Talk:Dead Like Me

message: Anyone else think it is worth mentioning the fact that in S2:E1 there is a clear reference to Hill Street Blues with a "lets be careful out there" from the dispatcher of the meter maids, followed by them all driving off to the theme tune of the show.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.147.65.92 (talk) 01:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Hill Street Blues

message: Not even one mention that Crystal Smith is an ex Special Forces agent?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.96.210 (talk) 03:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See here. Stormin' Foreman 04:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Crystal

message: It would make sense.. What are you think?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.37.241.49 (talk) 09:04, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This conclusion is two steps ahead of 'gravelings~gremlins' and 'toad~Todd (from 'Apt Pupil')' 2A0A:A549:279F:0:AD48:AEE7:2328:1F6 (talk) 00:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Gravelings = Keres (mythology)?

message: After reviewing the article, I have decided to fail the GA nomination for the following reasons:
*Many of the images lack either a Fair Use Rationale and/or fail to cite their source.  Additionally, some of the Fair Use rationales that are given are not sufficient (like the gravelings images).  Consider using :Template:Non-free media rationale or at least address those points in text/bullet points of your own.
*Fair-Use images are not allowed in galleries or lists, so the DVD releases sections will have to be revised a bit.  (see Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information)
*The article should be referenced more thoroughly. For instance the Gravelings section has no references at all. Ideally every new thought should have a citation.  So, this would at least entail a reference per paragraph.
*The formating of the references is inconsistent.  My suggestion would be to use citation templates, though this is not required of a GA article.  (The good thing about using the citation templates, is that it makes it really easy to cite in-universe facts/plot points using the  template)  As an examples I've stumbled upon recently, check out the references section in Final Fantasy VIII article.  I know it's a video game and this is a tv show, but I think it would serve as a good example of reference style, since it does a good job of quoting the characters themselves as sources of in-universe information.
*The article is almost completely in-universe.  That is to say, except for a brief mention of the show's inspiration and creators in the intro and a section about the movie, there is no information about the television series, only the characters, concepts, and ideas within the fictional world.  What about the creators?  Writers?  Ratings?  Awards? etc.
*The Cast and characters section is a bit bloated.  There is already a link to the List of Dead Like Me characters page, so there is no reason to include 3/4 of that page on this one.  Stick to the primary characters and let the main article link do the rest.
*The Reapers sections is also a bit bloated.  It isn't neccessary to go into every little detail.  I'd recommend reducing it to the size of the Gravelings section, but that's just my recommendation.
*The Gravelings section also seems a wee bit too big.  What might help alleviate this problem at least a little bit (and the one above) is to use the  template (as mentioned in the 4th bullet point down).  That would allow you to take out all the instances of "In the episode "Blah Blah" we learn this..."
*The introduction does not effectively summarize the article.  Readers should read the into to gain a quick synopsis of the article: points which are then expounded upon below.  Conversely, the intro brings up topics which the rest of the article does not address (such as departure of Bryan Fuller).
*Speaking of Bryan Fuller, it sounds like there was some drama there, so let's hear more about.  I'm curious about that most of all.
*I think the DVD releases section could be included in the Episodes section.  (After the images are taken out, of course)
*As for the prose style of the article, it's decent, though a bit wordy and overly detailed.  However it is very clear and easy to understand, so kudos there.
Overall it is a decent article, but still needs some work to reach GA status.  If you have any questions feel free to ask here or on my talk Page. Good luck. Drewcifer3000 08:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for reviewing the article (good job!) I personally did not believe it to be ready yet either. Eventually it would be nice to get this article (of a brilliant television series) to GA. :) Matthew 08:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take on these tasks and see what I can do. Once again, thanks for the review. Stormin' Foreman 08:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Happy to help you guys.  If you need anything let me know. Drewcifer3000 09:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA nomination

message: In one week (August 25) I am going to renominate this article for GA status... Any objections? Stormin' Foreman 13:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: None at all.  Although you should un-strike the bullet points from the previous GA review I gave, so that whoever reviews the article next can see my comments.  Instead, you can say in your nomination that you feel that you've fixed the issues raised in a previous review, or something like that.  Good luck! Drewcifer3000 17:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New nomination

message: Why is there no mention of the series "second run" on the Sci Fi Channel?  I think this was significant, as the series was opened to a whole new, larger audience.  Ursasapien (talk) 08:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a quick, sourced mention of the SCI FI reruns to the intro paragraph. —Adavidb 05:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sci Fi Channel

message: I have reviewed this article, and do not believe it to meet good article standards for the following reasons:
#There are too many interpretive claims in the article that are not backed to any source. "Delores Herbig becomes the supportive, maternal figure that George never had when alive." "it is possible that Crystal is a reaper" and "she might have some kind of implied special power or connection that is recognizable by gravelings" require more clear attributions - who thinks these things are possible? Who is making these interpretations?
#There is still too much in-universe material. The "reapers" and "gravelings" sections should be judiciously edited down, and other sections (reception, production) expanded.
#Overuse of fair use images. I see no reason why both Graveling images are necessary, and the main image illustrates nothing that is not illustrated by the cast photo, as the cast photo also has the logo.
Good luck revising the article. I look forward to reading it again. Phil Sandifer 16:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA nomination

message: Who is the actress that plays "Mildred" as supposed to George. i.e. the person other people see? Shouldn't that also be added as well?
Also the part on how people become reapers, and how people stop being reapers should be added as either one or two sentences. That should make it less in-universe.--204.102.211.115 19:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I don't believe a separate paragraph is warranted, I added a sourced sentence in the Grim reapers section about Laura Boddington's role as the character you mentioned. —Adavidb 04:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Actors 

message: In the section where the grim reaper's special abilities are described, someone could add the information that grim reaper Roxy in one episode pulls the soul out of a guys body to intimidate him. During that, the guy is able to see his own body standing still in a zombie-like way while Roxy is holding his "soul body" up in the air. She then puts the soul back into the guy's body and regrets having done that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.173.219.23 (talk) 00:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, this information was already added. —ADavidB 22:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Agreed. I changed the statement to reflect the reality described in the episode. Cheers! JasonDUIUC (talk) 07:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition to section "Grim reapers" 

message: A Temp Agency called Happy Time was mentioned in the season 2 premiere of Bryan Fuller's new show Pushing Daisies. Anyone have any issues with adding it? WookMuff (talk) 07:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Der Waffel Haus was also mentioned in Pushing Daisies.68.148.123.76 (talk) 00:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Happy Time 

message: Is this a US or Canadian show?  The site lists it as a US show, but says it was made in Vancouver and set in Seattle.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.123.76 (talk) 08:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a US show. The film location is not important. The series was made by a US production company and premiered and aired in the US. Production companies often film in Vancouver because it is cheaper to film there. kingdom2 (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not interested in starting an argument, but I do not agree with your statements.  Bryan Fuller is American; the series was made by DLM Productions, which IMDB lists as a Canadian production company (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0100002/).  It aired in many countries, but premiered in the US and Canada on the same day (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0348913/releaseinfo#akas), while Dead Like Me: Life After Death premiered a month and a half earlier in Canada (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1079444/releaseinfo) than the US (where it was never aired, but simply released directly to DVD).  Moreover Vancouver is one of North America's most expensive cities; forth according to the Mercer serveys (after New York, Toronto, and Los Angeles), and second according to the Economist Intelligence Unit, after New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_cities_for_expatriate_employees).  Lower production cost could be achieved in almost any American city.  Vancouver is one of Canada's three main film production centers (along with Toronto and Monreal), which is why so many films and television programs are shot there.  I believe this should be listed as a Canadian program.68.148.123.76 (talk) 00:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The "premieres" cited on IMDB are for the series DVD set, not original television broadcasts, which I understand were first in the U.S. (since Showtime doesn't have a Canadian audience). How about leaving out the "American" claim in the lead sentence, or replacing it with "North American" if necessary?  It's clear people from both the U.S. and Canada collaborated in producing the series. —ADavidB 08:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What determines the nationality of a series is where it aired its episodes premiere , and upon looking it up more thoroughly, it seems like this show should be classified as "United States/Canada". It appears that each episode premiered in both countries simultaneously. This is also how IMBD classifies this show. "North American" and "American" are horrible ideas, because "North American" also includes Mexico and "American" includes all of North, South, and Central America (that last one is from an international viewpoint, not the egocentric, U.S. one). kingdom2 (talk) 17:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, if one feels a need to identify nations rather than a continent, then North American won't work. IMDB is not necessarily a reliable source, though as pointed out above, it's the series DVD set that was released simultaneously in the U.S. and Canada, not the original (Showtime) airings. Using your "where it aired its episode premieres" definition, Dead Like Me is a U.S. series. Showtime does not broadcast in Canada.  —ADavidB 01:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm confused. Those release dates that are in the link that you say are for the DVD box set are verified as being for the individual episodes by both the Dead Like Me lede, the List of Dead Like Me episodes, and the list of episodes on IMBD. I think either you are mistaken or there is was a very large screw-up (which, I admit, is possible). While I don't doubt that Showtime doesn't air in Canada, that doesn't mean that Dead Like Me did not air on a different network, possibly some other Viacom affiliate. kingdom2 (talk) 18:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

text: The IMDB date is for the date the episode premiered on broadcase TV in the US and on the same day the first season was released on DVD in Canada?  Does that seem logical to anyone?  The show was broadcase in Canada on Showcase, which works in partnership with Showtime.  As for the 'shot in Vancouver and set in Seattle' thing, I would like to compare this to the series Highlander (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highlander_(series) ); shot in Vancouver and Paris, but set in Seattle and Paris.  It is listed as a Canadian/French program, because it was made in these two countries.68.148.123.76 (talk) 07:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I've yet to see any verification that the series was broadcast in Canada the same days it premiered in the U.S.  It seems it aired on Showcase after The Movie Network. Though the names are similar, I don't believe Showtime and Showcase are formal partners. Regarding differences, Showtime is a U.S. company. Does anyone have a problem with listing it as a United States/Canada series? —ADavidB 13:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No. kingdom2 (talk) 17:11, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  US or Canada? 

message: It was a television show, not is.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.190.38.84 (talk) 10:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still a television show, viewable via reruns and DVD recordings. —ADavidB 11:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And my grandma is still viewable through pictures and recordings, but is no longer alive. Same goes with Elvis. --72.190.38.84 (talk) 08:29, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:TENSE, which applies to works of fiction. —ADavidB 15:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is to Was 

message: I appear to be the only person to have picked up on this, but I wish to draw attention to it by existing editors rather than adding it in myself; during the vet scene the substance the vet draws into the syringe is called "Sleepklon-B" with subtext stating it's "Euthanasia Solution", this is starkly close to 'Zyklon-B' part of Hitler's 'Final Solution'. I uploaded a screen cap to my blog, bashpr0mpt.com, anyone want to take this one on? :/ BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 21:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really.  Tenuous, and original research.   a_man_alone (talk) 18:15, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't pull the 'original research' card on observations of a movie or show. That's absurd. The entire article would be empty because it's all original research; had I not declared the screen cap as having been my blog it'd therefore be a secondary source at least. Don't be daft, I'm asking for serious opinions here. BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 21:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You asked for input and received some. Serious opinions don't have to be those that agree with yours. 'Original research' limitations still apply to television and film articles. If the observations you noted are published by reliable sources, and not self-published ones, by all means include and cite them; otherwise, they don't belong on Wikipedia. —ADavidB 22:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Anti-Semitic Reference

message: The article claims "She died on December 13, 1938 of asphyxiation/smoke inhalation in Marietta, Georgia, though she originally claimed this occurred on the set of Gone with the Wind."  But in episode 29 "Haunted" Daisy meets someone who remembers her dying on the set.  Is there any reference that she didn't?
Egret (talk) 07:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Daisy's death

message: I suppose reading discworld books is influencing me here, but has it been stated that all souls are taken by reapers? Or do they only reap certain souls (for whatever reason)? Seem to be few reapers for lots of souls.--Cyberman TM (talk) 23:35, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's stated that there are different groups of reapers for different types of deaths (groups mentioned are: External influence, Plague, and Natural/Hospital). Reapers also confine themselves to the area around their home city. Different cities have their own reapers. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the answer, but I suppose I should rephrase my question, to remove ambiguity - are all souls taken by reapers (of whatever division) or do some souls go into the afterlife "naturally"?--Cyberman TM (talk) 21:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's stated in two of the early episodes that souls that are not reaped remain trapped in the body until then. This seems to hold even if a body is mostly destroyed. Rube states that he once spent (I believe) half an hour looking for a piece big enough to draw the soul out of. The only known exception to this is the second season character who became a graveling after dying. Long after the fact, the graveling was itself reaped by George and simply disappeared. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reapers reap ALL souls?

message: I noticed while reading the article, it said that Rube died in 1927, but that Betty died in 1926. How exactly would it have been possible for Rube to collect her soul immediately after her jump, if he didn't die for a year later? It was shown in the show that he did that, and just making sure there isn't an error in the article. 99.39.151.190 (talk) 15:22, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a plot hole/continuity error.  Both characters are categorically stated in the programme to have died in 1926 & 1927 respectively, although in a later episode Betty also make a comment implying she was still alive in 1927.  I suppose their deaths could have been in the same year, but when Rube greets Betty post-death he seems to be pretty confident in his role, and anyway - what do I know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by A man alone (talk • contribs) 15:45, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Mistake, or Plothole? 

message: In just a cursory glance at this article one can see it needs to be fixed. There's the bad writing style... good enough reason for a fix. But there's also missing information! Will someone (who can write) who loves this show do some work on this article? 108.202.113.201 (talk) 08:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing... this article needs it 

message: Has he or anyone else disclosed how the show would've went if Fuller had his way? --TiagoTiago (talk) 10:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we know what changes were made against Fuller wishes? 

message: The article states: "While the members of Rube's team of reapers are instructed to never reap animals, George (and Reggie) do meet a child reaper who reaps the souls of animals — suggesting that there may be a fourth division that exists for this purpose." In at least one episode, Georgia is at the veterinarian's office with Delores Herbig, who does also meet the boy. I haven't seen the entire series, so I do not know if Reggie also meets him, so I do not know if this is a case of a name being left out, or a factual error. Either way, it should probably be corrected. MXVN (talk) 12:18, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Reggie not only meets Charley, but she shares hot chocolate with him.  IIRC it's the episode where the school janitor dies, and kills a komodo dragon which Charley then reaps.  I suppose it may have been intended for her to have a relationship with him had the series continued, as that's the screwed up way things were heading towards the end of the show.  As such, the original statement is correct, and I don't see what you want changing?  The difference is that George knows he's a reaper, Reggie suspects he has otherworldy pretensions, but Dolores is entirely unsuspecting.  Does that help?  Chaheel Riens (talk) 14:46, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mythology section - Grim Reapers 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dead Like Me. 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/20090416073641/http://channelcanada.com:80/Article2608.html to http://www.channelcanada.com/Article2608.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130806221535/http://www.lalalandrecords.com/DeadLikeMe.html to http://www.lalalandrecords.com/DeadLikeMe.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dead Like Me. 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/20110716161042/http://www.subtitlelive.com/download/dead-like-me-s01e01-subtitles/15262-3509/ to http://www.subtitlelive.com/download/dead-like-me-s01e01-subtitles/15262-3509/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.channelcanada.com/Article2608.html
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) 02:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is there a section that reviews the inside/dirty jokes?
For example, I recall a dialog where one female character is called a Cat Under No Table, except they didn't use those words. I can't remember the exact words.
There were all kinds of "jokes" like that and I'm looking for a list of them. I'm sure many of them went over my head. 173.23.121.3 (talk) 06:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt such a section would pass notability and/or be supported by reliable sources.  Most likely it would be considered trivia and not be included.  Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:29, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  cat under no table