhrer in season 5's opening credits. A starring role automatically denotes "main" cast member, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.213.41.49 (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to support move. JPG-GR (talk) 23:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Sliders → Sliders (TV series) — The plural form of "slider" should redirect to slider, with a template (e.g., {{redirect}}) pointing to this article. The reason for this is to avoid confusion in cases such as "... threw three [[sliders]] that game", where some users may mistakenly link to the plural. Additionally, some automated editing systems may correct [[Sliders]] to [[Slider]]s, pointing it to the wrong article. The earlier argument about Quantum Leap is no longer valid, as the TV series is located at Quantum Leap (TV series). In short, there are a series of potential problems with leaving this article title as-is, while the solution is really not all that bad. — —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 15:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support makes sense 70.51.9.124 (talk) 04:27, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose; while the proposal has been well thought out, the move is not necessary and perhaps even counterproductive; it is entirely possible that by moving the article, we could end up with an equal number of inadvertent links to baseball when the series was the intended target. Plus, the disambiguation hatnote can just as easily go at the top of the TV article. --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Suggestion How about redirecting to Slider (disambiguation) then? —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 13:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. It's quite possible for one thing to be the primary use for a singular form, and another to be the primary use for a plural form. I think that's what we have here (did you find anything linked incorrectly, or just postulate it?), so there doesn't seem any reason to change things. The TV series is always plural, and the pitch is almost always singular; a dablink at the top of each page should be sufficient to take care of the rest. Dekimasuよ! 06:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. A slider in baseball (or cricket) is singular. If people are putting link brackets around the entire word sliders, they're doing the code wrong and should learn to code properly. One of the Wiki code's nice features is that if you type [[slider]]s it shows up as sliders, not sliders. The code is like that precisely so we don't have to do page moves when the root word and the extended word have different pages. --M@rēino 00:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• Note: I know that you can link to the plural slider with [[slider]]s, but I'm concerned that software such as AWB, which will correct things like [[sliders]] to [[slider]]s accidentally. I thought it might be a genuine concern. I don't see moving this page to a disambiguated title with redirecting the plain sliders to slider (disambiguation) as a problem, but that's just me. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:42, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

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

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Pity there is no reference to Arnold Schwarzenegger in this article. I recall watching this series back in the day, and found it amusing how often they would jump to a new earth and found that Schwarzenegger was identified as Governor or President of an Independent California. This was BEFORE he became the current Governor. Gamweb (talk) 07:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

"[March 23, 2009] - Looks like all Slider Season 1-5 episodes are now available on Netflix."

Not true, I just finished watching all five seasons streamed off of Netflix and there are still several episodes that say "Episode available on DVD only". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.116.94 (talk) 01:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Images

FN is correct that the current set of images on this page fail to meet WP:NFCC. The DVD covers in the table are absolutely inappropriate. One single cast picture may be appropriate (and my suggestion would be the first iconic season), but since these people resemble their real life actors, they are technically replaceable. Leaving the timer and vortex image, neither which is sufficiently odd that they couldn't be described in text. --MASEM (t) 14:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Please don't put words in FN's mouth. If FN wants to write on this talk page or in the article edit summary that certain images fail to meet a specific criterion of WP:NFCC for some reason, then FN can do that. So far all FN has done is remove chunks of an article and spit out a four-letter summary. We shouldn't have to put up with that. --M@rēino 14:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

On the merits, I disagree as well. See Category:Video covers, where you'll find thousands upon thousands of DVD covers have been uploaded. As Template:Non-free video cover explains, it is generally recognized that Wikipedia may use the cover "to illustrate the videotape or disc in question." That is precisely how the covers are being used right now. As for the cast photos, that's a classic example of NFCC Rule 2: "Respect for commercial opportunities." Those cast photos are promotional images, in which the copyright owner of the image encourages the free distribution of the image in order to drum up interest in related material that the copyright owner also owns, such as a TV show. The images are being used precisely in the manner that St. Clare Entertainment and Universal TV intended them to be used. There may not be a Copyleft symbol on the photos, but industry practice shows that the intent is the same. --M@rēino 14:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

You need to read WP:NFCC carefully, as WP has a stronger policy about image use more than fair use:

• DVD covers for TV shows as an infobox image on pages about a specific season of a TV show are acceptable, but as part of a table for season listing they are not (non-free images may not be used in lists like discographies or the like). (see for example The Simpsons (season 4)) As there are no separate season pages (yet) for Sliders, these images are not appropriate. Basically, these fail the NFCC#8 - Significance requirement.
• While St. Clare Entertainment may wanted these as promotional photos, they do not work within NFCC bounds because they show actors that are still alive and are easily recognizable in their role. Because they are still copyrighted by St. Clare, WP cannot freely redistribute these images and thus we cannot use them as we please. Thus, per NFCC#1 these are replaceable by free versions - which we may not presently have but they can be. That said, one non-free cast image is generally appropriate and thus I suggest the quintessential cast of the first season. (It may be possible to have the copyright owner work with WP to grant it a free reuse license through a request made at WP:ORTS but that's a long shot) --MASEM (t) 14:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Once upon a time, we did have pages that went through the Sliders seasons just like the Simpsons Season 4 article you note; but people like you came along and deleted all of it as insignificant, irrelevant or whatever the rule was that week. Why bother to build anything on here when it's so damn easy for someone like you two to come along on a crusade and hit one button? Do you two have anything to actually add to the article or are you just here on a power trip to hit the button? Honestly, I could piss on your doorstep and argue I gave your house a free ammonia cleaning; I don't think you would like it, though. DBHughes (talk) 04:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

First off, I myself haven't deleted anything, but I recognize there's an NFCC problem here and that it has to be addressed, and I'm trying to work that out. As to season articles, I can't tell what they were likely but it doesn't take much to justify them. (I can't remember what extras are on the disks, but there are definitely reviews of the season sets [4] that can help flesh them out) This also would allow for more in depth episode descriptions since a causal glance at the episode list shows no separate episode article.

But if that is not done, then NFCC policy has to be followed. Completely against this policy are the DVD covers as the reader gains no additional knowledg with their presence or loses any without them; that's why images in lists and tables like this are not to be used. The cast pictures are generally also against NFCC policy, or at least as many as their are because they are all replaceable - though again, usually an ensemble cast picture is reasonable (ala Heroes (TV show). This is not possible in this case due to the cast switching over time, so maybe there's justification for at least two of them (S1 cast and S5 which covers all of the characters save for Colin). --MASEM (t) 13:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, the way I see it is that if you want to delete something out, you should put something back. You talk a good game about what we should do (such as the season pages), but you aren't lifting a finger. And Nua? He's honestly trying to say there's no image in existence that's useful for Sliders; that attitude is completely unrealistic and clearly false, but it's too easy for him to just hit delete instead of improving the article and adding something to Wiki.

In any case, you guys will need to come up with something more stout to back up your little crusade because I'm in no mood to agree with you. If this has to be a pissing contest, then I can just undo everything you try from here on out. You aren't putting forth valid reasons (as shown by the Simpsons main article that has uses of cast photos, episode screen captures, etc. on par with the Sliders article), and you aren't trying to improve the article by contributing something (such as creating the season pages to use the DVD cover art). All this amounts to is an exercise in trying to get some "I deleted 20,000 things" Wiki merit badge that can be sported on a profile; it's ridiculous. DBHughes (talk) 18:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

No, what Nua and myself are concerned with is that WP is a free content encyclopedia which recognizes that minimal non-free content is necessary to illustrate topics, but is not a license to use as many as some people want to make an article look "pretty". I do agree that FN's complete wiping of all images is inappropriate - there are some that are valid as I've pointed out (possible two cast pictures, and I think the time and the wormhole are fine since they're strong elements of the show), but I don't believe all the images are appropriate. The Simpsons article has 5 non-free images: one for the show's logo, one showing the Ullman show version, one a cast shot, and two depicting common elements (note that all the live shots of actors are free content and thus allowable - note that you could do the same here). Exactly the same here works: you have the show's logo, the original cast shot, the most recent cast shot, and two images of notable parts of the show; everything else is excessive and does not meet the NFCC policy. You still get an illustrated article with non-free content, but pruned better to keep it minimal. --MASEM (t) 18:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I could live with what you proposed at the end there. Anyway, I apologize for the tone of my comments, but I was pissed off. I didn't even realize you could warn people at this place (Nau just tried it on me), and I would taken that tact if I had known. As it is, Nau's talk page is littered with warnings; if he doesn't get banned for it, then it'll just be another thing to add to the reasons why I'm so jaded about Wiki.

Anyway, thanks for your patience and demeanor throughout this; I gave you alot of crap you didn't deserve. DBHughes (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

• How on earth are the cast photos replaceable? You try getting John Rhys Davies to dress up as Professor Arturo again, let alone making him 15 years younger. And as the prevalence of GNU-copyright material on Wikipedia shows, we don't have to get a signed release from the copyright owner every time we want to use an image. We just need proof that the image was intended to be widely distributed. Interpreting the Wikipedia copyright policy so narrowly is just a form of recentism, favoring current works of art (for which production companies can hire staff to promote them on Wikipedia by using GNU licenses and the like) over slightly older works of art where it's no longer worth the owner's time to pay staff to promote them on Wikipedia. --M@rēino 17:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

This is standard policy. We are a free content encyclopedia and use of non-free material should be considered the exception, not the rule, per WP:NFCC. John Rhys-Davies has a free image of the person on his page, and from that you can easily figure out what Arturo looks like even if its not wearing the same clothes. --MASEM (t) 18:00, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

All I'm saying is that you're applying the policy too harshly. Take your example of John Rhys-Davies, for instance. It has not only a free image of him as himself, but also a copyrighted image of him as Gimli. --M@rēino 20:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Harsh is an interesting word, removing inappropriate content brings this article closer to FA/GA status, it brings the foundation close to it's m:mission, and I see nothing harsh in reaching these goals. As for the John Rhys-Davies article WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Fasach Nua (talk) 21:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Allusions and references by others needs an addition

sadly i don't really have a great source but it's fairly obvious in The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya Haruhi Suzumiya mentions in her class introduction that "I don't have any interest in ordinary people. If anyone here is an alien, time traveler, slider, or esper, please, come see me! That is all." her mentioning of a slider is a direct reference to this show. Heck even the anime version aired their episodes out of order which seems to be a direct reference to the show —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.138.87 (talk) 10:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Season 5 Box Art

Found this while surfing, http://www.sliders-dimension.de/DVD/Bilder/box5_rc2_de/box5_rc2_dea.jpg. 98.246.175.190 (talk) 14:11, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Maggie's Relation

Maggie's father was named Thomas Beckett. Thomas Beckett's brother is the main character in Quantum Leap, Samuel Beckett. Thoughts? Jeanlovecomputers (talk) 04:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Duff McKagan

I'm sorry to bother you guys, but please, does anybody know which episode(s) featured Guns N' Roses/Velvet Revolver bass player Duff McKagan acting as a drummer? 89.138.59.29 (talk) 21:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

McKagan played "Harker" in the third season episode "Stoker" where Wade joins a Goth band who turn out to be vampires. It might also be of interest that Tommy Chong played the part of "Van Elsinger" in the same episode.Wayne (talk) 10:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

the onion

The onion recently made fun of Sliders! So why is this not in the article under the references? http://www.theonion.com/articles/sliders-ended-two-seasons-too-early-if-you-ask-me,17765/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.240.4 (talk) 06:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Common Star Trek Gimmick

Someone added to the article that "The timer has frequently been lost, stolen, or damaged during the slides, a gimmick common to "Star Trek" in the 1960s, which earned the earlier show justifiable criticism". The author added an invisible note that the comment was from a book by David Gerrold. Would it be possible to either get the specific details and context regarding this comment, or remove/edit it. I find the comparison to Star Trek and the criticism comment confusing. I consider myself a big Star Trek fan, and I don't think the gimmick is that obvious or worth mentioning. And does "earlier show" refer to the show mentioned earlier in the sentence, or the show that aired earlier in time? Elnauron (talk) 17:09, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

In the original Star Trek, the crew had their communicators taken away many times so they couldn't just call the Enterprise to be beamed up. When they didn't have their equipment confiscated, the writers had to come up with other ways of blocking or disabling the transporter. The nifty device became a major headache to the writers because without a way to prevent its use, the crew could simply be zapped out of any danger. IMHO the best ST:TOS episodes were the ones where they had to stick around to resolve the plot even though they could beam out at any time. Losing the timer or having it taken is very similar in Sliders. Bizzybody (talk) 08:10, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Rerwrite needed

Much of this article reads like a bad book report. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.34.187.154 (talk) 01:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I think that the sliders defeated the Dream Masters too easily! So maybe they are still dreaming! That would explain how Quinn could have found another world that is exactly like his Earth Prime! So there are in fact no discontinuities with the events depicted in the previous season! In my opinion it was Tracy Torme's intention all along to place this hidden mystery in his television series! There could still be other hidden mystery(ies) that I am not aware of! Yonathan Arief Kurniawan (talk) 09:04, 1 June 2012 (UTC)(User: Yonathan Arief Kurniawan)

Critical reception?

Could use a section on this.

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sliders. 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/20110710163818/http://earthprime.com/episode-guide/sliders-season-2-episode-guide.html to http://earthprime.com/episode-guide/sliders-season-2-episode-guide.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205010925/http://www.dimensionofcontinuity.com/getalife.htm to http://www.dimensionofcontinuity.com/getalife.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Dimension of Continunity

Hello

It appears Dimensionofcontinuity.com which is used as a source, is now the website of an american Limo hire company. I would suggest that if you want to use this as source perhaps using the waybackwhen machine.

Hope that helps

J — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.69.116.81 (talk) 04:31, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Interview with jerry o connell

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jerry-oconnell-reveals-the-checkered-history-of-211218691.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.53.82.13 (talk) 23:29, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

We are currently using this already, at several points, so if you see something you think might be added, just point it out and we can easily include. --Masem (t) 00:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Colin in character table

He seems to be a guest in Season 2-3 in the table, but I don't recall him in those seasons, and in the main characters article he doesn't, am I remembering incorrectly or there's a mistake in the table? Didiko4444 (talk) 09:48, 20 November 2022 (UTC) Turns out he's a different character in those seasons. Didiko4444 (talk) 16:18, 21 November 2022 (UTC)