Talk:List of NCIS: Los Angeles characters/Archive 1
This is an archive of past discussions about List of NCIS: Los Angeles characters. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Foster Homes
Problem in callens foster homes. The writers couldn't do the math, as usual. In the episode they claim he had 37 foster homes from 5 to 18, and then claim the longest was 3 months. 37 homes in 13 years makes the mean stay in a home over 4 months.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.248.240.96 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
- If he did not go into foster care until well in his fifth year, meaning the overall period was less than 13 years, and/or if he spent some time between foster homes in a facility, it's possible he spent less than 3 months in each home. We don't know what the case was so we have to accept what the writers say. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:55, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Ex-Wife?
I removed the following:
In "Standoff", the viewers discover that Callen had an ex-wife named Tracy Rosetti.
As she was not his wife, but played his wife on a mission. I do not believe that they were actually legally married for this though the cast does seem to act like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.113.233 (talk) 19:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Interesting point. So the question is, was getting married part of the cover, or did they get married voluntarily and worked it into an existing cover? Jake fuersturm (talk) 22:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Mowadh or Mowahd?
Does anyone know the correct spelling? Seen both in various places, but none would necessarily be considered WP:RS. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
- All of the press releases, with the exception of the one for "Lockup" list the name as "Mowahd 'Moe' Dusa". It's likely that the "Lockup" spelling is a typo. The press releases are regarded as RS. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:44, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Lary Macy - Operations Manager?
Does anyone know the actual job / title given for Lary Macy in the pilot? In "Ambush" Hetty explicitly refers to Macy as her predecessor. So by implication, Macy was the OSP's Ops Manager. But the role she played seems somewhat different from Hetty's (in particular, Macy was actively involved in running the case, whereas Hetty generally allows the team more autonomy. I'm wondering if she's actually a Sr. Field Agent / Team Leader, or can we just chalk up the differences to a matter of working style? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Splitting characters into individual articles
I just noticed the addition of an infobox for G. Callen. I'm just wondering if this isn't the first sign that it may be time to give Callen his own article? I've actually got one sitting in draft form on my computer. Is there any sort of Wikipedia guideline that can help guide us on this? At what point was there enough "critical mass" for the various NCIS (original series) characters to get separate articles? (Also, I'm not necessarily saying that the other NCIS:LA characters are at the point of deserving their own articles (yet)). -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 15:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- As with everything, separate articles must meet the general notability guidelines. As to content, MOS:TV#Character article structure provides guidance on that. WP:WAF provides guidance on writing about fiction. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:22, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Irrelevant and innacurate citation
A citation was recently added to the article after the sentence, "Deeks is extremely personal about his choice of firearm, preferring the Beretta 92FS over the NCIS standard-issue Sig Sauer P229."[1] This citation is potentially misleading as it gives the reader the impression that something in the sentence is sourced. The citation actually refers to the real-world NCIS using the weapon but does not support the sentence because fiction does not necessarily follow the real world. The fictional NCIS we see could use bows & arrows or Star Trek phasers if it wished. The source does not confirm Deeks' preference, nor does it confirm that the fictional version of the NCIS depicted in the program uses the weapon. The assumption that the fictional depiction of NCIS uses the weapon because the real NCIS does is classic WP:SYNTH and is not permitted. Accordingly, I've removed it from the article. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- Seems more like a case of WP:OWN to me, much like most of the edits you make on this article. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 10:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please, be civil. Comment on content, not the contributor. You would be better off arguing your case for keeping the OR in the article than taking digs at other editors who are trying to follow policy. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
- There's no reason why I can't comment on the contributor if the comment is relevant. Otherwise there would be no need for WP:OWN to exist as a policy. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 00:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- The point here is that the comment is not relevant. What would be relevant is a defence of your position regarding the source, not attacking other editors. If you really think that WP:OWN applies here, you should be able to support that with a cogent argument justifying why WP:SYNTH should be allowed in articles. In short, please stay on-topic. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Jake, please don't just bring up WP:OWN when some raises a concern. If you honestly think they have claimed ownership of an article in any way, please politely bring it up on their talk page. If you do it when they create a discussion about an edit you make with a valid concern, it makes you look like you've just randomly accused them of it out-of-the-blue for no apparent reason. Okay, on-topic, NCIS:LA is a fictional show. A cite that the real NCIS is really not needed in my opinion. It does nothing to cite that the fictional character uses them. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- Harry - what are you hoping to contribute, when the last post was over a week ago, and it's a dead issue? -- 19:22, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you looked at it didn't you? And there was some advice on what you should do in future if you think WP:OWN is an issue. So there's that. Technically. And often discussion's can go inactive for a month and then still be unresolved and just come back up later (this happens in Wikipedia a surprising amount of the time). You, for one, never said "okay, we won't add that source", nor did Aussie go "okay, we will add it", so the discussion wasn't really resolved, you see. It just went inactive. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, it was just a coincidence that I looked at your reply, since I was already popping by to edit the article following all the revelations in the season finale. I like to think that Aussie and I decided not to beat a dead horse to death. You don't have to explicitly kiss and make up for that to happen. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you looked at it didn't you? And there was some advice on what you should do in future if you think WP:OWN is an issue. So there's that. Technically. And often discussion's can go inactive for a month and then still be unresolved and just come back up later (this happens in Wikipedia a surprising amount of the time). You, for one, never said "okay, we won't add that source", nor did Aussie go "okay, we will add it", so the discussion wasn't really resolved, you see. It just went inactive. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Harry - what are you hoping to contribute, when the last post was over a week ago, and it's a dead issue? -- 19:22, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- Jake, please don't just bring up WP:OWN when some raises a concern. If you honestly think they have claimed ownership of an article in any way, please politely bring it up on their talk page. If you do it when they create a discussion about an edit you make with a valid concern, it makes you look like you've just randomly accused them of it out-of-the-blue for no apparent reason. Okay, on-topic, NCIS:LA is a fictional show. A cite that the real NCIS is really not needed in my opinion. It does nothing to cite that the fictional character uses them. Harry Blue5 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- The point here is that the comment is not relevant. What would be relevant is a defence of your position regarding the source, not attacking other editors. If you really think that WP:OWN applies here, you should be able to support that with a cogent argument justifying why WP:SYNTH should be allowed in articles. In short, please stay on-topic. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- There's no reason why I can't comment on the contributor if the comment is relevant. Otherwise there would be no need for WP:OWN to exist as a policy. -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 00:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
- Please, be civil. Comment on content, not the contributor. You would be better off arguing your case for keeping the OR in the article than taking digs at other editors who are trying to follow policy. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Does Hetty speak French?
Interestingly, although her personnel file shows that she's a graduate of the Sorbonne and of the Ecole de la chambre syndicale de la couture parisienne, it doesn't actually state that French is a language in which she's fluent. Since it's highly implausible that anyone could live and study in Paris without being fluent in French, would it be reasonable to add that? Or would it offend my fellow editors' WP:OR and WP:SYNTH sensibilities to add that to her Wikipedia entry? -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 13:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I'd call that WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 13:16, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- LOL, fine - thought I'd save a couple of bytes, but looks like that's too late now :P -- Jake Fuersturm (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
extra page
What about an extra page for every character? --91.66.20.211 (talk) 21:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- In order to justify separate articles, the characters must be notable. Based on the article as it stands, there is no evidence that any of the characters meet the requirements. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Unrequited Mutual Attraction?
I changed the sentence "Nate and recurring character Rose Shwartz share an unrequited mutual attraction" to "Nate and recurring character Rose Shwartz share an unconsummated mutual attraction". Although I've never actually seen the show I assume this is more what the original poster meant as an attraction cannot be "mutual" and "unrequited" at the same time.
Callen's name
If Callen's father George Callen, is G. Callen = George Callen jr.? -- 91.65.248.127 (talk) 18:49, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- Or Graham, or Geoffrey, or Godfrey....nobody knows and you can't assume that the same initial is the same name. --AussieLegend (talk) 00:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Just wanna put a suggestion, because when we find out Callen's first name, it'll become a spoiler, I would suggest when it's found out, that it is mentioned not near the start of the section on Callen (and definitely not in the title). - Ezuvian (talk) 12:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- I suggest you read WP:SPOILER. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- Just wanna put a suggestion, because when we find out Callen's first name, it'll become a spoiler, I would suggest when it's found out, that it is mentioned not near the start of the section on Callen (and definitely not in the title). - Ezuvian (talk) 12:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Hetty hand Vance a letter of resignation
the leter of resignation is over the loss of an agent "Dom". Who is this? and where is Marty Deeks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.134.224.140 (talk) 21:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Nell's sister
Why no info or section on Nell's sister "Sydney"?
Just curious. 2600:8800:785:2A00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 11:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)