Talk:The Pretender (TV series)

Chart?

As someone who never saw this show, I'm utterly lost when trying to read the chart seen on this page. Can someone explain what it means, and also re-work it so that newcomers would actually be able to read and understand it? "2001" "IotH"? These things need explanations.

Pbones 01:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right. I didn't do the chart but even I, as an avid fan, didn't get what IotH was for a few minutes. I will try to clarify this chart. --ImmortalGoddezz 01:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, edited. Should be easier to understand now. Hope it looks better. --ImmortalGoddezz 02:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if the chart was confusing. As a fan, it made sense to me :) --CDaly CDaly

Serial impostor? POV

I am going to remove the sentence "Inspired by serial impostors such as Ferdinand Waldo Demara", becouse it is an unsourced detail, and POV, unless you can prove that the authors have mentioned this issue in an interview. Brian W 20:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

A source can be found here. It's on the website of Patrick Bauchau, the actor playing Sydney, which is definitely an authoritative source, stating directly that "[Steven Long] mentioned that the initial inspiration was the life of Ferdinand Demara, a man who actually had been able to practice medicine and do other things without having been trained for them." It wouldn't even be POV to mention that Jarod bears some resemblance to Ferdinand Waldo Demara in method and ability, if not motives and morality. --TexasDex 22:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Episodes

List of The Pretender episodes

Feel free to contribute to the summaries. I'm still in the process of getting screenies. -therearenospoons 06:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Characters

The character sections has a few problems. To start with it's incomplete, it's missing some of the major characters of this television show. The characters that are covered are littered with weasel words, and shows original research (ex. Jarod is a composed man, but sometimes his tortured soul gets the best of him. On two occasions, he could just stop himself from seeking freedom from his pain in beating the abductor of a child. At the end of an episode, Jarod is often seen crying, or walking a lonely street in sorrow.) which violates the NPOV policy that wiki holds. I believe the 'back story' section covers the series pretty adequately (though if necessary it could be expanded), and I don't believe the Characters section really needs to remain. If nobody objects to this I'm going to delete it in a week. If you do have problems with it please let me know beforehand. --ImmortalGoddezz 18:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I removed the section as there is no objection. If you do have an objection/comment/thought please post it here before reinstating the characters section. Thank You. --ImmortalGoddezz 13:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The Centre ?

Is "The Centre" wirth a new article?--Brown Shoes22 15:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

My thoughts

I'm a rather recent fan of this series, and I've been (very late-night) thinking:

• Perhaps there needs to be a real Jarod article- somehow a short summary about him in the main article and character section seems inadequate, especially since ever single one of the Pokemon have an article and he does not.
• The chart about how many episodes each character has been in is weird. It's really only served to make me wonder why "Kyle" is not mentioned and killing me as to why Brigitte's last name is Parker (I have only seen through the third season's fourth episode as of right now). =P Obviously someone's worked hard figuring it all out, but what is the point?
• The List of The Pretender (TV series) characters seems odd that there's only a few characters in it. Anyway, it'd be nice if we could get links for the characters' names going to specific lines in the character article rather than to the actors' or the main one. I'm thinking maybe one article for the main/recurring characters with longer bios, and then a separate article for the minor characters who are only in one episode (with the current TOC template there).
• The Trivia section on the main article needs work- it looks like a giant block of text, and therefore my eyes desperately want to avoid it. It needs some clipping up and wiki-links added.
• I think "Synopsis" and "Back story" should be combined into a "Plot."

There's a few other things as well, but I cannot think of them. It's a definite I'll be doing a lot of this stuff myself, but if there are any other thoughts or concerns, I'd like to hear them. Also, for the record, because I haven't yet been through all that's available, it's reasonable to expect some of what I do could be inaccurate- it's why I've been working on the episodes list but haven't gotten very far (I've been trying to wikilink as accurately as possible and that's difficult if I don't know what's happened yet!). If something's awry, feel completely free to fix it and I'll try not to wonder too much! -- Sarrandúin ^{[ Talk + Contribs ]} 07:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I feel that I truly liked the show and I feel that they should bring it back on or at least let Miss Parker and Jarod settle down with each other and get Married to one another. Or have him work at a fastfood restaurant, like 'Burger King, or Mcdonalds. Or have it that he finally finds his mom. I feel that the series should make a come back. Nancy

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [1]. Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia. --Maniwar (talk) 03:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

DVD Releases Dispute

This section has become the centre of a very heated dispute due to the persistent editing of the section by AnmaFinotera. At the heart of the dispute is whether a table is a relevant way of presenting information. I feel VERY STRONGLY that a table is a relevant way of presenting information while the above noted user does not. A table is more visually appealing and easier to read than blocks of paragraph. Wikipedia is supposedly an online "Enclyclopedia", which is basically a collection of information on various topics. Each article should present info in a concise and simple manner- i.e. no endless blocks of text. Regarding this section of the article whose purpose is to present information on any DVD releases of the TV series in question, I feel that a table would be the best way to present this information that is straightforward and allows users of Wikipedia to get the information they need quickly without having to read through paragraphs of text to find any info on any DVD releases.

As a result of this ongoing dispute, I request that the above noted section of this article be closed to editing until this dispute is resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Any administrators (if they exist) should ensure that no further edits are made to the DVD releases section of this article. HeMan5 (talk) 16:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

relevant discussion copied from User talk:HeMan5 and User talk:AnmaFinotera

Please stop your continued efforts to clutter this article with an inappropriate DVD table. These do not belong in main television series article, period. Your first attempt to change it to a very bloated table was undone, and per WP:BRD you should have taken it to the talk page then, instead of continuing to try returning to put it back. Per the WP:MOSTV and Wikipedia style/content guidelines, this is excessive detail, inappropriately formatted, and completely unnecessary. The episode list has the full DVD release dates, not the main article. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 15:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Please stop deleting content that was already present in the article before, do you not have anything better to do with your time?! You objected to the more detailed table so I reverted back to the more simple, straightforward table. This table existed in the article for a long time, why was it not deleted before if it was in Appropriate?! Also, many other TV series articles contain table in their DVD release section, I don't see why this article is any different? I will continue to re-insert as I don't see the reason why it cannot be in the article. Let the games begin!! HeMan5 (talk) 15:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The table does not belong there, nor does WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS justify you trying to ruin the article again (particularly when the main reason those other series have them is because you've gone on a campaign to insert them). High quality articles do not. It was NOT appropriate, it just hadn't been deleted before because no one has been working on the actually clean it up, which I have started doing recently. I just hadn't gotten around to dealing with that yet because I had to fix the episode list first. That's done. If you continue reverting, you will just get a 3RR violation and be blocked. Stop being disruptive. The actual valid content is still there, just not the crap that doesn't belong.-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 15:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

As per WP:MOSTV, no where does it state that a table of DVD release info is not allowed, so please show me the exact Wikipedia rule that forbids tables?!? HeMan5 (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

It also doesn't say "stick the DVD releases in a huge ugly table and include all kinds of details about the contents". See WP:NOT and WP:SUMMARY and go look at actual high class TV articles instead of all the low class ones. Go read the previous discussions in the television project. And go read Wikipedia's rules on appropriate uses of tables, which are not to flood articles with excessive sales catalog data and bloat main articles with minor and trivial information. You might also want to try reading WP:NONFREE and the other image guidelines as you seem to have a lot of problems with those from your talk page. This is a TEXT encyclopedia, not a visual mark up one. Nor is the information relevant nor important for the main article. The bulk of any regular Wikipedia article is PROSE not tables just because you think it should all be tables and bullets for "visual learners". Prose has always been strongly preferred. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 16:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

"A huge ugly table", is your opinion and while you are entitled to it, it does not mean that everyone else feels the same. As for these 'high class' TV articles, I see no example given in your little rant, care to provide one such article? You have disintegrated into name calling and making accusations about my character, I am quite sure that is also not allowed under Wikipedia guidelines. You have no clue about reality and are just spouting non-sense- what sales catalog data are you referring to?? The table contains info relevant to the topic of discussion- DVD Releases!!! If in your brain that means sales data then not much I can do. HeMan5 (talk) 16:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

One such article Meerkat Manor, a featured article and part of a featured topic (and, in case you are not aware, FA articles are the best of the best). Another one: Degrassi: The Next Generation, also a featured article. I have not made "accusations about your character" but your editing habits and lack of apparent knowledge or skills in crafting good articles per Wikipedia guidelines. Please point to a single remark I made that was a personal attack. You, however, are descending into personal attacks by claiming I have "no clue about reality" and removing my note you and calling it a "post by a vandal." Sales catalog data - extensive details about the DVD contents beyond release dates, method of release, and a general summary of features. Extensive details such as you added are found on DVD sales sites and are not necessary nor appropriate for a summary article of the work. The table does not contain relevant info, it contains excessive minute details which do not belong in an encyclopedia. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 16:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

This matter is now being discussed here: The Pretender, should you feel that you have anything further to say on this subject please post your comments there. I have nothing further to say to you, my views have been made clear on the talk page. HeMan5 (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

My views on the issue should already be clear from above. A DVD table is not appropriate content for the main article at all. I have posted to the television project for additional views. Meanwhile, HeMan5, please be advised that administrators have been notified of the edit warring and noted that if you revert again, you are subject to blocking. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 17:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

If all you have is region 1 then I would stick to prose. If you have region 2 and 4, I would say that opting for a table is the better avenue. As for the details of the DVDs, IMO, I've always been against listing out everything (we aren't Amazon, if someone wants to know what a box set has specifically then they can go pick one up), but giving a general overview (e.g. "The DVDs typically consiste of episode commentary, etc.) is good for prose. WP:MOSTV does not address this specifically, and we probably should start a thread on the talk page to hash this out in some more detail.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:28, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Not sure if there is a region 2 or 4 release. For now, all I've seen is region 1, which is already detailed, by season, on the fuller episode list. For FA series articles I've seen, usually that's where the regional release dates seem to go, rather than replicating the table in the main article as well. Also agree, the MOS should probably be updated a bit more to clarify format. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 17:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

HeMan5, please be advised that administrators have been notified of the edit warring and noted that if you revert again, you are subject to blocking.

So much for being Civil, I consider this a direct threat and will not tolerate such behaviour. I'm done with this site and your Draconian rules! HeMan5 (talk) 18:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

That was not a threat, it was a notification since you erased those put on your talk page, after you'd already been warned several times to stop reverting, overwriting new changes. And yes, Wikipedia does have "rules" in the form of policies and guidelines. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

John Hershey's The Child Buyer

I've read a little bit about this show and watched a little bit on hulu but the premise of training child prodigies in a secret school for special purposes reminded me of John Hershey's The Child Buyer. Has that ever been mentioned in the mainstream media (TV show reviews, interviews, etc.)? Were the originators / writers influenced by The Child Buyer? Does anyone else see the relationship and is it worth developing on the Main Page? AdderUser (talk) 03:54, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

<HTML><META HTTP-EQUIV="content-type" CONTENT="text/html;charset=utf-8">

John Brunner's The Shock Wave Rider

When I saw it on TV it reminded me of The Shockwave Rider: A young man, grown up in a secret institution, escaped because of moral conflicts, hiding from his instructors, but using the skills he learned from them to search for his past. And he is also capable of acting in miscellaneous occupations after short preparation. Is there any hint that the creators of "The Pretender" read that novel?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.112.93.139 (talk) 20:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

AdderUser (talk) 04:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)