Talk:Hawaii Five-0 (2010 TV series)/Archive 1

Article name
The use of a zero instead of an oh in the name of this article may be a clever solution to the disambiguation issue, but it's too clever. -68.76.16.14 (talk) 17:20, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not clever, it's the name of the show. see this press release.  X  eworlebi (talk) 17:27, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's incredibly not clever; in fact it's downright stupid, especially considering that the original show also officially used a zero, which was (and is) widely ignored (including, I might add, by wikipedia) since everyone pronounced it as an "Oh". And guess what, everyone is pronouncing the new series with an "Oh" as well, and wikipedia is supposed to employ common usage in titles.  "Oh" well.... 70.131.159.96 (talk) 10:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC

But it is stll very confusing. At least please use that press release as a source and explain in the body about the subtle distiction of the name. W Nowicki (talk) 23:43, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No need to bother. The reboot is so bad that it will be canceled in short order, and quickly no longer meet WP's notability criteria, and just get folded back into the original series article. 70.131.159.96 (talk) 10:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, need to bother. The series has become a hit, and was renewed for Season 2 on May 15, 2011.  Some diehard fans of the original consider the reboot to even be superior to the original, myself included. Bill S. (talk) 00:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * "The reboot is so bad that it will be canceled in short order..." Wrong!  --В²C ☎ 19:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * If you actually compare the title screen to the font used in the title credits then you will see that it is clearly an O is used and not an 0.94.197.68.188 (talk) 20:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)


 * OK - from the CBS site:-
 * The original series = Hawaii Five-O
 * The new series = Hawaii Five-0 -
 * I suppose that technically we should be calling the new one "Hawaii five-zero"
 * Chaosdruid (talk) 21:57, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I concur that it is a bit confusing to the uninformed (of which I would say I was one). That said, I don't know the wiki standard for changing a name that is correct yet is confusing with other names. JesseMSmith (talk) 03:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The standard for such things is to add a hatnote, which both articles have.  X  eworlebi (talk) 14:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Why not change the articles name to Hawaii Five-0 (2010 series)?--Klltr (talk) 11:45, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * By the looks of both series logos, i'm pretty sure they're both Hawaii 5-O (Not long ago, CH 10 aired the pilot of the show, it was titled Hawaii 5-O — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keycoke (talk • contribs) 11:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not according to CBS - see my previous comment :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 10:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

There was never an on-screen explanation given for the name of the Five-O task force in the original series, but in the re-imagining the team clearly bases their name on McGarrett's high school football jersey number "50". This occurs at the end of episode 3. Therefore it makes sense for the new series to be Five-0 (which also avoids anyone calling the show "Hawaii Fifty" :P Jake fuersturm (talk) 23:35, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Both titles refer to the numbers 5 and 0, the letter O meaning the number 0, there is not title change. I really wonder what you actually see in this following/also provided above/ link. The video is subtitled both "Hawaii Five-0" and "Hawaii Five-O" -cbs.com (E-Kartoffel (talk) 16:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC))
 * The title screen of the original 1970s series actually uses the number "0" rather than the letter "O" imdb.com/video . -Whilst the new series' title looks more like containing the letter "O". The German title of that series was "Hawaii Fünf-Null" (E-Kartoffel (talk) 16:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC))

I've added a sentence to the intro to document the difference.  Will Beback   talk    02:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 * If you look at the included images it appears to be the other way around, so perhaps we should change it to

"Hawaii Five-O" --79.69.105.94 (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I see that on the Hawaii Five-0 page there is a banner that mentions this discussion and asks that no changes be made until this discussion reaches a consensus. And yet, the most recent contribution to this discussion is more than four years old. What does it take to reach a consensus here? I vote for "Hawaii Five-0 (2010 Series)" or the equivalent, common usage on wikipedia and what's the big deal? Ericp-nh (talk) 12:59, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikia
I just started an Hawaii Five-0 wikia ,and i need help.208.54.45.68 (talk) 23:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Copy & Paste WikiPedia is Creative Commons--88.111.113.78 (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Taryn Manning
Taryn Manning was billed as "also starring", so I'm gonna put her in the new info box. J52y (talk) 21:45, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * She's not a regular, and doesn't belong with main cast in article or infobox. See the CBS site.

TV show production jargon?
I don't think most readers are going to know what a "showrunner" is. I also think most people will trip over "script" when it's used as a verb. I betcha there's a Wiki policy against specialist jargon, but I don't have time to hunt for it right now. (Heck, I can't even remember how to do italics in here.)68.89.149.2 (talk) 22:18, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyone exposed to entertainment news during the past 10-15 years is familiar with the term "showrunner", which has its own Wikipedia article and therefore does not require explanation here. "Script" used as a verb to describe the process of creating dialog or a screenplay is almost as old, and it's been used as a verb in computer programming at least since the mid-1990s.  Neither is "specialist jargon", as they are widely used by people not employed in either industry. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 20:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Kono or Kona?
I'm a little perplexed by Grace Park's character's name. Some places I see it as Kono, and others cheekily as Kona. I was about to correct it on one page, but then I see "...Chin's cousin, a rookie cop nicknamed Kono." on the main page. Was there an introduction or explanation of a nickname ever? Farglesword (talk) 08:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Main issue is that the original Kono from the 1968 series was a male. Changing the name would have been like changing the name from Boomer to Boomera. Jake fuersturm (talk) 23:37, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think the original series version of the character is an issue at all. An early episode of the new series stated that one is her real name and the other is a nickname, but the significance of either (i.e. what either name means and why she has a nickname that is almost identical to her real name) was not explained and the similarity between the two makes it all the more confusing.  However, she is generally called "Kono" on the show.  We'd need a transcript of the early episode that differentiates the name and nickname to know which was which. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 19:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It is my understanding that Kona is her birth certificate name and Kono is her nickname. Like another Hawaiian-born person, it is like Barack and Barry. (Oh crud, I brought the birther debate to this page. :) )Lilly (talk) 05:25, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Kono
Kono is her nickname and Kona is her birth name! --88.111.113.78 (talk) 17:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Is this show really a 'procedural'?
Does this show really come under the category of 'procedural'? The show has just premiered here and in the hype, Alex O'L said that audiences were getting tired of procedurals. It seems they kill more people in the pilot episode (and beat suspects during interview time) than an entire season of the original. Maybe 'procedural' should be replaced with 'police action show'?Foofbun (talk) 22:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That doesn't mean the premise isn't about solving crimes. The body count is just a side-effect.  The average episode of NCIS: Los Angeles probably kills just as many people, and I don't think anyone's disputed that they're a procedural either. Jake fuersturm (talk) 23:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * A story has to do more than just solve a crime to be considered a procedural. It has to convincingly demonstrate the real methods of evidence gathering and logic used to piece together the methods, motive and opportunity of the crime.  An argument could be made that Five-0's near-science-fictional technology, contrived negation of the need to operate within the bounds of law, happenstance appearance of missing evidence and obvious suspects, and leaps of logic in absence of evidence would actually make it not a procedural.  Unfortunately, that's interpretation and original research, not reliance on a third-party source.  IMO, Foofbun is correct, it's an action show and not a procedural.  But we can't just say that in the article. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 19:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Police procedural really isn't a term we use in the US to describe shows such as this -- we call them crime dramas. In my experience, it's British viewers who add the label police procedural.  My answer to the question above, then, would be no, it's not a police procedural, nor is any US crime drama. Drmargi (talk) 19:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You are correct; I think the term is legitimately used only in reference to crime novels or detective fiction. Not all crime dramas are procedurals, but all procedurals would be crime dramas.  A crime drama like CSI could probably be considered a procedural (even though crime scene investigators do not actually questions suspects or make arrests) because the focus is on the process of investigation.  Dragnet could be considered procedural.  Law and Order is to an extent procedural.  Five-0's tendency to gloss over procedure and jump to the car chases and firefights is what makes it more of an action series.  But we're still dwelling in the realm of opinion and not scholarship. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 20:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * But you missed the key point: police procedural isn't a term we use in the US.  Given that, whether it's a procedural or not is moot.  In the US, it's called a crime drama, and that's the term that should be applied.  Drmargi (talk) 20:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, only use American terms, thanks. Wikipedia is knowledge crafted by american 12 year olds aimed at the same, and nothing you say is going to change that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.7.28 (talk) 09:44, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Is Kono a Detective?
The listing of cast members shows Kono to hold the title/rank of Detective. My understanding is that most local police forces in the U.S. require their officers to have at least several years of experience before being eligible for appointment as a Detective, and Kono is clearly a rookie. Is there an on-screen source that settles this? Jake fuersturm (talk) 00:17, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * She is definitely not a detective, and that's been very clear from the beginning. Drmargi (talk) 00:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks. I didn't want to remove that reference until it had been clarified. Jake fuersturm (talk) 01:23, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * As Drmargi said, in the Honolulu Police Dept. a detective is an actual rank (they rank as/with sergeants) rather than an assignment like in most law enforcement agencies. I would imagine Kono would have to have at least 2 or 3 years service before she could be a detective. I believe the Honolulu Police rank structure goes like this: Officer, Corporal, Sergeant/Detective, Lieutenant, Captain, Major, Assistant Chief, Deputy Chief, and Chief.24.46.236.67 (talk) 01:47, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I didn't say detective is a rank, which it's not. Detective is an assignment -- a police officer makes a lateral move to detective, and police officers can be assigned to a detective bureau without being detectives.  Danny is both a detective (assignment) and a Sergeant (rank), whereas Kono is a police officer.  Assignment to a department's detective bureau is an elite assignment in and of itself; earning the title Detective more so  -- it takes experience, skill, and generally, passing one or more examinations.  A newly graduated officer would have no opportunity to even be considered for assignment to a detective bureau, much less be eligible to be considered for Detective.  Drmargi (talk) 02:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Proper use of Okinas:101
Many of the Hawaiian titles have ʻokinas. CBS uses them as apostropes, however that is not correct. To insert an ʻokina, you simply type okina between TWO SETS. Remember that Oʻahu has an ʻokina. However although it is more correct to say "Hawaiʻi" as the English language has fully absorbed Hawaii without the ʻokina, I think we should leave it out in the word Hawaii. Also don't forget the okinas at the beginning of a word such as Ohana.

Lilly (talk) 05:21, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Outside of the "wiki" context, however, plenty of programs have difficulty with the "okina" (glottal stop) character. I tried copying a name with such a character [under WinXP] and it was replaced by a box (geta?) symbol. I can also see search engines having difficulty with them, though in truth search engines *also* would choke on apostrophes. [As an example of apostrophes causing trouble, try a search for an Irish name like O'Connor or O'Reilly.] I fixed these symbols for some entries in the "Featured Songs" table and corrected some other flaws, but I simply copied the "okinas" from other rows to ensure consistency -- it is easier.

Dmacgr 22 (talk) 05:13, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

File:H5O Soundtrack Cover.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
Technically it is in the same -verse I hope to see more crossovers --88.111.113.78 (talk) 17:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Crossover
So with Kensi's appearance on Hawaii Five-0, does that place this show in the same universe as JAG and the NCIS shows? --114.73.42.115 (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about that since I don't watch NCIS or JAG, but calling one scene with one NCIS cast member a crossover is a stretch, to say the least. Drmargi (talk) 01:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about a crossover, but it definitely puts it in the same universe.76.246.49.58 (talk) 11:37, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Technically it is in the same -verse I hope to see more crossovers --88.111.113.78 (talk) 17:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Late reply&mdash;Season 3, episode 21 of NCIS: Los Angeles clearly established that these shows take place in the same universe. See this link for more info. (I think that a crossover section might be called for in the article, but leave that decision to those who edit here regularly.) Etamni &#124; &#9993; &#124; ✓ 10:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Product placement
I just watched my first episode of this series. I couldn't help noticing the blatant product placement. At least a couple of characters have brand new Chevys. Apparently they just went to the market when the episode originally aired. I think there also was showcasing of an LG mobile phone with Windows Phone 7.5. Some googling also revealed a clip where Subway meals are clearly advertised. Should product placement be mentioned in the article on this show? It's clear, unavoidable and very visible. Ristipiste 21:19, 2 June 2012 UTC

Both the original series and this one have agreements with various companies for product placement. Most notably for the original series they had an agreement with Ford that lasted the full run. The product placement should be noted in the article somewhere, but this show is not the only one with blatant product placement. Just about any series on network or cable TV has numerous product placements in each episode. The more high profile the location and/or the cast members are, the higher the number of product placements. Films have also been infiltrated with product placements. Gmosaki (talk) 07:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of product placement, has anyone else noticed that the bad guys always drive Fords? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.248.184.231 (talk) 22:20, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

We should include this in the main article--88.111.113.78 (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

+1 for mentioning this in the article. I have never seen so many Microsoft products featuring so prominently in one single series or movie. Most other series use made-up interfaces, some obviously had a helping hand in props selection from Cupertino, but Five-0 takes it to a level nothing short of ridiculous. An almost paramilitary special unit that routinely exchanges sensitive data with the CIA, the Navy and other agencies uploads case documents to SkyDrive and coordinates via Windows Live Messenger? Yeah, right. --188.174.147.142 (talk) 17:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Error in table wikicode
The last line in the "featured music" table (Hawaii_Five-0) is broken, but I can't fix it because I don't know what to put in the last three columns. Nineko (talk) 04:23, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Characters
Suggestion: create a separate page for the characters - Acsian88 (talk) 15:22, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

The Governor
The 'current' governor -- Samuel "Sam" Denning -- is played by Richard T. Jones; no problem there. However, during the original series' run, the governor -- Paul Jameson -- was played by Richard Denning. Is it possible that the 'current' governor's last name is a homage to the actor who played the governor in the original series? (Yes, I know Richard Denning did not play the governor in the very first episode of the original series, but he played him after that for the rest of the series.)68.2.115.99 (talk) 00:46, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Request to add Lou Grover(Chi McBride) to table
request someone to add Lou Grover to the table as Season 4 main — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.92.37.35 (talk) 20:11, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Dispute on theme song release
The full 3½ minute version of the theme song from the new series has been released, and here it is: |title= Hawaii Five-O - Theme Song [Full Version ] Discpad (talk) 16:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Here's the problem, this video is of the full version of the original series (in 1980), and first impressions is that it sound exactly the same as the video you highlighted. How exactly is your featured video of the new series when it sounds exactly like the original, but nothing compared to the re-imagined version? -- Matthew RD 20:05, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

time to ad
that M. Borth will be leaving.Phd8511 (talk) 23:02, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Chi McBride
If Chi McBride is now a series regular (as indicated in the cast listing) then why doesn't he appear in the opening credits of the show? -- 24.212.139.102 (talk) 04:35, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Remake or "Next Generation"
Is this a remake of the 1960's show or a "Next Generation" of the Show, McGarrett's dad might be played by another actor, due to the death of Jack Lord, but McGarrett's dad seems to have the same history as the 1960's McGarrett 156.33.241.9 (talk) 01:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

This is a "reboot". In this series' universe, there was NOT a previous incarnation of 5-O. I think the history similarity of the current McGarrett's father to Lord's character is more of an homage to the original series.68.2.115.99 (talk) 00:33, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Apparently there is another McGarrett homage -- the license plate number on McGarrett's Silverado is the same as the one used on the Fords driven by Jack Lord's character.68.2.115.99 (talk) 01:08, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Move text in "Episodes" to a new section called "Plot"
The article for this TV series has a peculiar structure. The usual way that TV series articles are structured is including a separate Plot section after the introduction, which gives a more or less detailed overview of the complete story so far (until the currently last aired episode). Instead here what is supposed to be in a Plot section is actually in the Episodes section. I discovered this while looking for the plot of the series in this article and it took me some time to find it. My suggestion is to re-work the episodes section by leaving some of the text there such as how each episode is structured but move the rest to a new section called Plot as mentioned above in order to improve omho greatly the readability and overall structure of the article.--95.113.251.84 (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Character Info
The character descriptions have a separate page where it is easier to navigate and does not block other information on the main page. Should it be in two places, because that seems pointless. No there wikipedia page has it that way why should this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whyedithere (talk • contribs) 21:09, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Removal of character descriptions
has been removing the character descriptions from the article after creating List of Hawaii Five-0 characters. He was quite correctly reverted the first time by, and I've reverted him twice. I've explained to him on his talk page that when character articles are created, we don't just delete all the content from the main series article. Basic descriptions should still be present, in prose form as explained in WP:TVCAST. Tables, such as the one that exists in this article, have been discussed at WT:TV and received no support at all for inclusion in the main article, and should be moved to the character article, or deleted entirely. He has copied the character descriptions in List of Hawaii Five-0 characters from this article but has not provided the attribution required in both the source article (this one) and the destination article (the character article), per Wikipedia's licensing requirements which are explained in Copying within Wikipedia. However, Whyedithere has continued edit-warring and I've had to leave a warning on his talk page. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 21:19, 20 July 2015 (UTC) You really need a life dude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whyedithere (talk • contribs) 21:53, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Hawaii Five-O which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 04:29, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Clarification of production company names
I was unable to verify the information given about the starting date for the second production company and I was loathe to make any punctuation changes to attempt to clarify the sentence itself. Thanks Norawashere (talk) 17:20, 28 October 2015 (UTC)