Talk:The Dresden Files (TV series)

message: As with most wikipedia entries on tv series, this one lacks an introduction that summarizes in one or two sentences what this series is about. Not all the people who visit this article know the series. I would suggest that someone add this vital information. DrSlony 11:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 

message: * I think it might be useful to add a reception piece near the end of the article, this series is infamous for having a typical general audience but extremely hateful fans. Its not exactly encyclopedic but then, this isn't really encyclopedia anymore, its either a how to manual or a piece of fan fiction ,depending on the article. Not to mention all the lobbying. 
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.152.240.136 (talk) 18:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception 

message: The show's country of origin is the USA, but I thought best to have someone second it before a change is enacted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.138.57 (talk • contribs) 
I agree with you. I have checked IMDb, and it lists both  and  as country of origin.
I have made the change. --Kevinkor2 16:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to disagree. If it is shot and all of the production done in Canada, then Canada should be the sole country of origin. IMDB could be wrong. GreenJoe 17:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That has never been the sole metric for Wiki. For example, the new BSG is filmed in Canada, but the country of origin is listed as the UK and the USA because it was financed by American and British companies. Dresden is financed by an American television company and premiered to American audiences. USA should be listed. - Debuskjt 01:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then maybe you should propose a guideline or something. However, if it's filmed in Canada, then it's Canadian. Canada finances it via tax credits. GreenJoe 17:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tax credits do not finance 100% of filming costs, and stating it as if its does is a straw man argument to support your point. Furthermore, your POV pushing is a distraction, since claiming the show is "Canadian" in origin is misleading at best. Three editors have now supported the addition of the USA as a country of origin. In addition to our voice, your filming-only guideline is inconsistent with just about every other show filmed in Canada (Smallville, Battlestar Galactica, House, Dark Angel, The X-Files, The L Word, Stargate SG-1), which provides a defacto guideline of cross-article consensus. I ask that you not change it again. - Debuskjt 05:59, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It came on in Canada on Space on the same day and time as on Sci-Fi.. how does that not count as having Premiered in Canada?  If it's anything like BSG it even finished a few minutes earlier.  Yet, the article, and here, it's being taken as truth that the show premiered in the US.  Webrunner 02:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It premiered simultaneously in both countries. No one said it was shown first in the US, and no one is saying Canada should be removed as a country of origin. - Debuskjt 02:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: May have been filmed in Canada, but some shots are recognizably in Chicago. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.251.54.186 (talk) 14:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, it has all been filmed in Canada, although Vancouver can look like a lot of parts of the U.S. which is why its often used. --Simonkoldyk 21:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Dresden Files wasn't filmed in Vancouver, largely because Vancouver looks nothing like Chicago. It was filmed in Toronto. And the skyline shots are most certainly stock footage of the real Chicago. For instance, the easily identifiable Wrigley and Equitable Buildings are prominently visible in the first episode at 23:26. - Debuskjt 00:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake; but, still it was filmed in Canada. --67.101.8.56 03:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

text: t's called a Sci-Fi original series because the Sci-Fi channel, based in New York, is the one creating it. Lord of the Rings was not a New Zealand creation, and South Africa is not credited with creating any of the movies filmed there. I think there should be some definite mention and credit given to Canada for providing most of the filming location and many of the people, but in no way can it be seriously stated that Canada is the sole country of origin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.185.105.217 (talk) 23:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country of origin 

message: The link to Dresden Files Fansite has disappeared and reappeared. I invite comment about links to fansites (in general) and the link to this fansite in particular. I believe a relevant guideline is WP:TV#External links. --Kevinkor2 04:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fansite 

message: Is it worth including a link to the official Forum, where both Jim Butcher and Robert Hewitt Wolfe hang out and answer questions?
HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 22:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to official Forum? 

message: Should Space be considered an original channel for The Dresden Files? Relevant guidelines are given at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television#Categories and discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Archive 3#Categorizing television series by network. --Kevinkor2 23:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Channel 

message: Would it be okay to make summary subpages for the episodes, like one page and on each a two paragraph summary with a spoiler alert?-- Yossi842 00:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's reasonable. Other shows have something similar, like Rescue Me and Supernatural. - Debuskjt 00:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I actually prefer to keep them all on the main page till we get past the first season. Expanding is much easier than trimming back. Slavlin 23:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Go ahead and start creating episode pages if you want. Best to create them with content though, deletionists like to nominate the stubs. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 23:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Personally, I don't know how to do the links or create the pages correctly- if someone else could start it once we get past- let's say Fool Moon- than I could help write all of them. If anyone else would like to help there is a person on YouTube who puts them up weekly- if you would like the name you can ask on my talk page. Anyway- so, after Fool Moon, agreed?-- Yossi842 00:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Episode Pages

message: For the time being Arsilverangel has posted the episodes on YouTube. I have their permission to post the name and post this information. Those clips are to be used for verification only, not as a refrence. -- Yossi842 22:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Arsilverangel

message: Here is a list I made offhand of things that we should do to help this and things that we can do:
*1. Make a page for every episode already aired- include summary, trivia, and a template
*2. Start cross-refrencing this article with those articles
*3. Add all of that to lists at the WikiProjects they apply to- and put WikiProject templates in the talk pages
*4. Get reviews and general citable opinion and add it to these articles
*5. Asess all articles for importance and quality
-Thanks, -- Yossi842 01:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 6. Look into  ;) — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 02:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: We Have A LOT To Do

message: Should it be added that the episodes can be purchased the day after the airdate on iTunes?-- Yossi842 01:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a fine idea to me. Many TV series related pages list information on retail releases and their tech specs, etc. --Jtfolden 01:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: iTunes

message: I removed the following
* The Denarians (called Hellions) can be separated from their human host, and no longer seem to employ a coin to hold the essence of the fallen angel.
because I could not see where there is a direct link between the two types of characters. At least not one which could be referenced. I know that this could become prominent later, but right now I can't see that it is verifiable in any way. Slavlin 15:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denarians 

message: I note that someone has linked the character names on this page to pages concerning the book characters. While this *might* be okay, it seems to me that enough changes are being introduced to the TV story lines that there will forever be irreconcilable differences. It just adds confusing and untrue back stories for people that are coming here for info on the TV show and it's characters (like the changes to Murphy w/ child, changes to Harry's childhood, changes to Bob's past, etc).  Thoughts? --Jtfolden 05:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I recall, there are other book/film or book/series situations where this is done, but there is a separate section for each. See Sin City characters for some examples. Slavlin 06:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character Pages 

message: Shouldn't this be recurring characters?  There are several here that we have only seen in one episode.  Also, ME Waldo Butters has appeared in three episodes to date.  Justin Morningway has only appeared in one flashback scene, but he has been mentioned several times.   --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Related to this: I see Susan listed as a recurring character... but I don't think she appears anywhere other than one episode, does she? --John T. Folden 03:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor characters 

message: Should the TV series have a separate template, or should we shoehorn it into the Jim Butcher template?   In my opinion, the series is distinct enough from the Butcher novels that it should be separate.  I have created a draft template at User:Gadget850/Sandbox4 for review. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the series should most certainly be separate. While it's based on Jim Butcher's work it's created by an entirely different source and both he and Robert Wolfe have stated they are not the same and the TV show will grow ever more divergent as time goes on. --John T. Folden 22:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree. The TV series and the book series should have entirely separate templates. --Kevinkor2 07:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template 

message: The character section has too much plot and not facts about who the characters are.  If people want to read plot of characters, they can read the character history pages or the episode guides. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.133.139.5 (talk) 13:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format (specifically in the Character section) 

message: I removed a couple of summaries that were copied from other sites, check this for an example.  Anyways, I think this page probably has some more info that's copied, so whoever is running the show here should look into it, and rewrite whatever. - Peregrine Fisher 18:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a lot of the info comes from SFC press releases... which is why you see it everywhere. --John T. Folden 00:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Summaries

message: An editor seems to have a problem with the source for these. However, they have been on this page since it was created, and contributed by more than one editor in the past. Several months ago I, also, informally approached members of the WP:Mediation_Cabal for my own peace of mind and they confirmed it was a perfectly acceptable source according to the R&R's of WP. I'd like further comment from additional editors --John T. Folden 16:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem to have a misconception that the Mediation Cabal are some elitist group — they're not. I will enforce the citation policy aggressively; until such a time that I believe you have provided an adequate source or consensus agrees with yourself. The material is challenged, you should not go against policy and re-add it (until such a time as I said previously). Matthew 16:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have no misconception of anything. I solicited for further opinion from other editors and received it at the time. However, sources such as iTunes are not 'speculative', nor are they excluded by policy. --John T. Folden 16:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not seeing anything stating "production code" at iTunes, until you can provide a source that I can agree with (so that I no longer challenge it) or consensus agrees with, you shouldn't re-add them. Matthew 16:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Production codes are listed in the Episode ID of the metadata on each downloadable TV Show. --John T. Folden 16:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm still not seeing anything explicitly stating: production code, perhaps you could screencap it and upload it to Wikipedia under fair use temporarily. Matthew 17:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're misunderstanding me, I think. If you right click on an episode and choose Get Info, then click Video, you will see the heading for Episode ID. You can, also, activate this info as a column under normal View Options in iTunes. You can verify this number against previously confirmed IDs on other television shows and episodes, as well. --John T. Folden 17:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right, then it's not a production code without an explicit indication of such a thing, i.e. "Production Code: xyz". Without any explicit source your drawing conclusions. Point in fact it's not verifiable if you're drawing conclusions. Matthew 18:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not drawing conclusions, that just happens to be the label as used by the most readily available source. Sci-Fi Channel itself refers to the "production number" number as the "Episode Number" on it's site. "Production Code" happens to be the term WP settled on. Ironically, if you do a Google search "Production Code" commonly refers to an entirely different numerical system involving content ratings. --John T. Folden 18:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Production Code != Production Number. By your own admittance you've admitted they are indeed not the production codes. If you can find the actual production codes then please say so here. Frankly I'm bemused as to why time needed to be wasted to come to the conclusion they're not actual production codes... Matthew 18:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  If Episode ID in iTunes matches Episode Number on SFC site matches Production Code in SFC press Kits matches ad infinitum then it's all down to word games. I assume a statement from Robert Wolfe, the producer and writer on the series, concerning these numbers will be more than enough confirmation, even for you? btw, have you ever done a search for "prodcode" here on Wiki? --John T. Folden 18:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No I haven't, but this search indicates a lot of pages need cleanup. On and end note I've still yet to see a verifiable source that actually states "production code". Matthew 18:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  As referred to in previous post, I have solicited for the input of Robert Wolfe directly - assuming he is still reachable at the same location as he was prior to end of production. --John T. Folden 19:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wolfe stating "these are the production codes", "here are the production codes" (etc) would certainly be fine for me. Matthew 19:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: He states: "Yeah, that looks right." - which could mean any number of things... Matthew 19:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's distinctly clear in response to the question and data provided him. --John T. Folden 20:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Production Codes

message: All of the episodes of this series fail the notability guidelines for television episodes. The way for these articles to be improved is through the inclusion of real-world information from reliable sources to assert notability. That is unlikely to happen, and these only have certain bad aspects (though all may not apply) like containing overly long or one sentence plot summaries, trivia, and quotes. Per that, they need to be a small part of this list. 
If there are no objections, these will be redirected soon. Otherwise, discussion will take place here. Please remember that this is not a vote. If you like the information, that's fine and dandy, but your opinion doesn't really count towards anything. The only opinions that do count are ones that that lean towards the inclusion of real world information. TTN 23:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Episode notability

message: I've removed all the "fansites" from the external links, only official sites, IMDB and stuff that like that should be there still. GreenJoe 04:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did remove the link to his website. Now get off your high horse and start acting civilly. GreenJoe 04:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

text: As for your "crusade" against various links, I suggest you take a chill pill. There's a general consensus that allows the link to IMDB. As for the other links on Wikipedia, I don't have the desire to hunt them all down. There are too many. I really suggest you calm down before you get blocked. GreenJoe 04:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Everyone please be civil. I'm not sure why there is such an explosion of debate over a simple listing of external links. While I agree that certain transitory or non-notable sites such as petitions should not be included, I don't think the article is being helped by the slash & burn and rapid reverts that seem to be going on. The Jim Butcher site is perfectly acceptable. He is the creator of the works upon which the series is based on, he was featured in one of the episodes and members of the crew involved with the series have posted information there. Also, I think it's reasonable that an article on a TV show have at least one fan community site listed, such as Dresden City, when the site in question contains info on the series not readily available elsewhere, such as quotes from the producer. I don't see anything at WP:EL that automatically restricts these.--John T. Folden 07:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: :Image:Dresden images downloads desktop cast 800.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 Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 20:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Dresden images downloads desktop cast 800.jpg

message: I think it should be mentioned that some fans are desperately trying to get the show into a second season. These renewal efforts should be catalogued. Vegetaman (talk) 04:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would love to see the Dresden Files continue. --Haldrik (talk) 04:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sources? Website? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 10:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Renewal Effort Campaign

message: In the "Departure from Novels" section, the following is used as a supporting statement:
"In episode 9 "The Other Dick" Harry is seen using a digital camera that in the book series would have rendered useless, while in episode 4 "Rules of Engagement" he shorts out a surveillance camera by moving close to it."
Actually, the camera used in "The Other Dick" is a film camera. This is clear because Harry sends Liz Fontaine out to develop the film. Now, why the incubus' essence wasn't captured on the NEGATIVE rather than the photo Harry started to burn is a different matter. But as far as not being able to use electronic gadgets, this camera doesn't qualify.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.75.30 (talk) 23:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Argument about "Departure from Novels" section 

message: In the books, Harry owns a silver pentacle necklace he inherited from his mother. <-- this did show up in Season 1, Episode 5, Vampire Episode when Harry was in bed, with his shirt off. It just wasn't attributed to his mother.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 03:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect statement

message: Has anybody information on the pilot before it was recut into episode 8, Stormfront?204.14.79.229 (talk) 19:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information on the pilot? 

message: I've merged the Episode List back into here. Per WP:SIZESPLIT, the extrapolation shouldn't have happened. I realize this was to lay a foundation for the individual episode pages, but they didn't work out, did they? Please leave the episode list here as it prevents extraneous navigation for those still interested in TDF. Thanks. — Wyliepedia 20:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged Episode List 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Dresden Files (TV series). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080601034328/http://www.scifi.com:80/scifiwire/index.php?category=2&id=36229 to http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=2&id=36229
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:17, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified