Talk:Dual Survival

x

Did as much as I could, not much in the way of reference for this yet. Still need to fill in some history on the show, and maybe rewrite/expand the format section. Alden richter (talk) 08:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Season Two Episode List

There are more than 10 episodes in the second season. During the 10th aired episode, "Hippo Island," a preview for a new episode to air the following week (24 June, 2011,) was shown. The title of the episode is "Up the River." The description of the episode from the series' website is: "In Kentucky, Dave and Cody take on a scenario of two kayakers who are dumped into the cold river just a few hours before sundown. To make things worse, they become separated from each other by two miles of rushing river. Then, Dave traps an irate skunk." Ref: http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=1.16333.26299.39182.x 68.41.153.62 (talk)

I've added both upcoming episodes (Up the River and Road to Nowhere) to the season two list. --EarthboundEngineer (talk) 06:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Staged?

Is this show staged, or is it real? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.22.176.211 (talk) 19:11, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

"This program depicts a survival scenario. Due to the extreme danger, Dave and Cody receive support when they are in potentially life threating situations, as required by health and safety regulations. On some occasions, situations are presented to Dave and Cody so they can demonstrate survival techniques. This situations depicted in this program are dangerous. Do not attempt to duplicate."

Of course it's staged; it's an educational show, not a documentary. --EarthboundEngineer (talk) 23:04, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

-- You can't just say "of course it's staged" staged is a subjective term. Care to cite some information regarding that this show is as perfectly scripted or "staged" as a Spielberg movie? All that disclaimer is for is to make sure that people realize that Dave and Cody got proper medical attention and support when in life threatening situations as required by law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.195.5 (talk) 20:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

All TV is "produced" that is the point of TV production, and the show does have the disclaimer at the start. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minty10200 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Mykel Hawke?

Couldn't find any evidence that Mykel Hawke will be the replacement co-star. I suspect this is also vandalism like the last update I just reverted. Can anyone shed any light on the subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.228.192 (talk) 22:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

To complete what you did, I just removed the word "former" from next to Dave's name on the cast list until he is actually "former" there is no reason for it. His FB page asked people whether they were excited for season three coming up in 2012, but that was in Nov, 2011. 173.2.45.231 (talk) 14:01, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Dave is no longer the co-host. Lundin has been filming with a new person since April, according to his facebook site. Isn't that reason enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minty10200 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Citation for firing and reason?

The sources after the sentence about the reason Dave was 'fired' do not mention this at all. Why is this on here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.207.67 (talk) 15:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

It should not be here and I have removed it. The page was full of unsourced information or sourced to Blogs which are not a reliable sources and cannot be used on Wikipedia. I've replaced this information with the only verifiable information I could find. I've also added relevant information to Canterbury's page about his military backgrounf which does not belong here as this is not the page for that discussion. --JournalScholar (talk) 02:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The page continues to be reverted to unsourced allegations that cannot be verified. No one has produced a reliable source that Dave Canterbury was fired or for why. The only press release that has been found so far says he is not part of the show anymore. --JournalScholar (talk) 20:53, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Canterbury's own 2008 bio makes military claims that are not true. This bio also states, in his own words, that he worked full time at an auto plant in Ohio. Clearly one does not have 20 years of experience teaching survival when they are a factory worker. Lundin's bio, for those who think, says it all about dishonesty regarding Canterbury. POWnetwork.org specializes in exposing phonies. They have Dave listed. If these aren't reliable sources, what is?? Wicki should not be used to censor the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minty10200 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The POW information regarding Dave Canterbury's military background has been added to his page. There is no reliable source for why he was fired from the show. Nothing is being censored, you have failed to provide a reliable source for you edits. Information on Wikipedia needs to be verifiable and from a reliable source, you have provided neither for why he was fired. Blogs, forum posts and Facebook pages are not reliable sources. I researched this and located only two sources stating that he would not be returning but they did not say why. The POW Network is only a reliable source for his false claims regarding his military background which has nothing to do with the show Dual Survival. --JournalScholar (talk) 10:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, I added two cached pages of his false claims regarding his military background. His 2008 BIO mentions, "After Leaving the Military I worked several private sector jobs and am now an Engineer in an Automotive Plant full time, and have a private buisness as you can see from this web site." It is possible for someone to teach survival training when not working his other job. This is not evidence of anything. The key claims are of him falsely claiming he was Ranger qualified. The military records they provide show that he was not Ranger qualified but do show he was in the military. It is our job to make sure this information is added from a NPOV and in the correct context which I have done. None of this information has anything to do with Dual Survival as his military records do not mention the show. --JournalScholar (talk) 10:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I added the following quote which is the best that can be done without violating WP:NOR with the information available, "The goal of the survival instructor is to keep people alive. To accomplish this goal, honesty, integrity, trust and competence must come first. These core values cannot be compromised or people’s lives are needlessly put at risk. In a profession where human lives are at stake, dishonesty about ones background and experience is an inexcusable breach of trust." --JournalScholar (talk) 10:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Journal Scholar, here is what the POWnetwork has stated about Dave, "He was let go from the show after the claims and actual records came to light." In other words, he was fired for misrepresenting his military background, (and civilian), which you continue to dispute as well after seeing Dave's own bio. In this bio Dave claims to be Airborne, etc, not just a Ranger. Why didn't you add these other lies to his page? Why did you cherry pick what the POWnetowrk said and ignore that fact that they said he was "let go" i.e. fired? Daves "business" as he stated on his 2008 bio was selling archery equipment online, thus his old email address wildernessoutfittersarchery@yahoo.com. He did not teach survival, even then. Working at an auto plant full time and selling bow and arrows on a web site does not give someone 20 years of survival skills experience. All are different fields. Lundin has the proven decades of experience, Canterbury does not. Canterbury also claimed to leave the show himself for family and business reasons in April, when he was really fired in September. Please do your homework and quit censoring the Dual Survival page! That said, I think you have added great professionalism to Lundins and Canterburys page. Sincerely, Minty10200. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minty10200 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

POW Network is not a reliable source for information outside of his military record as they only provide evidence of his military background, this has already been added to his page. I have also added archived web page captures showing that Dave claimed to be a Ranger. You have no way to know what he did or did not teach at any time. There is no reliable source stating that Dave was fired from Dual Survivor. --JournalScholar (talk) 23:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

POW is not a reliable source for info that is non military?? Really, says who, you? What is your proof? Or is it simply your opinion, and as you have told me many times, opinions are not acceptable according to Wickipedia standards. One more time Canterbury fan, POWnetwork ONLY takes FIRST HAND information in WRITING. I have told you to check this out, instead, you simply vandal the page based on your opinion. Unacceptable. Canterbury was "let go" for lying. Quit censoring the truth! Also, don't you wonder why when you added the false ranger thing to Daves page that it kept being "blanked"? Minty 10200 (Minty10200 (talk) 00:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)).

POW Networks is not a reliable source for this information WP:RS. No news source can be found to corroborate this. Continuing to misrepresent me as a Canterbury fan will not change the fact that you have not presented a reliable source to support your allegations. If you continued edit this page in this manner page I will report this. --JournalScholar (talk) 00:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I will report you for vandalism sir. I'm trying to save you some embarrassment. Give me an email or a phone number and I will have a first hand source contact you, consider that this source has shared this with others too. I will check this when i can for your contact info. (Minty10200 (talk) 00:45, 15 August 2012 (UTC))

First hand sources violate WP:NOR and you do not understand WP:RS. Your edits are deleting fully sourced information to unsourced information and I have reported your behavior to the notice board. --JournalScholar (talk) 01:14, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

This is interesting apparently Lundin wants something to be said on Wikipedia he is unwilling to say himself, http://www.facebook.com/pages/Cody-Lundin-Aboriginal-Living-Skills-School-LLC/124508247561387

These two commentators hit the nail on the head,

"I'm not sure what the point of this was. Was it to point out how Wikipedia is a poor academic source? Or was it another opportunity to take veiled shots at the former co-host? Because I'm still waiting to hear the actual story from the direct source without lame ass assertions and innuendo. But even those directly involved in events can't be a trusted source either."

"The thing is, Cody, the whole REASON wikipedia editors keep removing the facts related to you having a new cast member is that there is no reliable source for those facts. If you issued an official, public statement, whether here on Facebook or elsewhere, with your thoughts on it, they could link to that statement as a source, and the edits would then be allowed to remain by the editors of wikipedia. In fact, this entire little war of edits is occurring precisely because there has been so little in terms of official statements regarding the cast change. At least SOME of wikipedia's editors are in fact trying to maintain the objectivity of the site by only allowing statements which can be linked to a reliable source to be allowed on the site."

If Lundin is unwilling to say it then it is likely a legal issue with Discovery and even more of a reason to be careful about adding unsourced inuendo on Wikipedia in violation of WP:BLP. Cody can rest assured that as soon as a reliable source WP:RS says Dave was fired and for why it will be added. He can resolve this at any time by making an explicit statement to the press. --JournalScholar (talk) 02:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Protection

I think this article needs to be protected, it is vandalized on a regular basis, unfortunately, I don't know the correct procedure to request protection. --79.181.196.229 (talk) 15:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Please be careful about using the word vandalism. It has a very specific meaning on wiki. JanetteDoe (talk) 16:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I put in a request based on Content Dispute. StevePrutz (talk) 21:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I just came across this and considered it but it seemed not to rise to the level by now where I would fully protect, and seeing as most users traversing this page seem to be autoconfirmed semiprotection wouldn't do a whole lot. I'll try to keep an eye on it. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 05:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I've reported the behavior of 198.60.121.1 to the notice board as well as it is identical to Minty10200.--JournalScholar (talk) 11:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I would like help in reporting the user Journal Scholar to whoever takes disputes regarding content on Wickipedia. I have looked at Journal Scholars history and the lions share of it is dealing with Dave Canterbury. I do not feel that a Dave canterbury fan should be dictating facts and suppressing the truth about the Canterbury firing as fully supported by POWnetwork.org. POWnetwork also has other lies that Canterbury told that are not being added to Canterburys page. Journal Scholar took great pains to cherry pick information from the POW page to add to Canterburys page. Why is this being allowed to happen, the censoring of the truth? (Minty10200 (talk) 22:46, 20 August 2012 (UTC))

Then you clearly do not know how to look at a user's history as I have hundreds of edits with very few dealing with Canterbury all of which were fully sourced and detailed edits as my edit history will attest to. Misrepresenting me as a Canterbury fan will not help your editing that violates WP:RS and WP:NOR. Please feel free to take this to dispute resolution as an admin has already reviewed your editing behavior and issued you a warning. I have also reported the IP address making the same edits. --JournalScholar (talk) 23:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Minty10200, this issue has already been opened on the Administrators' Noticeboard, Incidents here. A link was placed on your talk page. I'm not sure how you managed to miss it. Also you may wish to read WP:TRUTH. Wikipedia is not for righting great wrongs, nor it is for proclaiming THE TRUTH. It is to summarize what reliable sources say. JanetteDoe (talk) 01:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Since an IP has insisted on reinserting the info that violates WP:BLP, and no constructive edits have been made by an IP on this page for some time, I think a short semi-protection won't hurt and will at least curtail this most recent behavior. I've semi-protected the article for a week. -- Atama頭 02:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --JournalScholar (talk) 02:22, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

POWnetwork does not qualify as a reliable source as it appears to be user-generated and to not have any editorial oversight. Please see here for more details. A magazine or newspaper article, for example, would probably fulfill the requirements of reliable sourcing. I realize that when starting out there is a lot to learn but other editors are willing to help. JanetteDoe (talk) 15:54, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Teti article?

Is Joseph Teti notable enough to have a standalone article? Wikipedia:BLP1E. StevePrutz (talk) 18:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

as of now [1], clearly no significant coverage at all let alone independent of the show. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Make a #redirect for him, then? StevePrutz (talk) 18:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

that is probably a good idea. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done. It is very plausible that as the new host viewers will be looking for information about him, so it's somewhat sad that we must redirect to this article...but it's better than no page at all. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 19:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Jogershok Per WP:SPS "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer." These blogs are not reliable sources for information about Teti. Do not add them again. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

These sources are not self published but contain the evidence from the records released from the Military Personal Center are authentic and evidence that this man is NEITHER a combat vet nor a retired Special Forces soldier. Joseph N Teti combat veteran GWOT poser Teti Resume Remove the word RETIRED, he is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jogershok (talk • contribs) 18:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Jogershok I personally do not disagree with you as to Mr Teti misrepresenting his background. But those sources are indeed self published. They are on blogs. The blogs do not have any editorial oversight or fact checking other than the guy who runs the blog. We have no provenance as to those documents or how they may be faked or modified etc. Even if we DID have such knowledge, those documents would then be covered under WP:BLPPRIMARY ("Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person")

These are not reliable sources for wikipedia, even if they are true. Please do not add them again. Teti may have lied. Others may be repeating his lies (perhaps not knowing they are lies), but those sources DO meet our reliable sources policies. Until actual reliable sources come in to contradict it, we cannot add information to the contrary. If you persist in adding negative information to a BLP without proper sourcing, it will end up with a block for you. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:59, 20 February 2014 (UTC)Jogershok (talk) 19:02, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Then I will contact those sources for retraction.Jogershok (talk) 19:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Jogershok I think that will go nowhere. Their standards for publishing are their own. Our standards are ours. Ours are more stringent than theirs. Thats fine. they serve their purpose, but wikipedia cannot rely on them. In this particular case, Teti is a trival person outside of the show. He isn't a politician, or big business man likely to get coverage in mainstream investigative journalism that would be a reliable source for us. He is essentially a showman at this point.

I found some of your personal websites via google, and see that you served.(Thank You) As such, I can see why someone making unwarranted service claims may have personal impact on you. I sympathize, but the sources that have looked into Tetis background are not the type of source that wikipedia allows. Literally anyone can start a blog and say whatever they want on it. They can make whatever docs they want and say they are official. I am not accusing either of the sites you have referenced of doing that. I respect their work and purpose. But there is no way to create an objective standard that would allow them to be used as a source, yet exclude random conspiracy theory sites and other blogs. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

But they are reliable sources according to your standards. Can you remove the word "retired" from his paragraph? Jogershok (talk) 19:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Which source are you saying is reliable (not self published, not primary sources) that says he is not retired? Wouldn't saying he is currently active special forces be worse than saying retired? Gaijin42 (talk) 20:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

You credit the two newspaper articles which state he is a retired green beret as reliable sources but then say that their standards are lower than Wikipedia's. Can we have it both ways?

SSG Teti left A Company 5th Battalion 19th Special Forces Group (SFG) 25 DEC 01 without serving the required time in service or with a qualifying disability that would qualify him to be issued a retired military ID Card. Truth be told he knew his Special Forces (SF) team in A/5/19th SFG and the California National Guard (CANG) was on alert for deployment in OCT 2001 and chose, as was his right, to not reenlist in the CANG or with the 19th SFG. I served on active duty with the 7th SFG from 3 DEC 73 (when I earned my beret) until 9 DEC 81 when I left active duty. I am not retired Special Forces even though I am a LIFE member of the Special Forces Association. I had 10 years of service not 20 years as required to be issued a retired ID card and collect a pension upon discharge. National Guard and Reserve component service members must show credit for service based upon their regulations and are issued a retired ID card upon their discharge if they are qualified. National Guard and Reserve service members who complete a minimum of 20 "qualifying" years of service (creditable retirement years) become eligible for retired pay at age 60. Jogershok (talk) 22:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Now the Army Times has weighed in on Teti's claims:

   ″Mary Schantag, who heads both the POW Network and FakeWarriors.org, has investigated some 5,000 contested claims of combat experience and 
   valor medals. She contends that a contractor simply cannot earn the same status that a military member can.

   'I don’t care if you’re a veteran of however many contracting scenarios,' she said. 'It does not make you a combat veteran.'

”Jogershok (talk) 16:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

An article in the Army Times states that The Special Forces Association stripped Joseph Teti of his membership and he is ineligible to rejoin the organization.

As stated in that article, “He’s an embarrassment to the Regiment, because of the falsehoods, lies and embellishments he’s used in association with his Special Forces qualifications,” says retired Army Sgt. Maj. George Davenport, a “life member” of the organization.

Among Teti’s lies, says Davenport, are claims that he was a graduate of the Special Forces Combat Diver and Special Forces Sniper courses.

“I personally checked with the Special Forces schools and he did not go to those courses. There is no record of him attending,” stated George Davenport, founder of the “Special Forces Poser Patrol” Facebook page, which added Teti to the group’s “Wall of Shame” Sept. 30 in the wake of the SFA’s decision. Jogershok (talk) 23:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

factbook is most certainly not a reliably published source. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Facebook etc are not reliable. Army times is, but only for the things it directly says, and things that are opinions need to be following WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV and even derogatory facts should be attributed to the people asserting those facts. In particular, we should be saying something like "According to Davenport" not stuff in the wiki's voice Gaijin42 (talk) 01:49, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Please note that all of the most recent claims are from the Army Times or Military Times. The reference to Facebook is what was stated by the Army Times as to the bonafides of George Davenport. That same article quotes the President of the Special Forces Association, Jack Tobin, as the source of information regarding Teti's expulsion from the organization.

In the wake of Cabala's severing their relationship with Joseph Teti, Casio watches is considering their options since the Special Forces Association has expelled him from their organization. Teti denies the allegations. Teti replaced David Canterbury, another Army veteran, who, after allegations surfaced that he had lied about some of his military qualifications, was fired from the program.Jogershok (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

References

Is the "Production" section redundant?

I was considering removing it, but I wanted to pose that question here first. All of the information about the air dates and cast is already in the table above it, and the (seemingly out-of-place) information about Josh James can go elsewhere, namely the 'Format' section and/or the lead. TheTechnician27 (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2019 (UTC)