Talk:List of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles characters

Derek Reese

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Definitely. FOX did announce he would be a major character for Season 2. Plus, he might very well be appearing or be mentioned in Terminator 4, or whatever they're going to call it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.248.116 (talk) 22:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

He should get his own page, as Fox recently announced that Brain Autstin Green is joining that casts as a regular. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.37.119.96 (talk) 17:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

temp page: /Derek Reese – forked from list article

Derek is a major character. Should be split, or this list should be converted to a list of characters, with summaries for all characters, not just minor ones. 70.55.84.253 (talk) 05:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I was just going to say the same...Brian A. Green may be listed as a guest star, but Derek Reese is definitely not a minor character. I don't know how you can introduce another Reese into the Terminator universe and consider it minor. Taroaldo (talk) 05:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

ditto. derek is in fact a pivotal character in the terminator saga.

The fact of the matter is we do not know how long Derek will survive. He could be killed in the first episode of the next season. I'd give him three more episodes, then give him his own article no matter what. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.152.168.130 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 4 March 2008

The problem with that plan is this: we are out of episodes. Waiting for three more episodes could mean waiting another year, and I don't think that people are going to want to wait another 12 months to close out this discussion. The fact is, he was at the SCC panel at Wondercon. The only other actors on the panel were Thomas Dekker and Summer Glau. I think that makes him important enough for his own article. Just look at the length of his section. 146.201.25.94 (talk) 21:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree he deserves his own page. Jonesy702 (talk) 23:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Would such a page comply with WP:N or WP:FICT? No, doesn't look like it. So he shouldn't get a page. Google reveals lots of fan blogs and and forums talking about him, not much else. The basic problem is that fanboys come in and start a biography of everything the character does, when they should really be posting to one of the fan wikis. It's easy to condense it down to a paragraph or so without losing much, and it still fits nicely in the list format. I've done so, and I don't think I lost anything that's not already covered in the episode recaps. If Derek establishes some notability in his own right (if the show is renewed) and continues to be a big part of the show, then he should probably get a page, but not yet. Fritter (talk) 00:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

please, not more policy... one reason I don't do much in Wikipedia anymore is because it is bogged down in unnecessarily complex and picky policies. WP:N and WP:FICT really don't have much to do with whether or not Derek should get his own page. The T:TSCC page is considered notable. Characters within should have their own page if there is enough interest and viable information. Exactly how many stub-class articles are in Wikipedia anyway?? There is already more than enough information for a separate page. The new (emerging) backstory about Derek's fight against Skynet, and his significance as Kyle's brother and John's uncle are more than enough to justify a separate page, whether or not he is killed off next season. (Though I wouldn't suggest they do that, given the potential for development of this character.) Taroaldo (talk) 07:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

My motivation is not so much to enforce policy, but to maintain quality. It seems to me the spinoff pages for characters and episode recaps are a major target for badly written fancruft -- essentially people using Wikipedia as their personal blog or discussion forum. It sucks to read pages like this, because you can tell many people have no clue what they're talking about, and some clearly could not even pass a high school English class. It may be easier to maintain enyclopedic content on a centralized List of Characters page. Still, Derek may deserve a spinoff page in the future, but I doubt there is currently enough analysis about him from secondary sources to justify a new page. Fritter (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Your point about badly written material better suited to personal blogs is well taken. However, such material can (sadly) be found in even the most serious of pages in Wikipedia. Suggesting in advance that a separate Derek Reese page would contain nothing more than fancruft is a bit excessive. If editors find that, collectively, they can't make a go of any page then there are remedies available to them. -- Taroaldo (talk) 04:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You are quite right that the mere possibility of fancruft shouldn't discourage people from creating new pages. My thought process is that there don't seem to be many (or any) reliable secondary sources (i.e. not forums and fan wikis) discussing Derek, other than just noting BAG's role as a guest star. So a page about Derek will rely on a primary source (that is, the show itself). Primary sources are acceptable, but a page based almost entirely on primary sources is not likely to be very good, consisting mostly of the thoughts and observations of fans watching the show. And it will be hard to make it a good encylopedic article, because what one editor sees as important and noteworthy is irrelevant crap to another. That's why the guideline on reliable sources exists, to find independent third parties who think the topic is notable. To me, you don't need more than a paragraph or two explain Derek's place in the show, which can be done here on this page. Fritter (talk) 17:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

In reference to the "main characters", only John Connor and Sarah Connor actually have such a reason to exist. Cromartie definitely does not, and neither does Cameron, or James Ellison. Derek Reese is a significant part of the storyline, in the episodes shown, more so than Cromartie or Ellison. So, either this list should be renamed to "list of characters" and Ellison and Cromartie are merged here, or Derek Reese should be split off and given his own page, since he's a larger character than either Cromartie or Ellison, both of whom are less significant to the mythology of Terminator. 70.55.84.253 (talk) 07:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

A single list of characters seems more appropriate until there is a next season. (Leaving the pages in place as redirect links to the list of course.) -- Horkana (talk) 04:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Cameron, Cromartie and James Ellison are part of the main cast and not guest stars. They full deserve there pages. Jonesy702 (talk) 19:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

• my two cents: I think that if someone is worried about "fancruft" they can put a "watch" command on those created pages. We are working with unlimited bandwidth and space here people, it's not like we have to make sure Wikipedia fits on a floppy disc or something. With that said, do make sure all characters that get their own pages have enough significance to warrant that. In the case of "Derek Reese" I think that even if he no longer shows up in any other episodes (which I doubt) he still played a significant role in how events unrolled in season one, thus significant enough to make a full page about him... even if he ends up being listed as a "season one character" Nesnad (talk) 16:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Well said. That was at least five cents. One cannot expect all fictional events/characters to be sourced to the same standard as IRL topics because they are, well, fictional. -- Taroaldo (talk) 17:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

No, it depends on the character. Homer Simpson has 66 references. Conversely many obscure real life topics have scant references. I maintain any new article should have some secondary sourcing to justify its notability, not just the opinion of fans posting here. Because to me, we just don't know how important he will be to the show overall, if it is even continued. He has been important for a few consecutive episodes, but that could change. Many shows have guest stars who are very important on one part of the story arc, but then largely disappear from the show. A paragraph on this page is currently sufficient to describe him. It's not a question of space, but maintaining a decent standard. Fritter (talk) 18:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Not true. Characters who are not notable in the real world (such as Homer Simpson, Buffy Summers, Holden Caulfield) should not have articles whatsoever on Wikipedia. There's a Terminator wikia for that. See Jack Harkness or Jason Voorhees for an example of heavily-sourced fictional character articles about culturally notable characters.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 00:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Huh? Jason Voorhees is a culturally notable character but Homer Simpson is not? D'oh! Oh, wait a minute, I should make that D'oh!. Does Jason have any iconic, culturally significant catch phrases with their own articles on Wikipedia? -- Taroaldo (talk) 07:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Some more spare coins: Well, I think the people discussing this clearly have a difference in opinion regarding what is significant. Instead of freaking out guys, let's try to keep cool heads about it, yeah? However, I must point out that "he might ultimately be insignificant" is a weak argument since articles can be deleted after they are created. In the case of Derek Reese, if that fictional character ends up being nothing to the ultimate story (which doesn't really seem possible, but I'm keeping an open mind) then a mechanism exists in Wikipedia for deleting or merging his article. I see nothing wrong with fictional characters having pages here, we are using an encyclopedia that espouses a desire to be "a collection of all the world's knowledge" and pages (with references) regarding real characters from fiction certainly count as some of the endless knowledge we are gifting the eons with. Although, someone go dig up some lost-in-old-books fact and gift us with that too, eh? Cheers Nesnad (talk) 12:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It's all good. I thought the juxtaposition of non-speaking Jason with constantly-speaking Homer was an interesting illustration of the diversity of what is notable. I don't disagree with the notion that there is an excessive overrepresentation of "fan-based" material in fictional character pages, and that many characters really aren't "notable". However, I think that battle has already been lost. From that perspective, it's hard to argue against a Derek Reese page. But, this is just my personal assessment of the state of this part of Wikipedia: if other editors don't consider a separate page warranted at this time, I'm ok with that. -- Taroaldo (talk) 18:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not freaking out -- I'm going to find me a CoinStar. =D Fritter (talk) 20:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Derek Reese has more screen time than any other character other that the triumvirate in the print advertising campaign (Sarah, John, Cameron), so the guest star title has no relevance. Title billing means little if they don't actually get screen time. And Cromartie's been played by 5 different actors already. 70.55.84.89 (talk) 12:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I said Jason and Homer were both examples of notable characters, where'd you get the implication I meant the opposite? And yeah, the Derek Reese subpage is so godawful it goes all the way to making the point that the character cannot sustain a subpage. Use the Terminator Wikia. There is no real-world information, therefore there is no enyclopedic content.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 20:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It is a fork of the list article, it is not meant to be an article on its own without heavy editing. Perhaps you didn't see the note? 70.55.84.89 (talk) 09:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Why are we still debating this? Brian Austin Green will be a regular next season, and Derek, frankly, has had more to do in the episodes he was in than Ellison. He deserves an article and that's that.--T smitts (talk) 01:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

At present, there is not enough information in there to warrant a separate article. As his section grows, it can be split into its own article, when it is warranted. ColdFusion650 (talk) 02:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fair use rationale for Image:Pict 2008-03-04 08-26-308.jpg

Image:Pict 2008-03-04 08-26-308.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 ensure 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) 15:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pict 2008-03-04 08-42-018.jpg

Image:Pict 2008-03-04 08-42-018.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 ensure 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) 15:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Characters

Cromartie should be listed as main and morris should be listed on the supporting characters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.230.214.31 (talk) 04:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Cormartie shouldn't be merged. He's the sole entry for the T-888 series, a whole different breed of Terminator and not just that particular cybernetic organism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.48.107 (talk) 22:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Vick

Vick has a last name... should be added. 70.51.9.124 (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Riley (Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Riley should get her own page because Leven Ramblin casted as a regular, meaning she has a huge part on the drama of the show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NeoBatfreak (talk • contribs) 18:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't make her notable.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Why doesn't it? She's a main character in the series? Jonesy702 (talk) 15:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

see Riley Dawson 76.66.198.171 (talk) 04:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Silly archival. She's not notable because there is no real-world discussion of the character's significance, outside the context of the show.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:15, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Charley

Why isn't Charley mentioned anywhere in the article? Some guy (talk) 09:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Allison Young

Hasn't it been revealed that Kacy Corbin's baby is the future Allison Young? If so, does anyone recall what episode that was suggested in? Can that factoid be added to the section for Allison Young? 168.166.196.40 (talk) 16:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Lachlan Weaver

Part of the article states "He was killed in a 2003 commuter jet crash in the eastern Sierra Mountains, en route from Sacramento to Portland (however, the Sierra Mountains are in southern California and Arizona, not between those cities)." This is only true of the Sierra Madre, near Santa Barbara. The Sierra Nevada (very commonly simply referred to as "the Sierras") run for much of the border with Nevada, and very plausibly close to Sacramento. Look up the relevant Wikipedia articles.

Image copyright problem with File:John Jackson as Kyle Reese.jpg

The image File:John Jackson as Kyle Reese.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:RileyTTSCC.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --11:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Name

This list should be renamed List of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles characters, and the main characters added onto the list with a short summary, and linkage with {{main}}. That would present better coverage of the series. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 04:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

John Henry

I added a new character, for the android plugged into the mainframe. The show hasn't shown what it is yet, but it looks like it could be a beta-version of Skynet. Green Squares (talk) 22:58, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Chola

doesn't Chola appear in the Season Two finale, giving passports to Cameron and John? 70.29.213.241 (talk) 10:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

And? --< Nicht Nein! (talk) 11:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not in the character info, indicating which episodes the character appears in. 70.29.213.241 (talk) 06:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Merger of Cromartie

It has been suggested that the article for Cromartie be merged into this list. I would counter-suggest that the section for John Henry be merged with Cromartie, as they are played by the same actor (mostly) and it would result in a fairly long and substantial article (and of course with suitable redirects put in place). At a later date that larger article could be revisted and potentially merged into the list of minor characters but I think it would be better to bulk up that article rather than making this list even longer. -- Horkana (talk) 10:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thing is, he really does play three separate characters. They should all be merged here and linked to from the main page. He is one main actor playing three less-than principal characters, sorta.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, merging John Henry into Cromartie makes a lot more sense. As machine characters go they both have a lot of screen time.--Marhawkman (talk) 18:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Recasting of Sarah's fiance

Anyone here know of a reliable source discussing the original casting of Sarah's fiance, at the time called Burke Daniels and played by Tim Guinee? I've seen him myself (WP:OR) in the final sales master of the pilot and the only places I've seen it mentioned are on fan sites. -- Thinking of England (talk) 09:07, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

accuracy in section Boyd Sherman, Ph.D.?

Two statements here seem slightly inaccurate (maybe just incomplete?) to me, but I didn't change them, wanting to submit my queries for others' input.

In the 3rd paragraph I found this:

the T-1001 impersonating Catherine Weaver (whom it had killed some time in the past)

But do we in fact know that the T-1001 caused the death of Catherine Weaver?

No we do not. I know I corrected this somewhere. I guess I missed this. It's never shown how Catherine Weaver died, or even when.--Marhawkman (talk) 04:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Then in the 4th paragraph is this description:

Dr. Sherman is found dead . . . apparently in a purposeful move by the computer 'mind' whom Sherman named John Henry. John Henry redirected power from the cooling system and security system in the basement, whereupon Sherman became trapped and died of hyperthermia.

The phrase "purposeful move" implies that the computer intentionally caused the death of Sherman, when actually it's pretty well established that it was merely providing for its own needs. That is, it had the knowledge that Sherman would die, but its purpose was not to kill him but to preserve its own functionality.Ed8r (talk) 21:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah that was later shown to have been accidental.--Marhawkman (talk) 04:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Charley Dixon

I removed this clause, which seemed to make an assumption that is not established by the plot/dialogue:

where Sarah and John have to relocate to

Since it is also somewhat extraneous, it seemed better to simply remove it. Ed8r (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)-

Use of non-free images on this article

This article has been identified as containing an excessive quantity of non-free content. Per the Foundation's requirement to keep non-free media use minimal, and per Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria #3, the non-free images on this article have been removed. Please note:

• The presence of a fair use rationale for this article on an image description page does not make it acceptable for a given use.
• Blanket restoration of the non-free images that have been removed can and most likely will be reverted, with subsequent reporting action possible.
• If some restoration is desired, careful consideration of exactly what non-free media to use must be made, paying special attention to WP:NFCC #1 and #8. In most cases non-free media needs to be tied directly to the prose of the article, most preferably with inline citations tying the discussion to secondary sources regarding the image per Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If this is a list type article, please read the WP:NFLISTS guideline. If you wish to dispute this removal, it may be helpful to read WP:OVERUSE, as it answers a number of typical questions and responses to removals such as this. If after reading these, you still feel there is grounds for restoration of most or all of the media that have been removed, please post to Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 01:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

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.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

List of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles minor characters → List of characters in the Terminator series – user:71.162.100.157 05:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose No rationale given. Further the "Terminator series" is not the purview of this article, this article is about The Sarah Connor Chronicles. 65.94.77.11 (talk) 06:19, 30 October 2011 (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.

ТимофейЛееСуда

Can someone please explain/stop User talk:ТимофейЛееСуда from constantly removing images from this page. Not sure why they doing it. Jonesy702 (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Article scope

I question whether it was a good idea to turn this into a franchise-wide list. The result is that we now have a large list of characters from the TV show with film characters mixed in here and there. It seems disorganized. If readers want to learn about characters from a certain film, this list doesn't help them do that, since those characters are scattered around. Most of the main film characters already have their own articles. The ones who don't are mostly one-film characters who can be adequately described in the film articles (like here, for example).

Also, the films and TV show take place in various timelines, so characters who exist in one may not exist in another. The list now includes characters from four different storylines, and readers might find this confusing. Given the convoluted history of the franchise, I think it may be simpler if we restore the long-standing scope of this page, focusing on the TV characters.  AJFU  (talk) 19:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

The merged list, which was simply a renaming of the "List of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles characters" article, was overwhelmed by characters of the tv series, and also included nearly 100% tv-centric explanations for a number of the franchise-wide characters. The renaming has been reverted, a standalone list of film/game characters, or film/game-centric explanations of shared characters, has been created. In addition, the terrific work that a number of editors did to expand the non-tv characters, once the article had been renamed, has been transferred to and acknowledged in the standalone list of film/game characters.

The abundance of tv-based characters (70 at this time), as compared to the film/game characters (25 in that list) brings up a different question regarding article scope. Is the lengthy list of tv-based characters, which captures extensive in universe information and plot lines, simply being used in lieu of expanding the detail in List of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles episodes, where MOS:TVPLOT suggests up to 200 words per episode could be inserted? I do not have a strong opinion, the character article is a helpful cross reference of information, but thought the question should be raised. Jmg38 (talk) 08:10, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

From what I've seen, character articles and lists typically do go overboard with in-universe details and plot lines. In this case, I don't know if it has anything to do with the episode list. I'm not really familiar with the show or its articles.  AJFU  (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)