Jump to content

Talk:List of The Shield characters

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge proposals

[edit]

According to guidelines in the Manual of Style for fiction, I do not believe Armadillo Quintero qualifies as a major character. He is by no means a cultural icon, and does not take up a considerable amount of screen time over the course of the series. The guidelines say that if you are in doubt, and especially if the article is a stub (which that is, and has little hope of being expanded) you should merge the content into a list of characters. So that's what I'm proposing. I think there are a few characters who deserve and can support articles of their own, like the Strike Team members and Dutch, but Armadillo (to me) doesn't meet the requirements. Kafziel 05:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Rockpocket 17:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only characters that can hack a solo page are:

  • The Strike Team
  • Aceveda
  • Dutch
  • Kavanaugh
  • Antwon Mitchell
  • Maybe Claudette

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Morisato 40 (talk • contribs)

Terry Crowley (The Shield) is listed as a proposed merge here, and I support. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 19:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i am HIGHLY AGAINST the merger. I hate it when awesome characters do not get the spotlight they deserve. Margos, Armadillo, and Terry are all main characters in some way or form to their respective seasons. Omitting them from their own pages would be destroying the essence of the show for the very consensus of keeping only those characters that YOU feel are important. Well, newsflash, to me, Margos and Armadillo are WAY more excellent characters than the strike team and they deserve to have their own pages regardless of how you feel about it. I said my two bits. - Zarbon

This isn't based on our opinion; Wikipedia has reasonably clear guidelines on this, as I stated in my first entry. Furthermore, I don't see how you can say Terry Crowley is "awesome" - he makes a deal with Aceveda, then he gets shot in the face. The end. He does absolutely nothing, and dies in the pilot episode.
We're not talking about deleting these characters completely. Most of the content from their articles will be put here, including pictures (if they are properly sourced). Everyone who has voted so far likes The Shield, but you need to set aside being a fan and follow some rules here. If you love these guys so much, why don't you make your own website about them, rather than getting angry at everyone else on Wikipedia? Kafziel 13:10, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not angry. There's nobody else here other than you and some other guy. You don't necessarily make the decisions as to how the page should look, and for that matter, who deserves pages or not. I know for a fact that Margos appears in 4 episodes and he's very important to the plotlines of 3 seasons, not just one episode. So just because you may not agree, does not mean that the character is not a major character. Terry is important for the sheer fact that he returns in season 2 again, and then he also has the whole investigation in his favor and under his name, the whole plotline of season 5 revolved around his murder. so just because he's alive in the first episode and dead for the rest, does not make him a lesser character, in fact, it makes him MORE IMPORTANT for the fact that he actually died rather than lingering. And as far as merging them goes, it's idiotic. You can check out other pages...let me give you some examples, Dragonball Z characters, The Sopranos characters, Oz characters, etc. All the characters have pages dedicated. Even ones that appear in one episode. How do you like them apples? Everybody deserves a page. In fact, if I were to add all 100 characters that I know from the shield on the one page (which is your idea), it would become a hellhole of scrolling. So to keep the pages neat and orderly, nothing is better than separating the characters. - Zarbon

Two points:
  1. There are four other people here besides you - There's me, there's Rockpocket, Morisato 40, and there's pd_THOR. That means that so far 80% of the votes agree that the articles should be merged with this one.
  2. I don't care how other pages are doing it. They're wrong. Believe me, kid, you're not going to convince me that Wikipedia policy is wrong by showing me a bunch of Dragonball Z articles. There's tons of crap out there, but that doesn't mean it's okay to make more. Kafziel 13:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First off, i'm not a "kid", and second, last i checked The Sopranos and Oz were rated TV-MA. I'm trying to grasp your viewpoint but you seriously need to stop with the undermining disrespect. - Zarbon

For the record, i support Kafziel in this, not based on any preference for character, but simply on policy. I'm afraid, IMHO of course, Zarbon kind of invalidated his argument in his opening gambit by establishing the basis for their own pages because they are "WAY more excellent characters than the strike team and they deserve to have their own pages". If every tv series had a page for every minor character (irrespective of how important they may be in terms of plot progression), Wikipedia would be swamped. For every example you give there are plenty that avoid excessive cruftness. See List of Desperate Housewives characters. Mary Alice, for example, is absolutely crucial to the plot of that series, yet is also a very minor character (having appeared in only the first episode and now only as a voice over character). I think Terry Crowley is a perfect parallel to her. Rockpocket

Maybe Terry Crowley is...but then again...Margos and Armadillo have appeared throughout...in more than 4 eps each respectively. What makes Antwon more important? He wasn't even in season 1-3. he came in 4 and was in some of 5...just cuz he's newer, does not make him any more important, so if my fav guys are going to get merged, then antwon should too, he's in the same ranking. i added a merge tag for him as well. - Zarbon

I think his character has been much more developed, and of course the actor who portrays him (Anthony Anderson) is famous in his own right, but there haven't really been any criminals who have been prominent for the entire series, because Vic kills them all. ;)
So I'll support merging Antwon Mitchell as well. Kafziel 19:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Since you've nominated Antwon Mitchell for merging, does that mean you now support the rest of the moves? If we're all in agreement, we can be done with this right now. Otherwise, we'll leave the tags on for a while longer to see if anyone else dissents. Kafziel 19:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i think we should leave the tags for a day more, just in case. but if you do happen to merge them, please at least do not delete the pictures of the characters i got, because they at least deserve to have a pictorial reference. also, if you do merge them, i hope you don't intend to delete the info that i added for all the characters. also, if you merge them, please merge antwon as well. - Zarbon

We'll give it until the end of the weekend, just to make sure everyone has a chance to discuss it. If and when I merge them I will keep the pictures and most of the information, and I will merge Antwon at the same time (assuming we have consensus for merging him). Kafziel 21:21, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have objections to Antwon being moved onto the main page with the other three. Terry, Armadillo and Margos belong on the main page because their characters were not given enough time to evolve into anything more than the image given before they were killed. However, Antwon is different in that he is still alive and remains as a force against the Strike Team. Not to mention that the depth and transformation given to his character by Anthony Anderson is something that sadly the other three characters really lacked. -- Makaio 17:14, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since Antwon is only in season 4 and some of 5, his character really hasn't had that much development either. He only came into the picture in season 4, got arrested for trying to pin the murder of a girl on two cops, then proceeded in his jail life and has been seen in prison in season 5. I mean, seriously, if all the past villains of the show were fused, then why not Antwon. He doesn't have that much development either. - Zarbon

Antwon does have a lot more development than any of those other characters. The show has followed him from newly paroled convict, to community leader, to gang leader, to cop killer, to informant. He has blackmailed Shane, worked with Kavanaugh, and has an ongoing rivalry with Vic. I'm changing my vote; I think his own article merits keeping, although it can certainly use some improvement. I think that gives us enough consensus to take the merge tags off and the Shield article will look nice again. Kafziel 13:55, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I personally do not believe that Antwon deserves his own page, because all the previous "villains" from the show were taken out. Antwon does not have that much development at all. For someone who only decides to watch seasons 1-3, what would their consensus be? Besides, you shouldn't have removed the Antwon tags. Also, your changing your vote was quite un-called for. I didn't know you could do that. also, rockpocket and pdthor didn't even vote on it. you should have at least allowed the same number of ppl to vote before removing the tag. - Zarbon

This all sounds like sour grapes to me. Kafziel 14:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that was mean of you to say. - Zarbon

I agree that if someone was to only watch seasons 1-3 that they would probably be saying, "WTF, who the hell is Antwon?" However, anybody who has seen seasons 1-3 (quite a bit) have returned and brought friends for seasons 4 and 5. And if that is not enough reason to keep an Antwon article, lets look at episode count. Terry is in 1 episode, all the rest are flashbacks of his cold dead body. Armadillo is in around 10 episodes. Margos is in like, I don't know, 5, more or less, I don't really remember him that much. While Antwon is in the entire season 4 and about 1/4 of season 5, so roughly about 16 episodes. Not to mention that he was given character developement time, as we first see him as a black community leader and then progress into an agressive drug lord. Where as a character like Armadillo was evil from the get go and only transformed into an even more evil guy that sold crack to kids. So thats my take -- Makaio 04:58, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Zarbon - either keep them all separate or compile them into one. Antwon is a big character in season 4 and plays a pivotal role (although he doesn't get much screen time) in season 5 but I think Margos was a character with a similar power to influence the plot and Armidillo arguably had at least the same influence on the plot as Antwon (kills Tio, burns Ronnie's face, threatening to undo the Strike Team, in dying screws over Danny cos she 'failed' to do a proper search). Even if Margos only actually in five episodes or whatever, they talk about him in more than that (mostly people being freaked out/scared - the Strike team were way rattled when they realised Margos had been sent to figure out who ripped off the Money Train) and if evil was the measure of how big a villain a character is, then Margos is easily at the top of the list. Also, as he said, Antwon is a late inclusion to the series, spanning a shorter period of time - in a show that is only going to have seven seasons, he's appeared just this side of the second half and only in recent history as far as screened episodes are concerned. I've come to Wiki for info about The Shield a lot of times and I love following link after link - in my case, not cos I want to find stuff out (know the episodes well, except maybe the trivia) but to see how other people have viewed/written up the characters but also to think about how other people would perceive the show, should they be thinking about watching it. The more information you can give them about it, the better: keep them separate and have a shorter summary of each character in the list of villains page with links to their own pages. TurambarWiki 16:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Consensus

[edit]

Looking through the replies so far, the results for merging are:

More discussion is, of course, always welcome. Kafziel 12:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tone

[edit]

I know tone has been an issue for a while, so I've trimmed a few of the sections for language and excessive detail. As a new page, it is still a work in progress, so if anyone has any suggested improvements, please discuss them here. Kafziel 17:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea with adjusting them all to sub-headlines. -- Makaio 00:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goes for the groin?

[edit]

How is it notable that Tavon is the only one who goes for the groin during the fight with Shane? TWo things set me off on that: Either: 1. Someone's masculinity complex was violated or 2. There is racism built into this page.

There are plenty of skinheads who like to think that everyone but caucasians do not fight normal, and I can see that this line was added with intent to be racist. Even if it was not meant to be racist (in which case it would need to be explained as to why the groin attack was significant and notable), it still shows little bearing on the actual fight and Tavon's character.

I am deleting that line.

Signed by Scryer_360, who is too lazy to sign in. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.248.200.226 (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]


Mara

[edit]

Hey I just included Mara as a character. After reviewing it over a few times, it occurred to me that Mara should have her own page. After all, she has contributed quite a few things to the show, even if it was bad things that made you want to reach through the television and strangle her. Anyone else agree?

I agree that she should have her own page. Though she comes and goes from the plotline whenever she appears she is very important.

Decoy Squad?

[edit]

Anyone think the decoy squad should get somekind of mention?

--TheTarmanCometh 04:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, after all, they were a big part of the show at one point. Here's another question though: Should Julien get his own page now that he's a full fledged member of the Strike Team? And if Dutch has his own page, should Claudette have her own?

--Morisato 9:09 Mountain, 5 June 2007

Nigel Gibbs

[edit]

The actor that plays Roy Phillips, Nigel Gibbs, has a link that goes to Nigel Gibbs' page. But that's a totally different Nigel Gibbs, right? Should The Shield's Nigel Gibbs get his own page, or should his name simply be de-linked? Karlos the Jackal 00:09, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For now, I changed the link to "Nigel Gibbs (actor)". It's a redlink now, but at least doesn't go to the wrong page. Karlos the Jackal 00:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monica Rawling

[edit]

I went ahead and made a page for Monica Rawling. Im pretty new to this and didn't know we had to discuss these things but here's how I see it. The characters of Monica Rawling and Antwon Mitchell were very pivotal and arguably two of the most important characters in season 4. Antwon already has his own page and if anyone disagrees with Monica Rawling having a page then feel free to merge although I don't see the point as every other character that has appeared in the credits as a regular has their own page. Hell even Ronny does and he's arguably one of the characters of least importance until around season 5 or 6. (Budman08 18:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]


Kavanaugh not a main character?

[edit]

Is there a rationale behind this, or is it just an oversight? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.78.50.18 (talk) 01:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forrest Whitaker's name was never in the opening credit. He has always been listed as a guest star. Despite Whitakers lengthly stay and Kavanaugh's importance, according to contracting he is not a main character but instead a "guest star". Geeky Randy (talk) 05:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Armadilloq.jpg

[edit]

Image:Armadilloq.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) 06:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Terrycrowley.jpg

[edit]

Image:Terrycrowley.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) 09:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Characters by season

[edit]

I think this page would be better served by showing the characters introduced by season, but I don't want to do it unless people think it's a good idea. Mainly because it's time consuming, but also I don't want to do a bunch of work for it to be reverted 5 seconds later.151.166.15.115 (talk) 06:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When it's in alphabetical order, people have an easier time browsing characters — it's also more encyclopedic this way. Secondly, if everything is done correctly, the characters should have a list of episodes they've appeared it — thus, we also see what season they're introduced. Lastly, a lot of readers aren't going to remember when a character was first introduced — how many people remember that Billings was introduced in Season 4?… not many — so it'd be more difficult to make use of the article if it was divided by season.Geeky Randy (talk) 21:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Might?

[edit]

Where did the appellation "Might" come from regarding the Armenian mob in The Shield? I can't recall them ever being referred to in such a way. I certainly could have missed it, but a source (episode or the like) should be given. Again, having never heard it, I hope it isn't just some excuse to link to the Wikipedia page of the Armenian Power street gang (which the Armenians depicted in The Shield are certainly not).172.190.33.215 (talk) 07:06, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind regarding the source. Vic uses the term twice in the episode "Fire In The Hole". Regardless, the link to a real-life Armenian street gang is dubious at best.172.191.49.12 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2014 merger consensus

[edit]

As per the new consensus, the following articles need merged here:

Please help with this merge. Thanks! — Wyliepedia 20:12, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I say merge the lot not alot of real world information. Dwanyewest (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just three remaining to be done. wbm1058 (talk) 02:52, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of The Shield characters. 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, 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) 18:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of The Shield characters. 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, 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) 08:46, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

This article is severely broken, since section links go to the first subheading with that name, not the one intended. For example, "Curtis Lemansky" gets snagged by the Gardocki subheading about Lem, not his own header.

It is also garbled in that several write-ups are simply missing. There's nothing on Corrine Mackey for instance, except her relation to Dutch.

Add the excessive length of this single page, the lack of references, and it's clear a major cleanup is needed here. CapnZapp (talk) 21:11, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering about that too. The link for Shane Vendrell takes me to a subsection of Ronnie Gardocki instead of his own character section. This is what happens when people delete/merge pages, without doing the necessary work to improve the list article.
Instead of this overly long list it would be better if the most important characters had their own individual pages. See also WP:NEXIST -- 109.76.144.188 (talk) 00:13, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting the Ronnie Gardocki article

[edit]

What are other Wikipedia users opinion on splitting the Ronnie Gardocki character article into a separate article. I believe there is enough third person sources to justify a solo article. Dwanyewest (talk) 21:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_The_Shield_characters&oldid=1238049675"