Talk:Pilot (Jericho)

EMP and Denver cloud
The information in the sections marked "Electromagnetic Pulse Effects", and the section of the Trivia on the yield of the Denver explosion should be eliminated, as they constitute Original Research. In any case, one simply can't cite the entire contents of the Nuclear Effects book to support their theory about weapon yields - unless the book refers specifically to the mushroom cloud in the Jericho program itself, in which case, we'll need a page number.
 * Agreed. It's highly unlikely that a groundburst nuclear device would create any kind of significant EMP effect outside of its own blast radius.  In order for the EMP effect to disable electronics, a large nuclear weapon (on the order of megatons) has to be detonated at an extremely high altitude.  So away it goes.  MikeFTM 18:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Reference

 * The shape of the mushroom cloud seen in the episode is suggestive of an atmospheric nuclear blast in sub-megaton range, with maximum height of roughly 50-70 thousand feet. It is unlikely that such an explosion, should it occur in Denver, would be so visible anywhere in Kansas. [1]

The reference for this is an 8 megabyte PDF file, surely we can find something much smaller in a more conventional file type to support this claim? 211.30.71.59 12:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I am no expert on air bursts, but someone please explain to me how a burst at 50-70 thousand feet will show a rising mushroom column from at or very near ground level? The distance from Denver to Jericho coupled with the curvature of the Earth cannot even remotely approach 50-70 kft. The intervening mountains visible in the shot guarantee that. Air bursts don't shoot a narrow column *down*, they shoot one up in the form of superheated material rising at insane speeds. In addition, an air burst would imply an ICMB, or rather a dozen of them within an hour of each other, which while possible is highly unlikely even in the supposed 2009 the series is set in. 216.99.212.251 22:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Official Title Of Pilot Episode
Per CBS, and as reported on Kryptonsite's Jericho forums, the official title of the pilot is "The First 17 Hours". The links need to be updated accordingly if someone more versed in that high a level of change would care to make them. 66.90.151.114 08:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Care to cite where CBS says its "The First 17 Hours"? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 08:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The CBS Jericho web site lists "Pilot" as the title, as does IMDB and most web hits - the only one I found with "17 Hours" is Kryptonsite. "Pilot" it is, barring any proof otherwise. --Ckatz chat spy  08:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * My DVD version calls it "Pilot: The First Seventeen Hours". --Deadly&forall;ssassin 10:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

"Trivia" section
I've restored one item from the deleted "Trivia" section. It's the note regarding the shooting and set locations. The other items warranted deletion, but this one is worth incorporating into the article. (I've also added a ""fact" tag so that a citation can be added.) --Ckatz chat spy  16:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * We need to get a cite before adding it, I'll see if I can find one. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking - although it doesn't actually have to be removed first. In a case like this, where the item has a citation request, it is fine to leave it in while searching. --Ckatz chat spy  16:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, some people remove, and some request citations. I prefer to remove and wait my self. See WP:ATT. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. However, if you do remove the material, the suggested process is to then put it on the talk page so that others are aware of it. Otherwise, valid (but uncited) material can easily disappear from the article. --Ckatz chat spy  17:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Others prefer to leave items in while they search for information. Ckatz has requested that it stays in until a reliable source is found. I agree with this. I will support his/her request to leave the fact tag in as per WP:ATT.


 * However, this policy should not be used to cause disruption by removing material for which reliable sources could easily or reasonably be found — except in the case of contentious material about living persons, which must be removed immediately


 * I suggest you find concensus before making reverts to what appears to be a valid edit. Munta 17:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The operative words there are, of course, "easily" and "reasonably". Also I'm not sure what a "concensus" is, however WP:ATT is policy :-). thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 17:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should read WP:CON which is also official wiki policy Munta 18:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * So you meant a consensus :-P? Perhaps you should read it as well :-) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * While you are at it - try reading dyslexia before making silly coments about a simple spelling mistake on a talk page Munta 18:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have added the citation and would like to let you all know that it took les than 10 seconds on google to find this. If less time was spent reverting edits and this time was spent improving wiki instead then think how much more we could achive. Munta 17:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you'd like to tell your search terms, you know, to help others in future, for ten second searches ;-)? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 17:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure no problem - Jericho Calvert Studios Second link down. Far quicker than reverting an edit and editing the talk page. Im sure this is classed as "easily" and "reasonably" Munta 17:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Music
I've been unable to locate a verifiable non-user submitted source for the music, moving here till such a time that I or someone else locate one. Matthew 17:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Jericho 1x01 "Pilot".jpg
Image:Jericho 1x01 "Pilot".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 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) 18:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)