Talk:Rescue Me (American TV series)

message: In this last season it should be noted that the senior chief was filling out a section eight form for Tommy.PolarJosh 04:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The writing "style" for "Rescue Me" is relentless cursing gym sophomoric banter.  Not since the 8th grade has anybody heard such faux-macho nonsense.  The character smokes and drinks in a job purportedly requiring some semblance of physical fitness, and the hero -- or anti-hero -- has the sensibility of a gutter rat.  "Rescue Me" has actually been praised by some critics, which illustrates the level at which modern TV is mired.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.146.128 (talk) 03:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Writing "Style"

message: The "synopsis" of season 4 as it currently stands is in need of either a complete overhaul or a deletion. As it now stands, it reads like something one might find in a gushing press release, which isn't exactly what we need from an encyclopedia entry. This kind of worshipful, fan-boy nonsense is frankly embarassing, and I'm taking down the whole subsection in a week (to be replaced by something like "Rescue Me has been renewed for a fourth season, to begin in 2007") if nobody can give me a good reason to keep it up there. Buck Mulligan 03:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Season 4 Section

message: Please can we not have the imdb, tv.com etc links in the info box at the top of the page as it makes the web page look more unprofessional because it spans two sections. We also do not need it at the top of the cage it makes more sense to have it at the bottom of the page with the other links. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Atkinsn2000 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're in the infobox because that's where they belong.«»bd(talk stalk) 01:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info Box 

message: Just letting everyone know that I'm going to be moving stuff around on the article, everything will remain the same for the time being as I begin reorganizing, afterwards we'll be able to improve on the article by adding character profiles and so forth. -- Makaio 22:14, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is good. This article really needs a good clean-up. Thunderbrand 16:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, it is rather a long list. I will create a new page later if you have not already done so. Thunderbrand 17:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and created the page. I also started writing short season summaries, so this article isn't just a list of sister articles. Thunderbrand 17:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any chance you might finish the season 1 summary? (Steampowered 10:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not. I was going to buy the season 1 DVD, but never got to it. My memory for the first season isn't that great. Thunderbrand 16:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd do it myself, but I've only seen a few episodes from Season 1, and I don't plan on going out and getting the DVD anytime soon. (Steampowered 19:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing the article organization 

message: A link to Tommy's article is now in the main characters section. If anyone would like to help add onto that article as well as this one, that would be great. -- Makaio 23:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tommy Gavin 

message: Thinking about making two new pages, one for the characters, and one for the episode lists with their summaries. Of coarse the main page (this article) would keep most of the main cast while giving a link to the entire list of characters, but the episode lists would be switched out for semi-detailed overviews of each season with a link to the expanded article with the episode list. Basically, this idea would keep the main page organized as it grows. However since this page still isn't really big enough, I thought it would be a nice idea for all contributors to think about as a goal. -- Makaio 00:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny you should say because I was gonna talk about moving the episode summaries to their own page. I copied the table from Deadwood, but they moved theirs to a seperate page. I agree that there should be a seperate episode page, seeing how the show is going into season 3 soon and all. They also have a nice character page at Characters of Deadwood. Thunderbrand 00:25, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Projected ideas 

message: porbably make the eps list in it's own article.--Dangerous-Boy 06:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Rescue Me episodes 

message: leary wears a yellow shirt with a picture of a revolver on the back and the words 'THE JOB' on the front. is this a reference to the show of the same name he was in earlier?
-Lordraydens 19:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um... no idea. --Makaio 03:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: very likely Bwithh 04:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes see: The Job (TV series). There seems to be a lot of connections between the shows! Nigel Wick 16:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Job 

message: Has this show been picked up for a 4th season yet? 24.218.110.67 02:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if there are any links to confirm it or disprove it. But there has been alot of "talk" about the filming of the fourth season. Especially on the Howard Stern show, as Artie Lange auditioned to be one of the minor characters in the next season. -- Makaio 19:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: A fourth season of 13 episodes was confirmed on July 12, 2006: . -- SmokeDetector47<SUP><SMALL>( TALK )</SMALL></SUP> 19:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 4? 

message: Who deleted what I had typed earlier? Anyways, did they really say this? And mIke shouldn't leave cause he's bi-courious. That's just messed up. What I'm asking is that did they say the slang term for vagina?
:Could you please rephrase this whole thing. I have no idea what you're asking. -- Makaio 16:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mike/Chris affair 

message: I was recently emailed from someone about me posting links to rescue me fan sites.
I read the rules on external links and the links i added did not fall in to any catagories but 12 and i also think that they are informational.
If the links i keep adding to rescue me forum.com, rescue me forum.co.uk or rescue me blospot site can not be on i do not think tv.com's rescue me site should be on, TV squads rescue me page or imdbs page they are all done completely by registered users.
   
1. Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes a Wikipedia:Featured article.
   2. Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research, as detailed in Wikipedia:Reliable sources.
   3. A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link.
   4. Links that are added to promote a site, that primarily exist to sell products or services, with objectionable amounts of advertising, or that require payment to view the relevant content, colloquially known as external link spamming.
   5. Sites that are inaccessible to a significant proportion of the community, such as sites that only work with a specific browser.
   6. Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content, unless the article is about such rich media. If you do link to such material make a note of what application is required.
   7. Foreign-language sites, unless they contain visual aids such as maps, diagrams, or tables, per the guideline on foreign-language sites.
   8. Bookstore sites; instead, use the "ISBN" linking format, giving an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.
   9. Blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace) and forums should generally not be linked to unless mandated by the article itself.
  10. Links to search engine results.
  11. Links to sites that violate the copyrights of others per contributors' rights and obligations. Sites which fail to provide licensing information or to respond to requests for licensing information should not be used. (Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States.)
  12. Fanlistings are generally not informative and should not ordinarily be included.
I have added the links back on and have put a redirect on to this people do not delete the links before replying to this.
:Hey, I love Rescue Me just as much as you, pal, but the links you've added just aren't notable enough. Rescuemeforum.co.uk hardly has any posts (200 is not alot of posts), and RescueMeFanClub.com consists of nothing more than a single picture. The blog, according to rule #9, shouldn't even be linked, and it only updates once a month anyway. The only site you might be able to eke by into this section is RescueMeForum.com, as it actually is mildly popular, but that site is also not allowed by rule #9. Sorry, but none of these sites really add anything to the article, and they aren't notable in their own right anyway. As such, they will be removed.
:Also, please keep comments like you added in the Rescue Me Fansite's off of the article and instead on the talk page. (Steampowered 01:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rescue Me external links 

message: Now who does actually write the scripts? Probably Leary has a part therein, but who else has contributed? Did they ever give any names? -- 790 16:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Script 

message: *The three list of episodes pages need to be merged into one, like List of South Park episodes. 
*The song listings for each episode belong in their corresponding episode.
*The track info for the soundtrack belongs in a new page. 
I'll help make these changes when I have time. MahangaTalk to me 02:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Did them all. Thanks for the help, people. ;) MahangaTalk 17:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: few suggestions

message: does anyone know what song was playing when tommys son was killed, it played until the very end of the episodeRisteard B 00:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song on the Happy episode 

message: A new noticeboard, Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard, has been created. - Peregrine Fisher 18:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This noticeboard has been deleted per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard. Please disregard the above post. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New noticeboard 

message: This trivia section should be greatly reduced or completely removed.  Per WP:TRIVIA, these sections are greatly discouraged, as they add no real context to the article. - Rjd0060 13:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia Section 

message: Their are some hostile articles below but as David Ray Griffin has pointed out, nearly everyone who looks at the evidence regarding 9/11 with an open mind ends up being convinced that it was an inside job. Supporters include scientists, engineers, pilots, war veterans, politicians, philosophers, former air traffic controllers, former defense ministers, and former CIA analysts. Check out former senior official of the CIA Bill Christison (“I spent the first four and a
half years since September 11 utterly unwilling to consider seriously the conspiracy theories surrounding the attacks that day. . . . [I]n the last half year and after considerable agony, I’ve changed my mind.” and "a superb compendium of the strong body of evidence showing the official US government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 to be almost certainly a monstrous series of lies." ), Ray McGovern and Robert Baer. "If we do get a real investigation or a trial there is simply no doubt of what the verdict will be because now the evidence that 9/11 is an inside job is now overwhelming." - David Ray Griffin. Because Baer had written a critical review Griffins 'The New Pearl Harbor'. Having more recently, like Bill Christison, become convinced that 9/11 was an inside job, he wrote: "Until we get a complete, honest, transparent investigation-not one based on
'confession' extracted by torture we will never know what happened on 9/11. David Griffin will never let this go until we get the truth." Also, hoping that my new book would be found even more convincing than my earlier ones, I was very pleased to see that John Whitbeck, an international law specialist, had written: "After reading David Ray Griffin's previous books on the subject, I was over 90% convinced that 9/11 was an inside job. Now, after reading Debunking 9/11 Debunking,
I am, I regret to say, 100% convinced." 
*December 2, 2008 - Video Update: "Rescue Me" to feature 9/11 Plot Line
*December 3, 2008 - www.prisonplanet.com/hit-tv-series-to-feature-911-conspiracy-plot.html Hit TV Series To Feature 9/11 Conspiracy Plot]
*December 4, 2008 - www.prisonplanet.com/dennis-leary-firefighters-show-to-tackle-911-conspiracy-theories.html Dennis Leary firefighters show to tackle 9/11 conspiracy theories]
*january 13, 2009 - 'Rescue Me' braces for controversy  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.24.33 (talk) 19:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to voice your conspiracy-minded opinions, this is not the place. Rescue Me is not a show about 9/11 conspiracies, it is a show about the emotional burden carried by firefighters who survived 9/11. Conspiracy theories have zero relevance to the show. There is a minor subplot in one season in which one character talks about this, but only over a handful of episodes. It is not nearly an important enough subplot of the season to merit mentioning in the season synopsis, as the season has produced dozens of other subplots that each carry more significant chunk of the story. I have removed a "reference" from the season 6 synopsis. The sentence in question, something along the lines of "actor Daniel Sunjata discussed the sub plot" was not relevant or informative, and was clearly an attempt to get readers to click the link and watch the video. Perhaps this would be relevant on the actor's own Wikipedia article, or on any of the articles devoted to conspiracy theories, but it certainly has no place here. Aoystreck (talk) 01:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 5 & 9/11 Conspiracy 

message: Rescue Me: The Complete Fifth Season has been released for home media, but is not listed under the home media release section.
http://www.amazon.ca/Rescue-Me-Complete-Fifth-Season/dp/B003CPPY5G/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1276966902&sr=8-3
Synister186 (talk) 17:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media Releases section update needed 

message: Not a single photo in such a lengthy article on such a well-known, much publicised series? Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 21:19, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: Does anyone have information on why the Chief, a popular and increasingly sympathetic character, was dropped from the series after season three? Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 03:47, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why was Chief Reilly dropped from the show? 

message: This section is in real need of some kind of overhaul. I like that it attempts to show what seasons the characters had main/recurring roles in, but it gets it VERY wrong. Johnny Gavin was a starring character for season 3, and he isn't listed there at all. Many of the characters listed were also not featured in a starring role for much of the show's run, and it needs fixing. I'd fix it myself but I am only on season 4 and watch this show at a fairly leisurely pace. 
Also, can we not litter the characters section with spoilers? Literally every character that's deceased is credited as such, and this spoils events all the way from the first episode until the last. It's fine to state that Jimmy Keefe is a ghost for the entirety of the run, but pointing out that Lou is dead even though that doesn't happen until the finale is too far.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.137.188 (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, 78.144.137.188 - For better or worse, Wikipedia doesn't feel the same way about spoilers that you do. So, it's okay for so-called spoilers to stay in the article. See: Wikipedia:Spoiler for details. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 08:32, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

text: I adjusted the characters table as I was doing a re-watch. I think I fixed them all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.26.240.99 (talk) 19:46, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Characters Section