Talk:Southland (TV series)

Available on Hulu
Im not sure what the best way to add it to the article is but the pulot is already available on hulu http://www.hulu.com/watch/65741/southland-sneak-peek-pilot 65.164.22.45 (talk) 00:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's available a number of places, but that's not really appropriate to the article. No need to add any of it. Drmargi (talk) 01:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The date that its supposed to be start on TV is included so it seems relevant to mention that the first time its on TV is not the first time the general public can/could see it, seeing as its not the norm. 65.164.22.45 (talk) 01:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The infobox is designed to cover the first broadcast date. Screeners, such as what are on Hulu, NBC's website and On Demand aren't unusual.  What is unusual is that they're available to the public.  The only thing that might be done is add a sentence, if you can source it appropriately, that the pilot episode was made available via electronic media the week prior to its first broadcast date. I'm just not sure you can source it appropriately, nor how notable that is. Drmargi (talk) 01:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge
Support It is my opinion that the List of Southland episodes should be merged into this article. There are not enough episodes to warrant a new page for them. This article also needs to be bulked up a bit, and the list of episodes can do this. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 20:11, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Support It is far too soon for a separate article on episodes. If the series survives the season, then yes. Until then, let's leave it with the main article. Drmargi (talk) 00:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Against Since it already has its own article, we should keep it. If this series does well, in a few months somebody will just have to go through the extra work to make it again. All developed TV series articles have a separate page and it is Wikipedia's goal to make well developed articles about the topics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.217.236 (talk) 03:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Against Just leave it as it is. It'll beef up week by week. Agree with the person above. IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 22:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Support The show's article itself is fairly bare, and the list of episodes is short enough it won't clutter the page. We can easily just copy and paste the episodes article. If they need to be separated, then the episodes can be copy and pasted again. Chastayo (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment It's also worth noting the first season is only seven episodes. That leaves two short articles vulnerable to deletion rather than one substantive article that can be divided later if need be. Drmargi (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with Drmargi. If we increase the content of this article it will be less vulnerable to deletion. I'm not even sure that the article covering the episodes eve satisfies notability?! Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 20:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I've merged the two articles. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 18:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Boston Herald review
I created this reference for the Shawn Hatosy article and felt it might be of use here:



Enjoy. --SSBohio 02:40, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Theme music
I don't know the proper way to add it but the theme music is from a very famous Portuguese song named "Cancao Do Mar" by Dulce Pontes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSIGWEcR5Dc. I am very sorry if I did this the wrong way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.188.42 (talk) 02:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I listened to the video, and you're right - it is the same song IF the song is labeled correctly. Trouble is, there's no opening music credit for Southland, no music credits on NBC's Southland page, and YouTube is not a reliable source.  So until we have a reliable source that it's the same version of the same song, we can't list it in the Infobox. Drmargi (talk) 02:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I checked the credits on the In-Demand version, and there are no music credits aside from "Music Supervision" so now way to reliably credit the opening music. Drmargi (talk) 07:41, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the original poster of the theme music section. Here is a link to Dulce Pontes official site with the original music video if it helps. http://dulcepontes.net/downloads/detalhe.php?id=64&tipo1=0&tipo=4&flash=2&grupo=sons —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.89.196.40 (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, Sarah Brightman did a cover of that song, which she called "Harem" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy6BN1PdUDY, and which is noted as a cover here on Wikipedia, and which also uses the same musical phrase (in a slightly different arrangement) as the Southland theme music. I'd say all of this info and the above info is enough to credit Dulce Pontes's "Cancao Do Mar." 70.95.164.85 (talk) 18:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, it's not. You need a direct reference that says Southland used the piece. Drmargi (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Updates: It's credited on IMDB http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1299368/soundtrack (the original composer is Ferrer Trinidade); in this well-researched blog http://thenewnixon.org/2009/05/09/tnn-weekly-weekend-reward-44/; and in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulce_Pontes. Since it's only a 30-second snippet (sample, in other words), NBC doesn't have to credit it, and so I assume it is never going to. 70.95.164.85 (talk) 19:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The theme music is called "Dance of the Fairy Cop with Baton Shoved up Ass by Queer Cop John Cooper." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.132.252 (talk) 00:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.225.140 (talk)

Season 2?
When will season 2 start? Any information? --78.50.244.72 (talk) 10:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The only information available now, is that there will be season 2. It should start around the same time next year. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk |Sign 11:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Reception
What are the rules on who should be classed as reception? This revision shows the deletion of a well sourced table added that showed the reception this show had in Canada. Why was this deleted? Well the reason given was that "This is an American show". So? I know I'm having a rant and I mean no offence Drmargi, but why was this deleted? Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk |Sign 23:26, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * There are no rules, per se, governing inclusion of ratings. They were deleted because is an American show, not a Canadian one, as the edit summary says.  I looked and can't find any example of a show where there is ratings data for other than its country of origin except for Battlestar Galactica.  That lone exception is the result of an ownership squabble and the first season running in the UK versus the US, and even then doesn't include Canadian ratings data despite it being produced in Canada.  Take a look at any of a sizable number of US/UK co-productions aired on PBS and/or BBC America and you'll see no US ratings data, and a far better case can be made for including it than for the Canadian data reverted here.


 * Given your concerns, let me ask you this: why do we need Canadian data? If we leave it in, we'd have to add any country's that came along.  Well-sourced or not, it's extraneous in an article about an American show.  No offense taken, and none given,  but I can't see a reason for such an inclusion.  Perhaps you could add average viewership in the international broadcasting table.  Drmargi (talk) 23:40, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Standard for referring to characters
There is inconsistency in the epidsode summaries when referring to the characters. The characters are referred to by their first and last names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.216.101.233 (talk) 03:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Episode counts
I have reverted the advancement of the episode count for the show to 13. Although we know WB and John Wells Productions plan 6 episodes for Season Two, after which TNT may or may not order more, those six episodes may not be complete yet, and have not been broadcast. Moreover, that they may or may not exist does not guarantee they ever will if the show flops on TNT. Regardless of all that, the practice here, for good reason, is that we advance episode count based on what has been broadcast, not on the basis of what the media reports is a planned or possibly produced number of episodes. This particular editor has had issues with making this kind of edit elsewhere and has been reverted for it, so he/she is aware of the appropriate episode numbering practice. Drmargi (talk) 17:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Cast members
Could someone please explain to me how updating the cast members to match the actual cast members of the show does not meet the "guidelines", as quoted by user CKatz when he reverted my recent changes to the Series page? What guidelines? Please provide reference/link/FAQ to support this change/reversion. I appreciate the job of administering Wikipedia, but being an admin does not, IMHO, a subject matter expert make.

I have been working with TNT for over a year now on the show, and made the changes per their own direct materials provided by their public relations department, widely distributed through numerous channels both on- and off-line. Yet, for reasons un-referenced, CKatz decided to revert my changes and put people who are NOT main characters back into the "Main Cast" section, while putting characters/actors who were ONLY guest stars for 2 or 3 episodes into that section (C. Collins Jr) who rightly belong into the "Recurring Characters" section. If external reference is needed, this CAN be provided now as direct quotes of the TNT provided material.

I fully understand wanting to stick to Wikipedia standards, but if you don't know what the heck you are talking about, why make changes to an article, especially if you don't know about the subject matter in question? At the very least, put up a question here in the Talk section rather than just make an arbitrary change/reversion!

On a side note - why are there so many changes to this page without comments explaining WHY/WHAT was changed? Is that not a standard for Wikipedia? I realize I am a relative newbie here, but isn't that the purpose of the text input for "Changes made" when you change a page? Southlandbob (talk) 06:03, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Perhaps I can help a little with this. The guidelines for the info box at WP:INFO include listing of past end present cast.  Some shows with a large cast, such as ER get around that by adding a caption Season # cast in italics.  As for Collins, if you can source his status as recurring v. main cast, makes the change and add the source.  Do be aware that you can't look at this in the same way as you might a fan page, and have to consider the show's history, not just the show as it is now when discussing it.  As for the edit summaries, you can lead a horse to water, so to speak.  Not everyone provides the summaries.
 * If you drop a little note on my talk page when you do, I'll take a peek at the article to check all is in order, if that would be helpful. You might also want to review WP:RS for guidelines regarding sourcing. Sometimes errors stay in place simply because no one catches them, such as the change you note below, which originally described NBC's, not TNT's plans for the show.  Drmargi (talk) 00:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Authoritative references
Nearly every reference given in this article, from the Plot to the lead-in for the Cast section, appears to be Critics' reviews published online.

None of these sources are authoritative or unbiased in any fashion, nor are they encyclopedic. For example, the "Cast" section leads with:


 * The second season, which premiered on TNT following the rebroadcast of the first season, de-emphasizes the ensemble cast, and instead follows the Adams and Sherman characters and their partners. Stories center more on how crimes come together, with less-serialized storylines.

which references two critics' articles based on pure speculation, which have clearly proven to be untrue after the airing of the second season.

Since we are supposed to be following guidelines and standards here, why have these references and the content that they represent not been pulled?

If I make updates to the page, replacing this content with information directly from the source (writers, the show's creator, TNT, etc.) do I need to worry about wasting my time because some admin decides that my lack of experience on Wikipedia makes my updates less reliable than someone with more experience on the site who posted less reliable information?

Southlandbob (talk) 00:13, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I wrote that section, in a slighty different form, based on what were at the time quite reliable sources, and with the expectation the show would remain on NBC for a full-season run, so the section referred to NBC's plans in it's original form. The critics you cite, as well as a fair few others, had just returned from the TCA's or upfronts (I forget which now), and had that information from NBC.  When TNT bought the show, I revised the section,  as did a couple of other editors, one of whom I seem to recall being quite strident about several changes to this section.  An important qualifying statement regarding TNT's plans to leave the show as was has been removed, and I've never had the interest in further revision, having lost interest in the show.  If it seems dated or inaccurate,  fix it!  Drmargi (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep in mind, too, that any changes you make must be sourced in a manner compliant with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Information you may have from the producers is not suitable if you are the only one privy to it, and others cannot verify it. I'd also note that you must make sure that any changes are compliant with the standards for writing about fiction. (For example, one of your changes a few weeks ago deleted former cast members; we present the series as a whole, so we do not classify as "former" or remove stars just because they have moved on.) Please feel free to ask if you need more information about this or any other aspect of writing the article. --Ckatz chat spy  10:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Categories
Recently, user I Want My GayTV added the category Category:American LGBT-related television programs to the article. When I first removed it, asking "why", another editor re-added it saying "Cooper is gay". That may be the case (and thanks for the note, BTW) but with regard to the category we need to make sure it fits the category's own rationale. That is, per Category:LGBT-related television programs, the series should "deal with or feature significant lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender characters or issues and may have same-sex romance or relationships as an important plot device". We generally don't apply the category (or other similar ones) if the series just includes a gay character. Perhaps someone more familiar with the series could assess if that requirement is met? --Ckatz chat spy  08:40, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * John Cooper is definitely a significantly featured gay character (with Sherman and Lydia, one of the three central characters) who has garnered a great deal of critical attention from the LGBT media. To date the series has addressed his sexuality somewhat obliquely but published reports indicate that it will become more of a focus about halfway through the season. There have been a few minor LGBT-related storylines included throughout the series and one that I would consider major, Cooper and Sherman's attending the funeral of John's former friend who we are led to believe killed himself because he was gay. The gay characters and storylines don't need to be in the viewers' faces in every episode for the category to be applicable and Southland is an excellent example of the fairly seamless integration of a significant gay character into stories that aren't just about his being gay but instead show how a gay character functions in a world where we've never seen a gay character operate before. I honestly can't think of a parallel for this character and this series in terms of such integration. As the article develops and more sourced information is added about the characters beyond name and unit it will become more readily apparent that the category is appropriate.
 * I didn't notice this discussion before I put the category back or that it had been removed, replaced and removed again. No disrespect to the process intended. I Want My GayTV (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with the restoration of the category. Although GLBT topics are not front-and-center in the show. there is an important character development sub-plot regarding Cooper as a heavily closeted gay man, and the hostility to non-straight officers in law enforcement.  Moreover, given the large, active and visible gay community in Los Angeles, and Southland's somewhat loose approach to the LAPD's organizational structure at the patrol level, it's a reasonable possibility our main characters will deal with issues in that community in upcoming stories.  Drmargi (talk) 22:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments appreciated. With respect to the category, it (as well as several other similar cats for race etc) are certainly fair game, but we just have to make sure they are not being used inappropriately. As discussed above, we would not tag a series simply because it included an LGBT or minority character. However, if the character background plays a significant role in the plot development of the series (as you;ve noted here), then the category becomes appropriate. Thanks for the input. By the way, if the character is in fact getting attention in the press ,it might be worth writing something to that effect. --Ckatz chat spy  22:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Great idea! I Want My GayTV sounds as though (s)he is well versed, and this would be a good opportunity for a new editor.  Drmargi (talk) 22:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I put together a short article at John Cooper (Southland). I looked at some other TV character articles for a model so I hope it's OK. I have to look at the episodes again to cite the biographical stuff or if someone has the DVDs? I Want My GayTV (talk) 04:03, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * How come there is only one character page (on John Cooper)? It seems odd to only have one, when the show features a strong ensemble cast.

Season 5
Does anyone has any information about a new season 5? Season 4 just over, would like to read news, in the article there isnt any information yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.67.106.181 (talk) 15:46, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Concluding two-hour TV wrap up?
When I saw this, I thought at least the show will get the ending it deserved but so far nothing else? Anything else that could be said about this? 86.171.5.29 (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)