Talk:List of Jericho episodes

message: I have reversed the deletion of the morse code translations of the title sequence.
I beleive the placement of this information here is the best place.  It does not belong on the main Jericho page as a list it will make the page very long.  It also does not belong on a separate page as it is a fork that is un-nessesary.  It also seems (we are only 4 episodes in) that each translation will be different and seems to be about that specific episode.  To address the inevitable claim of original research, the morse code is simply a comunication in another "language" just as the chinese characters on the broadcast map were included as a translation in the main article.--Gay Cdn  (talk) (email) (Contr.) 14:36, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A) It belongs in the episode article its self, b) externious info past 2 lines = messy table, c) This is a table of synopsises for the episode. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:50, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the infoboxes for the individual episodes have been modified to include the morse code sequences and their translations, I've removed the separate morse code sections from the articles.  Not only was the information redundant, but it was also largely speculative in regards to the meanings behind the messages in a few cases.  199.79.222.119 17:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the way it is currently. Not a fan, but decided to look through the pages anyway. With some of the code from various episodes actually spelling out what appear to be three-part messages, it makes sense to include them here in the table, especially with the space already in the table anyway.  No real reason not to include it, and with only the translation there (i.e. no speculation) it's fine. 4.238.11.31 17:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morse Code title sequence 

message: Okay, this might be a tad nitpicky of me, but it's in my horrible Virgo nature so I can't help it.  Can we please remember that, when typing, you need to doublespace after sentence-ending punctuation?  My perfectionistic, constantly-proofreading eyes keep catching missing spaces at the end of sentences in the episode synopses, and I can't stop myself from correcting them.  It would be one thing if it was every once in a while, or just the odd typo here and there, but it's a constant, pervasive thing.  199.79.222.119 18:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Double spacing is wrong. Deus (talk • contribs) 18:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if you can point me to some kind of specific source for your assertion, I might be more inclined to believe you.  However, being a professional data entry operator for many years, and having taken many months of executive assistant training in the past, I'm fairly confident in my previous statement.  199.79.222.119 18:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah... now I understand why MF was reverting your edits. A comment from him on his edits would have helped, of course, and double spacing is certainly not "wrong", as he claimed. I agree with 199.79.222.119 - using two spaces IS much clearer, making the text more readable. However, I believe that the Wikipedia standard is to use one space, and the software may even do so automatically. (I'll try to double-check this.) --Ckatzchatspy 18:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: You learning how to operate a type writer does not make you correct (Also consider looking at my name) - Also read: Double_spacing#Spacing_after_full_stop, double spacing is a waste of time as it'll never get rendered. Deus (talk • contribs) 18:54, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd appreciate the double-check, Ckatz, thanks.  Now then, I didn't just "learn how to operate a typewriter," Matthew.  I also learned a great deal about proper grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, and spacing for typewritten documents, in addition to a touch of accounting, transcription, shorthand, and probably a few other things I've since forgotten.  I'm beginning to understand why others refer to you as some kind of "wikinazi" or "wikigestapo."  Your heavy-handed style of "I'm right, you're wrong, that's all there is to it" is absurd at the very least.  And before you go off on one of your "anonymous user" rants, I'd like to remind you that I've identified myself a couple of times now, and why I edit under an anonymous ip address while at work.  199.79.222.119 19:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You may of learnt xyz, it is still however inapr. for you to convert pages to your liking. You'll find 66. calls me a wikinazi because he doesnt get his way. Deus (talk • contribs) 19:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By that standard, if you were to horrifyingly misspell several words, and someone else were to correct them, you could revert the edit just because you think it's right.  Also, I've found that 66 refers to you as a "wikinazi" because you seem to have this "papa bear" attitude towards the whole of the Jericho article set, and get extremely territorial if anyone makes an edit that doesn't conform to your personal vision of what the whole thing should look like.  66 is not the only one who think so either.  I've glanced at your talk page a couple of times, and seen plenty of other instances where other editors have questioned your motives, as well as the Jericho talk pages.  You might want to consider just why people would feel this way, rather than just jumping to a knee-jerk reaction of "they're not getting their way."  I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, until "double spacing is wrong."  No explanation, no reasoning, just "I'm right, you're wrong, so there."  199.79.222.119 19:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Be serious.. You aint explained why an extraneous second spacing would be added because you like it? Deus Sum (Matthew Fenton) (talk • contribs) 19:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, yeah I did.  In my first statement, and my first rebuttal to you.  *sigh*  I didn't come here to get into a pissing contest with you, Matthew.  I came here because I enjoy contributing to this body of work.  I enjoy the show, and I want to help make sure that if, for some reason, somebody is unable to view an episode or (God forbid) the whole series, they can still get a good idea of the meat of the subject.  Well, that, and I have little else better to do right now.  My "job" right now isn't really providing me with much "work" to do.  Alas, I get paid to sit here and futz around on the intarwebs.  O woe is I.  199.79.222.119 19:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The only reason you provided is that you prefer 2 spaces - either way its extraneous and unrequired. Adding two spaces (imo) makes etxt very hard to read. Deus Sum (Matthew Fenton) (talk • contribs) 19:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a very bass ackwards argument.  Your reason for not doing so is because you don't like it.  My reasons were based on training, and years of practical use and experience.  *shrug*  Evidently it's 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other, based on Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Archive_(spaces_after_a_full_stop/period) and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Spaces_after_the_end_of_a_sentence.  I suppose I should thank you for instigating my search for further information.  In the future, however, I'd prefer you did so in a less antagonistic, "my way or the highway" manner.  199.79.222.119 20:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Not sure what you mean by "consider looking at my name" - if it looks like a Matthew Fenton edit, and (more importantly) if it is signed by MatthewFenton in the history, than it is a MF edit. Not sure why you're signing as "Deus", but whatever... Anyways, it's a good idea to fill out the edit comment when you revert, or else the edit might appear suspect. --Ckatzchatspy 19:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Do a translation, hehe ;). Deus (talk • contribs) 19:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm aware of the translation, thanks - it still doesn't answer why you're doing that. I'd hazard a guess that User:Deus would probably prefer that you stopped. You might wish to read this Wikipedia guideline, specifically the part that says "Signatures that obscure your account name to the casual reader may be seen as disruptive." --Ckatzchatspy 19:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Doesnt obscure it in the slightest as it is clickable, ;-) -- Eitehr way .. changed it for you :)! Deus Sum (Matthew Fenton) (talk • contribs) 19:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I invoke Godwin's Law! But seriously, I don't see it get rendered. Will (message ♪) 19:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: This is a disappointment. I'm gone for a couple of months, and these two British schoolboys continue to lord over the Jericho articles. Which begs the question: how *do* -British- schoolboys watch an *American* TV series? Could they be pirating episodes off the Internet? CBS's official website blocks all IP addresses from outside the USA, so they can't be watching it legally, can they? 24.227.251.199 03:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I can second this one. Having worked in the print journalism industry, I can testify - gee, that's not "original research", is it? - that double-spacing is no longer required save for some local courts which require submitted documents have the double-spacing after punctuation marks. The irony here is that they require it because they're using older scanners and OCR software, and this helps reduce scanning interpretation error, and the documents produced themselves are *stripped* of the extra space! Sixty Six 06:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper spacing 

message: Tweaked these a little this morning as some of the earlier ones still read like coming attractions.  I also added in episode 11, although we don't know much about it yet, except that it's their season-ending cliffhanger for the fall.  205.188.117.5 14:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Episode summaries

message: Does it make sense to add the Feb 14 and Feb 21 episodes to the list?  We don't have titles, but we know that the Feb 14 episode is a recap, and that Feb 21 focuses on the day before the attacks.  I'd say Feb 14 probably doesn't count as an episode for numbering purposes.  205.188.117.5 00:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see a reason why we couldn't add Feb. 21st episode.. would need to be cited and try to avoid any serious depth into the episode :). Matthew Fenton (talk • contribs) 00:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Making it even easier, the cite already exists (#1, the "split season" from Zap-to-It) and can certainly be re-used. While it is a "future event", the existence isn't speculative since CBS has announced the episodes. --Ckatzchatspy 06:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2007 episodes

message: I earnestly look forward to the person who made this claim (in the edit history) supporting said claim with documentation, justification, or rationale.  Aside from user comments, submissions are reviewed by IMDb database editors: "They will be examined and if approved will be included in a future update."  If there is a Wikipedia policy on same, let it also be quoted. 209.244.187.29 09:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "IMDb not verifiable"

message: Has the morse code for "Return to Jericho" been translated, and is there an appropriate place to post it, given the (understandable) lack of an episode page? --Toby Rush ‹ ✆|✍ › 14:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it'd make a bit of sense to have an episode page for "Return to Jericho."  Although it was mainly flashback snippets (some of which were out of order), there was the Hawkins voice-over as well as the various morse code bits.  If it were me, I'd do it as Hawkins voice-over, morse code, snippet a, snippet b, etc, lather, rinse, repeat.  Any other opinions?  MikeFTM 06:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Most shows don't generally have pages for their specials but if you can think of enough to write I don't see a big problem my self as long as it has potential to grow. Somebody has linked it now as well. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The morse code translation for the "Return to Jericho" episode is "BACK NEXT WEEK" Ragdata 11:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Return to Jericho

message: They should really have citations so that they can be attributed to a reliable source. Cliff smith 01:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Episodes yet to air

message: I've noticed most my other shows around this time have been updated on Wikipedia in regards to if they are being renewed for another season or not, both new shows and old ones. I don't see anything on that here though. Am I just missing it, or has it not been revealed if another season of Jericho will follow this one?
this was just posted on the CBS Jericho wiki..."Question:
Future of Show 
Is episode 23 the season finale, or the series finale?
Producer's Response:
Episode 22, entitled “Why We Fight,” is most definitely not a series finale! In fact, by the time it’s over, you’ll have some great clues about where our story is headed in its second season.
74.69.159.42 05:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See CBS producer's response dated 5/3/07.  They make it clear that CBS will announce its fall lineup on 5/16/07, and that the series has not yet been officially renewed.  209.247.22.62 06:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Renewed or not?

message: There is discussion at WP:AN/I#Fancruft_issue_again, and an AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kept Man that is attempting to create a precedent disallowing individual episodes. Matthew 18:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How 'bout yea? Effects the project as a whole :-). Matthew 18:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like "Not" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.37.141.254 (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attempt to create precedent disallowing individual episodes 

message: All are missing or no longer linked from main article.  No indication of deletion or other changes on history page.  No references to deletion.  No invoking of orphaned images, fair use problems, etc.  No indication of any images marked for speedy deletion criteria.  No discussion of any of this here, no link to any discussion of it elsewhere.  This would seem to be poor etiquette at best.  Explanation requested.  209.247.22.62 06:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The template was edited to remove the field for the screenshots.  See discussion here. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 10:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I read the page to which you linked, and was immediately reminded of the once-famous quote of Edwin Howard Armstrong (the inventor of FM radio), fighting for his patents in court: "(It is) a world where men substitute words for realities and then talk about the words."  The page to which you directed me was a mouthful but I take it to mean that there was an administrative decision (without consensus) to remove screencaps from episode lists, not merely for "Jericho" but for all series.  It's precisely this sort of thing which turned me from an active participant in Wikipedia into an occasional contributor, and even those contributions are reverted more often than not; I don't even bother signing in any more.  This is a terrible loss to Wikipedia readers, IMHO it was unannounced and unapproved, and is a good reminder that my time and effort are better spent elsewhere.  Feel free to copy my comments to whatever administrator's talk page applies; this is an objection, in the strongest terms.  209.247.22.62 07:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it impacted all tv shows that use that template.  I do completely agree with you that the admin who did that jumped the gun and should have waited for consensus or at the very least, given more of a heads up.  However, s/he was following their interpretation of WP:NFCC and I do agree with the end result.  The English Wikipedia should limit fair use images as much as possible.  Lists of TV shows generally abuse fair use images as they are just there for decorative use. Other Wikipedias such as the German one have outright banned fair use.  Fair use just goes against the "free" (as in free to distribute, etc) part of the motto, although I do believe that there are limited circumstances where fair use images are necessary. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 07:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screencaps 

message: The Casus belli summary links to an article about this subject in general, and not to Casus belli (Jericho episode). Could someone who knows how to please fix this? Safebreaker (talk) 15:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just seen someone has done this. Thanks! Safebreaker (talk) 10:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casus belli 

message: Cloud02 has added the weekly Morse code text to the table. I'd like to retain it for several reasons. First off, it doesn't make the table any bigger and fills up some dead space in the "Title" column. Perhaps more importantly, however, it allows readers to see how the text is related from week to week. (For example, it is a lot easier to see the connection between "IT BEGINS WITH", "6 AND ENDS WITH", and "BLOODSHED" in this table than from flipping between articles. Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 21:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. No reason NOT to have it, and I've yet to see anyone advance a good explanation for why they shouldn't be there. As someone completely new to this series and article series, I appreciated the morse code renderings being right there on the main "List of episodes" article. 4.238.11.31 17:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morse code 

message: i have discovered the morse codes are linked together to tell you something, here is a list of the morse code stuff
JERICHO FALLO
 
JERICHO THREE
HE KNOWS ROB
THERE IS A FIRE
THE EMP HITS
PRAY FOR NYC
ROB NOT FBI
AOV SURPRISE
IT BEGINS WITH
6 AND ENDS WITH
BLOODSHED
BLEEDING KS
4 DOWN 4 TO GO
THEY WILL NEED IT
A COSTLY DEAL
ROB EXPOSED
WHO RAN RED BELL
ONE GOT AWAY
WE PLEDGE
ALLEGIANCE
TO THE FLAG
i am assuming the next one will be of the united states, there are 2 groups that say something so perhaps more can be linked to tell something. like a story, or a fact. --Superchad 02:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking together morse codes 

message: The last episode "Patriots and Tyrants" was labeled "Series Finale". According to http://www.cbspressexpress.com/div.php/paramount_network/original/release?id=251&dpid=70&rid=18150, which is one of the references for this page, this is the "Season Finale" not the "Series Finale" (ie the end of the show in the entirety).  Thus, based on the primary sources for this page, it is only the end of this (half-) year's run.  
I have thus changed this to "Season Finale".
This is a USA produced show, so one uses "Season Finale" to indicate the end of a year's run; "series finale" means the last episode of the entire program(me). I realize this differs from UK usage.
Please stop reverting "Season Finale" to "Series Finale", unless you have a reliable and documentable source that this is the absolute last episode of this show, and are going to reference such evidence.
This caused me no end of consternation as I thought it meant "Patriots and Tyrants" was supposed to be the absolute last episode of the entire show. This is not the case. According to references #2 and #3, there are more in production.
Chevalier3 (talk) 19:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Series Finale vs. Season Finale

message: I agree with Chevalier3, because this is a USA-based show, "Season Finale" is more fitting. Do you all think it would make more sense if everyone just used these terms the way the Americans use it. I personally think it'd be more more universal if you were to use these terms literally. --DavidD4scnrt (talk) 03:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Dude, Jericho was canceled.  Tuesday's episode was the last.  If it gets picked up by another network in the future, we can change it to Season, but right now, it was the Series Finale.  ---- JTHolla! 15:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Series Finale vs. Season Finale 

message: At present the individual episodes consist almost entirely of in-universe plot summaries. With the exception of the pilot, all episode articles fail WP:EPISODE. It is likely that each individual episode of a television series will not be notable on its own, simply because there are not enough secondary sources available.  Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) explains further:
When an article is created, the subject's real-world notability should be established according to the general notability guideline by including independent reliable secondary sources — this will also ensure that there is enough source material for the article to be comprehensive and factually accurate.
Episode lists pages must still be notable, and contain out-of-universe context, and not merely be a list of episode titles or cast and crew: Wikipedia is not a directory.
Therefore individual episodes should be merged and redirected to List of Jericho episodes. McWomble (talk) 05:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't a voting. This is a discussion. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

text: I agree that it would be good to preserve information such as the special guests/cast of each episode. Netmouse (talk) 04:24, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of episodes 

message: What is the rationale behind removing the morse code and summary for each episode? I am strongly tempted to reverse the edits to this page to bring them back as there does not seem to have been any discussion or reason given.
Aine (talk) 15:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a bold move. Everything can still be found at Jericho (season 1) and Jericho (season 2). NuclearWarfare (Talk) 21:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'll be similarly bold and revert the whole table back. I don't care how nice the colour scheme is, or if they can be found on another page; the facts are what is important and should not be deleted on a whim. See much preceding discussion.Barsoomian (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked over the preceding discussion. I see consensus for keeping the Morse Code, but that does not mean it has to be on this page. nevertheless, I will shift around some stuff to keep the morse on this page. Also, your edit wiped out a huge amount of the work that I did, especially for the lead, so I am going to partially revert back that at least. Please be careful. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 19:55, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry but I frankly didn't understand the new formatting, so I could not pick and choose, I just went back to the last edit before the Morse disappeared, it seemed urgent before too many changes were layered on it. When you make a "bold" edit, maybe wait for a while to see the reaction before building on it. But glad to see you worked it out in the end.Barsoomian (talk) 06:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

text: NW, while your changes look good, the split to separate articles is not needed unless you are planning on developing those articles. Otherwise, we have three pages doing the work of one, which causes problems with keeping the information synced between them. Please let me know if you intend to significantly expand the "season" pages in the near future. If not, we will have to merge the three pages back together and restore the summaries. --Ckatzchatspy 21:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

text: That is true, but there is a significant wealth of information out there, and I hope to expand into it. Ckatz, I do intend to significantly expand the season pages in the near future. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 22:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Heck, you guys are probably right. I am going to restore the episode summaries. Unfortunately, this means extra work before FLC, but one page rather than three is justifiable. NuclearWarfare (Talk) 22:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morse code and episode summary removal 

message: Someone had changed the title of the first episode, removing the quote marks (which every other title has), with the comment "'pilot' is a description, not a title)". But still, he left Pilot in the title slot, so I don't know what the point of that was. Looking at the press release from CBS we see:
SKEET ULRICH, GERALD McRANEY, PAMELA REED, LENNIE JAMES, ASHLEY SCOTT, SPRAGUE GRAYDEN, MICHAEL GASTON, BRAD BEYER, KENNETH MITCHELL, ERIK KNUDSEN AND SHOSHANNAH STERN STAR IN "JERICHO," A NEW DRAMA PREMIERING WEDNESDAY, SEPT. 20 ON THE CBS TELEVISION NETWORK 
"Pilot" -- Skeet Ulrich, Gerald McRaney,....
-- So CBS seems to think "Pilot" is the title.
Interestingly, I found this at TVGuide: Jericho Episode: "Pilot: The First 17 Hours"; but haven't seen this cited anywhere else.
Anyway, very many series have "Pilot" as the first episode title. It's treated as a "title" the same as any of the following ones. Titles ARE descriptions of a kind anyway.  Barsoomian (talk) 13:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this; I too have seen "Pilot" as the beginning episode for many series (e.g, Premiere (The O.C.), 30 Rock (season 1)). I haven't seen the TVGuide description anywhere else either, so I think just "Pilot" would make sense. NW (Talk) 14:18, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  A bit more digging turned up what seems to be the original script. This has the title: "Pilot: The First 17 Hours".  And on this  DVD cover "Pilot: The First Seventeen Hours" (note, word for "17" here) was used too... So this seems to make it fairly official. And just found it's noted on the Wiki page Pilot (Jericho episode) too. I'll update the title accordingly, ugly as the formatting is. Barsoomian (talk) 14:37, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies to all re my edit! Usually "pilot" is a description not a title, but if the creators titled their script as such then obviously the quotation marks are valid! Bradley0110 (talk) 17:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of first episode 

message: The separate episode articles could do with more external references. I've added excerpts from several reviews to the respective "Reception" sections
Sources: 
* LA Times reviews: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/jericho/
*IGN reviews: http://tv.ign.com/objects/828/828170.html
Please add any other sources of substantial reviews here. Books, newspapers, journals preferably.Barsoomian (talk) 12:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding references

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of Jericho episodes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120404132718/http://gawker.com/266665/nina-tassler-issues-formal-letter-of-surrender-to-the-jericho-nation to http://gawker.com/266665/nina-tassler-issues-formal-letter-of-surrender-to-the-jericho-nation
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ezydvd.com.au/item.zml/794392
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:28, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified