Talk:CSI: Crime Scene Investigation season 12

Television: CSI / Episode coverage Mid‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the CSI task force.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Spoilers?

The season finale description is a bit spoiler-y. It gives away the whole cliffhanger of the season. Should this be included in what normally is reserved for a basic description of the premise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muffin8or (talk • contribs) 18:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Homecoming (Part 1)"

Homecoming is Part 1, a cliffhanger leading in to CSI: CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION's 13th season, and it should have "(Part 1)" in the title. 207.166.0.1 (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Do you have a reliable source that it's a two-part episode? A cliffhanger does not always equate with the first of two parts. You need to know that the writers' intent was that Homecoming was a two-part episode, not determine that on your own (per WP:OR). See years and years of ER finales that ended in a cliffhanger, none of which are listed as Part 1. M, as it's a descriptor. See how TV Guide and other TV media do it; Part 1 is the beginning of the episode description, not the title. --Drmargi (talk) 00:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's talk about this. You asked me if I have a reliable source that it's a two-parter. My answer, based your required evidence, is no. My answer, based on what I know, is yes. No one knows the CSI: franchise better than I do, except maybe the writers, producers, and actors themselves. I know CSI, and I KNOW that this is a two parter, because they would not end the episode in a cliffhanger without continuing (and usually resolving) the situation in the next episode. Have you seen the episode? I don't think you have. Watch it, and you'll see what I mean. Nick Stokes considers leaving CSI, Conrad Ecklie is shot on the street in a driveby, and DB Russel's grandkid is kidnapped. Now if that's not "PART 1" then I must not know what is. As for your comment, "Moreover, unless the show explicitly uses Part 1 in the title, it should not be listed as part of the title," I have a counter to that. I would like to refer to you to Season 8 where we have a nice two-parter, the season finale being part one. Notice, the words "part 1" are not in the episode title, but still in the title box, not in the description. This is the same for Season 9, with the concluding "part 2" in the title box. 71.137.192.16 (talk) 01:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"I know it..." See WP:OR, because that's all you have. An episode with a cliffhanger is not necessarily the first part of a two-parter. Cliffhangers are commonplace in TV, but unless the show explicitly states this is Part 1 of two, you cannot label it that way, no matter how well you flatter yourself you know CSI. --Drmargi (talk) 06:37, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then explain this! Season 13 has "part 2" on the first episode. That means, "Homecoming" is part 1. 70.133.64.36 (talk) 23:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not my problem. Do you have a reliable source that the correct title of the episode is Homecoming (Part 1)? If not, you can't label it that way. --Drmargi (talk) 00:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But it says right on season 13 "PART 2". That means someone has a reliable source saying it's "Part 2" which means that source also verifies that "Homecoming" is in fact a "Part 1"! 71.137.192.139 (talk) 18:26, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another article is not a reliable source. Find a reliable secondary source or move on. --Drmargi (talk) 19:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Colour contrast problems

It seems that this article is using colours in the infobox which don't satisfy Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines. The contrast between the foreground colour and the background colour is low, which means that it may be difficult or impossible for people with visual impairments to read it.

To correct this problem, a group of editors have decided to remove support for invalid colours from Template:Infobox television season and other television season templates after 1 September 2015. If you would still like to use custom colours for the infobox and episode list in this article after that date, please ensure that the colours meet the WCAG AAA standard.

To test whether a colour combination is AAA-compliant you can use Snook's colour contrast tool. If your background colour is dark, then please test it against a foreground colour of "FFFFFF" (white). If it is light, please test it against a foreground colour of "000000" (black). The tool needs to say "YES" in the box for "WCAG 2 AAA Compliant" when you input the foreground and the background colour. You can generally make your colour compliant by adjusting the "Value (%)" fader in the middle box.

Please be sure to change the invalid colour in every place that it appears, including the infobox, the episode list, and the series overview table. If you have any questions about this, please ask on Template talk:Infobox television season. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (season 12). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 09:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]