Talk:NCIS (franchise)

NOLA

The entire point of using acronyms in the "Main cast" table is to reduce column widths and the acronyms we've been using are fairly logical:

• NCIS = NCIS
• LA = NCIS: Los Angeles
• NO = NCIS: New Orleans

"NOLA" doesn't make any sense unless we throw "Washington D.C." and California into the mix. That CBS may use "NOLA" is irrelevant. Is this even verifiable, and even if it is, CBS is not Wikipedia. NOLA is far too ambiguous, especially for international readers, it could easily be read as New Orleans Los Angeles. It's best to stick with the far simpler, unambigious acronyms. In any case, this table should not even include the episode count columns. WP:TVCAST and MOS:TV in general is being modified after discussions to specifically exclude these counts, so the columns should probably be removed. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

What?! What are you even talking about here? The term "NOLA" isn't "ambigous"! Anyone who lives in the United States knows that "NOLA" is one of two nicknames used for the city of New Orleans, aside from "The Big Easy". Wikipedia even tells you this on the New Orleans page! I mean, even if you want to forget the dozens of Creole restaurants named "NOLA" across the country, the city's website is literally "NOLA.gov" and a newspaper's web address is "nola.com". In the words of one of the characters in "Tropic Thunder" (and I mean this is the nicest way): "You're AUSTRALIAN. Be AUSTRALIAN." AntiHeroDwight (talk) 18:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

You need to realize that Wikipedia isn’t only written for Americans. Tvx1 21:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Episode counts

As the result of this discussion at MOS:TV it was decided to amend WP:TVCAST to exclude episode counts. The table at NCIS (franchise)#Main cast was specifically mentioned in the discussion as an example of what not to include. For this reason I am removing the episode counts, and these should not be restored. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

JAG

When this page was first created JAG lived alongside the NCIS' as part of the franchise. When did this change, and why wasn't there a discussion about it? It seems odd to exclude it as a franchise series just because it doesn't have NCIS in its name, especially with it being the original series of the group. --Unframboise (talk) 16:18, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

NCIS was a spin-off from JAG so JAG is part of the JAG "franchise", not the NCIS franchise. A franchise consists of the original work, and the works that were derived from it. It doesn't include works from which the franchise's original work was derived. --AussieLegend (✉) 20:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

So then if the NCIS series are all part of the JAG franchise, wouldn't it make sense to redirect this page to JAG (franchise) so all the related works are noted in their entirety? --Unframboise (talk) 23:26, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

When referring to the JAG "franchise" I used quotes because there is actually no JAG franchise. It only had a single spinoff, that wasn't really a spinoff in the true sense of the word. It was a separate series that just used two JAG episodes as a backdoor pilot. NCIS: Los Angeles and NCIS: New Orleans didn't have any connection with JAG, which had ended 4 years before NCIS: Los Angeles started. JAG is almost a completely separate series. --AussieLegend (✉) 23:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, I mean NCIS is a spinoff in the truest sense of the word, in that it had multiple character crossovers, and originated on the series. If the consensus is that JAG isn't part of the same franchise, then so be it, but I think it's a bit silly. It's like Law & Order: LA isn't part of the Law & Order franchise because it spun-off SVU. --Unframboise (talk) 23:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

None of the NCIS characters or storylines were from JAG. None of the NCIS characters appeared in JAG before or after the backdoor pilot. The only crossover by a JAG character into NCIS while JAG was still airing was in a 2003 episode by Lt. Bud Roberts. John M. Jackson reprised his character in 2013, 4 years after JAG finished, so that's not really a crossover. So not, NCIS is not really a spinoff at all. I never watched Law & Order: LA so I can't talk about that but I will remind you that the premise is important. While Law & Order: LA may not be a spinoff, it was a new show following a similar premise to that of Law & Order, so it is part of the franchise. This is not the case with any of the NCIS named programs. The premise of all of them is similar to each other, but completely different to JAG. --AussieLegend (✉) 00:24, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

@Unframboise: Just to correct the record, I don't know where you may be getting your information from, but LOLA was not a spin-off of SVU, but rather Law & Order. It is Law & Order: LA not SVU: LA. It's a series about homicide related crimes, like the original series – not sex crimes, like SVU. Cast members crossing over from SVU to LA and vice versa is irrelevant; Alana de la Garza starred in LA as her original Law & Order character. —MelbourneStar☆^talk 05:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

LOLA premiered after LO was cancelled, and it's lead characters were introduced on SVU, but anyway. Miami only crossed over with CSI once. NCIS and JAG have shared characters (Alicia C, Adam Baldwin, Patrick L, John M Jackson) , both follow a similar premise, NCIS as an organisation was peeve land in JAG. The two series are clearly linked, so why not include it? '--Unframboise (talk) 14:02, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Please try to keep obscure acronyms and abbreviations to a minimum. Discussions should understandable by all readers, as well as the participants. Not everyone knows what "LOLA" is, (I assume you're not talking about my pet bearded dragon) and I'm pretty sure that Miami has never moved from Florida.... Simply being linked by a crossover or two is not enough to establish a series as part of a franchise. Burger King sells burgers but that doesn't make a Burger King store part of the McDinald's franchise. As for the crossover characters:

• Alicia C - I assume you mean Alicia Coppola. She was the only "Alicia C" who appeared in JAG. According to IMDb, like the NCIS characters, she never appeared in JAG before or after the backdoor pilot, and she only appeared in 1 of the 2 episodes. She later appeared in 3 NCIS episodes but she was never a major character in either series and her contribution to storylines was minor. It's a character crossover, but this is not enough to establish JAG as part of the NCIS franchise, any more than the characters who crossed over from Homicide: Life on the Streets established that series as part of the Law & Order franchise.
• Adam Baldwin appeared in a single episode of JAG and a single episode of NCIS in two unrelated episode. His appearances were even fewer than Alicia Coppola's and definitely not enough to justify inclusion of JAG as part of the NCIS franchise.
• I have already addressed Patrick Labyorteaux's and John M. Jackson's appearances.

As I've already pointed out, a small handful of character crossovers is not sufficient to establish JAG as part of the NCIS franchise. Additions don't go uphill, they go down. Spinoffs can be part of a franchise, in fact they help to establish one, but a prior series doesn't become part of the franchise of a series that came after it. As also stated, the premise is important. NCIS and its spinoffs have virtually no links with JAG, other than NCIS using JAG for its backdoor pilots and the fact that the US Navy is involved. Even the Navy has become less of an issue in NCIS Los Angeles and NCIS New Orleans. Most of the time the Navy doesn't even seem relevant. There's really nothing that would justify including JAG and NCIS in the same franchise. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I could argue with you about this all day, but I'm just going to link you to a legal case () that establishes the series - JAG, NCIS and NCIS: LA - as part of the JAG/NCIS military justice franchise. To quote this legal case, which resulted in a settlement (therefore has legal basis), "NCIS: LA is therefore a spin-off of both JAG and NCIS". Unless you can find an equally viable source that says JAG isn't part of the franchise, then it should be included --Unframboise (talk) 21:52, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

References

That case does little to justify inclusion of JAG as part of the NCIS franchise. You are delving right into WP:SYNTH with that claim. Establishing either series as part of a "JAG/NCIS military justice franchise" cannot be directly translated to including JAG as part of the NCIS franchise. --AussieLegend (✉) 23:45, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Look, I don't know why you're finding this so hard to understand. That legal brief states that NCIS: LA is a spin-off of JAG as they are all part of the JAG/NCIS franchise. You can't find a source that states otherwise, so you're throwing around WP:SYNTH, which isn't even applicable in this case. JAG is going to be included on this page until you find a source that says it shouldn't be, because the only current piece verifiable data says it should. --Unframboise (talk) 23:54, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

The document you've cited is not a ruling. It's simply a claim by a plaintiff, and the plaintiff can write whatever they want. It doesn't have to be true. As you should be aware by now, citations must directly support claims, so what you would need is an actual ruling that explicitly states that Jag is part of the NCIS franchise. The claim does not do that at all.

"You can't find a source that states otherwise, so you're throwing around WP:SYNTH" - No, it doesn't work like that. You don't have to prove a negative. Per WP:BURDEN, All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. If you continue to add JAG into this article without providing a citation that explicitly supports the claim you are making, you are very likely going to end up with a block. You need to conthinue to discuss this and not continue your edit-warring. --AussieLegend (✉) 23:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

In an attempt to gain input from more editors, I have started a discussion at WT:TV. The discussion may be found here. --AussieLegend (✉) 00:08, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

JAG is a part of the franchise and brings in missing crossover

I feel the need to reopen this discussion due to recent appearances of John M. Jackson as A.J. Chegwidden on NCIS: Los Angeles. He appeared in three episodes on NCIS: LA so far with the possibility of more. Also, Patrick Labyorteaux reappeared as Bud Roberts in the pilot episode of season 14. So why is JAG being excluded from its child and grandchildren?

Also, there are missing crossovers. The first one is the appearance of Dean Stockwell as Senator Edward Sheffield from three episodes of First Monday for eleven episodes of JAG. The second is an out of franchise crossover between Hawaii Five-0 and MacGyver. I believe these should be in the crossover tables. LA (T) @ 12:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Nothing has changed since the previous discussion. JAG came before NCIS and can't therefore be part of the NCIS franchise. If anything, NCIS would be part of the JAG franchise, if there was one, but there isn't. That characters from JAG appeared in programs in this franchise doesn't make JAG part of the franchise. That just means characters from another TV series appeared in this franchise. That happens all the time. This is similar to John Munch from Homicide: Life on the Street. When Homicide: Life on the Street finished he crossed over to Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. That didn't make Homicide: Life on the Street part of the Law & Order franchise. Note that this was also discussed at WT:TV, so you should probably notify the TV project as well.

As for the crossovers, since JAG isn't part of this franchise, the crossover between it and First Monday is irrelevant. Regarding Hawaii Five-0 or MacGyver, why would they be relevant since neither are part of this franchise at all? --AussieLegend (✉) 13:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Why is the name important? JAG is the parent of NCIS. Leroy Jethro Gibbs, Anthony DiNozzo Jr., Donald Mallard, and Faith Coleman all first appeared on JAG. So how is JAG not part of the NCIS franchise, when it birthed the franchise?!

As for the crossovers, NCIS is now part of a greater continuity that includes all the crossovers, even the second level crossovers, so they should be noted. Since JAG is the parent of NCIS, its crossover is important. Also, since NCIS: Los Angeles crossed with Hawaii Five-0 the crossover between Hawaii Five-0 and MacGyver (2016) is also important.

The past of NCIS should not be ignored. Also, the connections it has with other series, even the indirect ones, should not be ignored. LA (T) @ 15:05, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Here is a handy chart to see the whole family of shows. LA (T) @ 15:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

JAG

First Monday

NCIS

NCIS: Los Angeles

Hawaii Five-0

MacGyver

NCIS: New Orleans

Scorpion

Much of what you say has already been addressed in the previous discussions and I'd rather not have to repeat myself. I will say that JAG was simply used as a convenient venue for the NCIS backdoor pilot. NCIS included all new characters that only appeared in JAG for the pilot. A couple of JAG characters did appear in a couple of NCIS episodes but that was it for several years until one JAG character was reprised for a couple of episodes of NCIS: Los Angeles. Even then, the character appeared in a different role to that from JAG. Prior to that, NCIS: Los Angeles had no relationship with JAG. NCIS: New Orleans still hasn't had any relationship with JAG. The franchise is therefore correctly called the NCIS franchise but JAG really has little to do with it, as I already explained. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:10, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

So since no characters from Star Trek appeared on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, DS9 should not be part of the Star Trek franchise? LA (T) @ 22:57, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Not at all, since DS9 is a child of Star Trek and the two series share a universe in many ways. However, ST:TOS would not be part of the DS9 franchise if there was one. Quite simply, parents don't become part of the child franchise. If the Star Trek reboot spawned its own franchise, ST:TOS would not be part of that. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:43, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I am one of the authors on the Lenkov-verse page. This "universe" consists of the CBS reboots of Hawaii Five-0, Magnum P.I., and MacGyver. They HAVE shared continuity with the NCIS universe with three crossovers with the L.A. branch. There are already loose plans to cross Magnum with the new NCIS: Hawaii. I will say this: while there isn't a real name for the "universe" in question, all these shows obviously share the same continuity. Aussie Legend is correct in noting that the "reboot" of Star Trek (The Kelvin Timeline, as it were) wouldn't include The Original Series -- HOWEVER, it is a by-product of the Original Timeline, which Star Trek: Picard showed us. Furthermore, Aussie, your argument is contradictory and a bit ridiculous. You cannot claim that JAG isn't part of the NCIS franchise when JAG literally gave birth to it and has had multiple character crossovers with two of its shows. The argument that JAG hasn't crossed over with NCIS: NOLA and, therefore, isn't truly part of the franchise is also equally ridiculous, not to mention irrelevant. We're talking about the NCIS universe, which JAG is a part of. Saying that JAG isn't a part of the NCIS universe because it didn't crossover with NOLA is like saying that Star Trek TOS isn't part of the Star Trek universe because Spock hasn't appeared on ST: Voyager. I am in agreement with LA (T) on this. JAG may not share any continuity with the two (or even three, now) other NCIS shows (L.A. and New Orleans) but NCIS is one big franchise which started with JAG. Since NCIS obviously shares a LOT of continuity with the other NCIS shows and JAG shared a lot of continuity with the original NCIS, then JAG is related to the other NCIS shows by proxy. The notability of The Lenkov-verse and the NCIS Franchise alone make this article-worthy and I would love to get it going.AntiHeroDwight (talk) 01:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Splitting proposal

I propose that the Universe section be split into a separate page called something like: CBS Drama Shared Universe. The universe currently includes 9 shows, and has over 50 crossovers. 68.187.143.13 (talk) 15:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

There is only one small section about the universe and none of it is sourced. At best it's original research. There is absolutely no justification in splitting that into a separate article. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

You don't think it can be sourced? I could do that in minutes. The same was said of The Lenkov-verse and we sourced that sucker half to death.AntiHeroDwight (talk) 01:41, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Magnum P.I.

meanwhile there is a crossover between Hawaii Five-0 and Magnum P.I. (H50: 10x12 "Ihea ’oe i ka wa a ka ua e loku ana?"; MPI: 2x12 "Desperate Measures")

Down Under

Why no mention of the planned "NCIS: Sydney" set for Australia ? ? ? 2600:8800:204:C400:389F:8C2C:2927:60A3 (talk) 23:05, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Background music

Does the NCIS director purposely make the background music so loud that it is hard to hear the dialog? 2601:58B:C01:8B20:84E3:9127:5389:7BA5 (talk) 03:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

when to include mention of NCIS: TONY & ZIVA

Howard from NYC (talk) 17:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

has been announced as being broadcast in 2024;

when to add to crosslinks? list of spin offs? when to create its own article?