Talk:Paige Matthews

Powers Updated

I've added "Psychokinetic Orbing"; it is seen in the episode "Repo Manor". ~Silence_Knight

Psychokinetic orbing is the same as telekinetic orbing, which is already there so I've removed what you added, sorry.--NeilEvans 22:47, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

But according to the Charmed canon, telekinesis and psychokinesis are not the same thing. In season one's "Secrets & Guys" it is revealed that psychokinesis - Max Franklin's power - is different from telekinesis because you move things that you cannot see. Since telekinetic orbing is the ability to telekinetically orb what you can see, psychokinetic orbing would be the ability to orb what you cannot see, and thus they are two different powers (both of which Paige has been shown to possess - for example, with Phoebe's soul from the athame in season four's "Enter The Demon," the Ring of Inspiration in season four's "Muse To My Ears," the Book of Shadows from the attic in season five's "A Witch's Tail, Part Two," and the ice cream and three spoons from in season seven's "Once In A Blue Moon" as well as several times in combination with her TKO to orb people far away to a place she wasn't even near like demons and Phoebe to and away from Magic School and Darcy to the Manor from the Underworld in "Little Box Of Horrors"). Mewiet 12:16, 01 June 2009

I know it's possible that paige might be able to hover like leo can, but since it's never actually been shown i'm going to remove it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.188.10.230 (talk • contribs) 11:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Apparently she does levitate in the season 8 episode "Gone with the Witches". Edit has been reverted. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 17:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually Paiges hovering ability is just her using her Telekinesis, as when she hovers you can see orbs carrying her. If she could hover then she would do it the way Leo and pheobe have done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.182.161 (talk) 12:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Paige does perform the same type of "orb-levitation" in season eight that Leo performed in season four's "Size Matters". Mewiet 12:08, 01 June 2009

But in one of the season 5 episodes, Paige orbs the Book of Shadows from the attic to the living room. She didn't need to see it. In one of the season 1 episodes, the little boy says that psychokinis is when you can move things that you can't see. So I think its appropriate to have "Psychokinetic Orbing" in the power description. Jpagan09 (talk) 21:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I've added Light Manipulation to Paige's powers. It is listed as a whitelighter power on the Whitelighter page and Paige is shown to possess the same ability to create glowing, hovering balls of light in season eight's "Repo Manor" that Leo demonstrated during his wedding in season three's "Just Harried". Mewiet 01:35, 01 June 2009

Power growth

Paige is clearly stronger then pru was, her powers grea rapidly and greatly as well. in the episode where it specifies that prue couldnt move and object that her ancestor moved hundreds of miles away. in the episode where paige orbed a fellow witch whitlighter that wanted to marry her, across the ocean to england, she showed much more power than prue ever could.

Yeah, but Paige had her powers active for five years and Prue had them active for three. Paige can also orb, so your point is moot. sorry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.170.93.59 (talk) 05:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Paige is a very powerful witch and I'd rather have her powers than Prue's! But if Prue had lived, her powers would have gotten just as strong as Paige's. We got a little sample of what Prue's powers would have been like on "Morality Bites" Bubble bunny

Finding the sisters

I can't remember precisely but didn't Piper's use of the "To find a lost witch" spell after Prue's death (when she was trying to contact her spirit) send a newspaper to Paige's desk? Or make the newspaper open to her obit? I think that this is a better summation than Paige being "magically drawn" to the funeral. Missjessica254 16:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

While it sounds like a good assumption, unfortunately, the use of the "find a lost witch" spell and the newspaper appearing cannot be directly linked to each other. The two events must have occurred at least several hours apart (spell cast around 4am and Paige was at work, so sometime after 8am or 9am. I think "magically drawn" is, in this situation, the best available option to describe what happened...we simply cannot be certain enough without making such an assumption, which fails Wikipedia's original research restriction. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 17:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I'll go through my DVDs to find the episode that I saw this in just in case. Thanks for the reply, very helpful! Missjessica254 17:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I just watched it myself, which is where I got that timeline information from. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 18:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Now I'm confused because on the synopsis for the Charmed Again episode, Paige's first appearance, it very specifically states that Piper did the "To find a lost witch" spell and it made the obit appear in Paige's office. Missjessica254 18:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I've not read that page before, but I see what you mean. I rather strongly disagree with its inclusion. I might edit it later on when I have some free time...I don't have the DVDs themselves, so you may want to check--if it has a commentary track--to see if there is a specific mention that the newspaper was the result of the spell. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 18:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Missjessica254 18:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Picture

A bot deleted the picture of Rose McGowan. Can we use a Charmed promo pic, such as what's on Phoebe's page? Missjessica254 15:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I've restored the picture. Someone had tampered with the image itself, causing the bot to classify it as a breach of policy. All has been fixed, and the image has been ported over to Commons. -- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 01:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm still trying to figure out how to do all of this stuff. Good with the info, not with the internet loading. Missjessica254 14:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I have used the Charmed season 4 promo picture in the infobox. Can nobody please remove it until a more suitable image can be found to use here or at least until the image of Rose McGowan is put back on, even though she isn't actually portraying Paige in that picture.

And please nobody use the image of Tatum Riley from Scream. While this is Rose McGowan, the image is of her portraying a different character. I don't think anybody would actually do that but just in case Kkbhe 03:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I have now placed a screenshot of Paige on this article. Nobody remove this, as I there is currently no better alternative image that just displays Paige. I also find it quite stupid that for a long time there was no image on the Paige article yet supporting characters from Charmed, who are less worthy of even being included in an Encyclopedia, had images!Kkbhe 10:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted the picture in this article, as it is a promotional picture of Alyssa Milano, who never portrayed Paige Matthews (except in the Season 4 episode "Enter the Demon" where they switched bodies). It's up to someone else to replace it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.209.240 (talk) 05:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry I have replaced the other stupid non-Paige pics with one of the Season 8 promos of Paige.Jpagan09 (talk) 21:15, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

You uploaded an illegal image which has been removed. You must learn the difference between an actress and a character in order to upload images and post them in articles. KellyAna (talk) 14:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:PaigeInDesguise.jpg

Image:PaigeInDesguise.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Paiges Last Death

Paiges death in episode 8x21 is unclear and i dont think it should be added in the list because there is no proof she is actually dead

78.19.86.89 (talk) 19:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

If she survived she would have gotten up when Piper was calling for her. If not that, she would've at least orbed to her and leo later on. sorry, she died. Jpagan09 (talk) 13:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

acknowledgin prue.

are there any episodes where paige actually acknowledges prue as her sister. like does she ever say like my sister prue. or i have a sister who died or anything like that? just wondering 66.245.65.88 (talk) 20:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I Dont think there is but in Charmed nd Dangerous where htye vanquishedthe source..Phoebe says 'For Prue' and they all clink their drink glasses at that! Harmless 77 (talk) 19:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Pagies New Powers

what do u think pagies new powers are —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.146.11 (talk) 11:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

we dont know, however she may have developed more whitelighter pwoers, instead of whitch powers Harmless 77 (talk) 21:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Removal of files

WP:PRESERVE is invoked. Why would anybody want to remove image files? "A picture is worth a thousand words" has no meaning anymore? What policy or guideline is used to justify their removal?
 —  Paine (Ellsworth's Climax)  06:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy_2 Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. We're not going to use multiple copyrighted images that don't add anything significant to the article. AniMate 06:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Also per the same policy: Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. The pictures don't significantly increase readers understanding of the topic. They're just pictures of the character wearing different clothes. AniMate 06:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I disagree with you that these images are in violation of policy. "Minimal usage" means that each image will be used minimally, not that there should be minimal usage of images. I'm afraid you have misinterpreted the policy, and you have some edits to self-revert.

 —  Paine (Ellsworth's Climax)  06:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Contextual significance is a judgement call, I'll agree. However, I disagree that these images violate this part of the policy. There are only a few images, and I contend that they improve the article by being there.

 —  Paine (Ellsworth's Climax)  06:1::::5, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Read it again, and read it carefully. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. The policy says absolutely nothing about each image being used minimally, it says multiple images shouldn't be used. Are we reading the same policy, because I cannot fathom how one would get "each image should be used minimally" from something specifically addressing multiple image use. All the images convey the same thing, we only need one image not multiple. AniMate 06:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

"All the images convey the same thing"? Again I disagree, and there are only three images in question, not thirty. Maybe we need a reading on what precisely is meant by "multiple"?

 —  Paine (Ellsworth's Climax)  06:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Multiple means multiple. Minimal means minimal. Once I finish cleaning my room, I'm going to nominate a bunch of the Charmed sisters images for deletion since I don't think we're hearing each other. That way the community can decide. AniMate 06:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Precisely. Multiple means multiple. Each image is used ONE TIME. I see NO "multiple usage" here. Each image conveys different information. I really don't see the policy abuse here. You can do what you will, however there is nothing here that is not strictly in line with policy.

 —  Paine (Ellsworth's Climax)  07:17, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you kidding? This is almost funny. The policy I'm quoting doesn't say anything about how many times the images are used. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." Please point out in that sentence where it says anything about how many times an image is used. Multiple clearly and unequivocally refers to the number of images in that sentence. Stop playing around and actually address what the policy saysand not what you think it should say so you can get your way. AniMate 07:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I have been addressing it. And you are in disagreement, that's all. We disagree whether or not the multiple usage is justified. I think it is, and you think it isn't. So, I've requested a third opinion as noted by the template at the beginning of this discussion. Usage of those three images is not against policy.

 —  Paine (Ellsworth's Climax)  07:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

AniMate has explained why these images are inappropriate. All of this sort of fictional character article attract endless trivia, babble, and non-free content. Periodically we have to clean them up. I've just taken a pass through the articles on the main characters and tidied up obvious nits and poor formatting by the unskilled. I also reverted out the excess images on this page. This is WP:FANCRUFT, as are huge swaths of the so-called prose. There are also considerable fake-references that are to non-notable articles here on the individual episodes. This is a common tactic of those seeking to make such articles appear to be ‘real’ articles. I'll be reviewing the images at IfD, next, and will then review the images on the other articles. nb: I've been through a lot of these before concerning the now-deleted templates that were snotting these things all up last year. Jack Merridew 00:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Third opinion

Weaponbb7 (talk · contribs) wants to offer a third opinion. To assist with the process, editors are requested to summarize the dispute in a short sentence below.

Viewpoint by ( —  Paine (Ellsworth's Climax) )

Editor AniMate has been deleting image files from articles left and right "according to policy", however none of these images are in violation of policy. 15:30, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Viewpoint by (AniMate)

The images in questions fail WP:NFCC#3 and WP:NFCC#8. AniMate 19:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Third opinion by Weaponbb7

....

So they are all deleted? Weaponbb7 (talk) 20:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I've nominated all of them for deletion. AniMate 20:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Could ya'll give me links it would help alot.... Weaponbb7 (talk) 20:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

[1] [2] [3] These are the files. Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_July_6#File:Rose-mcgowan-paige.jpg is the first new deletion discussion. AniMate 20:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Third opinion by a street-legal sock puppet ;)

The images in questions fail WP:NFCC#3 and WP:NFCC#8, as AniMate has pointed out. This is a project about free content and all non-free content, such as images, should be kept to a minimum. This is policy and a correct reading of policy shows it. There are WPs that don't allow any non-free content; da:, for example. Jack Merridew 00:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Third opinion response

What counts is not the images themselves but how they are used to indicate violations of WP:NFCC#3 and WP:NFCC#8.

Paige Matthews images

• [4] Fail under WP:NFCC#8 as it does not differ sinificantly form the one in the info box thus does not "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."

• "[5] fails under WP:NFCC#8 in the article its used (Paige). Had it been in the Main artilce for Charmed i think we could allow it

• "[6]" fails WP:NFCC#8 as fails to "increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding" a better image for that section where it is place would be a Pix of "Nate" or them kissing each other

• With the four above non-free images that fail to increase readers' understanding of the topic it violates WP:NFCC#3 wich requires a Minimal usage of Non-free images

Prue Halliwell images

• [7] this one is tricky, but WP:UNDUE type thought is helpful how important is this scene? would not having "detrimental to that understanding" of this woman?

• [8] this one seems to violate not policy and seem perfect for the section.

• [9] Fail under WP:NFCC#8 as it is nearly identical to the one in the infobox thus does not "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."

Piper Images

• [10] Fail under WP:NFCC#8 as the text under fails to clarify the context of the shot and is similar to the one in the infobox thus as I see it "as is" it does not "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."

• [11] here this file work splendidly since it is under the "Eldest Sister" thus it is used in good context

• [12] Seems to work great since it is her being impersonated but again WP:UNDUE type thought is helpful how important is this scene? would not having "detrimental to that understanding" of this woman?

• [13]Fail under WP:NFCC#8 it is near identical in the infobox thus as I see it does not "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."

• [14] Fail under WP:NFCC#8 A pix of the couple doing the "kiss the bride" would be better here

and this [15] might need to be Speedy delete as it is clearly not public domain Weaponbb7 (talk) 21:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I didn't notice the public domain tag there. If I wasn't already involved, I'd delete it myself. As for picture of Prue kissing Ted King's character, I am unsure how that is perfect. You can't even see her face, so how does it enhance this article? As for the Piper where she is possessed, I've not seen the show in years, but I'm pretty sure the sister's get possessed or impersonated on a semi-regular basis. Not sure what a picture of her looking slightly different adds here either. Regardless, thanks for taking the time to comment here, and feel free to make your opinions known at WP:FfD as well. AniMate 21:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

maybe perfect is an overstatement but compared to what i had written up till that point it was a serious improvement Weaponbb7 (talk) 22:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I will admit the images you didn't agree with me on are the most closely compliant with policy. I don't agree with your assessment of them, but I see where you're coming from. Again, please share your opinions at WP:FfD. AniMate 22:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Paige Matthews. 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/20030211104905/http://www.thecharmedones.com/dianagallagher.htm to http://www.thecharmedones.com/dianagallagher.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tvtango.com/asc/charmed/awards/sort/awardName?filters%5Byearaward%5D=&filters%5Bnomorwin%5D=&filters%5Bperson%5D=&filters%5Bawardname%5D=&commit.x=20&commit.y=11
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/rose-mcgowan/10/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aoltv.com/2007/10/22/top-tv-witches/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.comicmix.com/2008/10/31/aol-picks-tvs-best-witches/

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) 09:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)