Talk:Cops (TV program)/Archive 1

message: shouldnt something about G4's cops 2.0  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.146.222 (talk) 04:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: COPS 2.0

message: Was COPS ever filmed in Canada? I thought I remember seeing an episode based in Toronto. --209.226.183.16 02:55, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to my knowledge.  Denelson83  02:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

text: There's a version called "To Serve and Protect" that films in Seattle, Vancouver, and Edmonton, and maybe some other locations. Bobanny 02:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada

message: Constables...is there a part of the United States where this term is used to describe police officers?  If not, should this word be used? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.73.82.69 (talk • contribs) 
:Some depts in the U.S., such as in Texas, use the term constable.--TruckOttr 08:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look here for more on the title of "Constable" and how it's used in the US and elsewhere. -Maverick 20:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Either way, when a constabulary duty's to be done, to be done, a copper's lot is not an 'appy one. Wahkeenah 02:23, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: In Pennsylvania, local circuit courts refer to their uniformed officers as "constables", whose duties include transporting prisoners  to courts from county prisons and serving criminal and traffic warrants on defendants. Kepiblanc (talk) 19:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Constables

message: Does anyone know what theme song Cops used before Bad Boys?
4:35pm, 6 March 2007
*Car 54 Where Are You? Wahkeenah 02:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Theme Song

message: I've rated this article as start class. It contains some of the information you would expect but is missing some sections (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Television programs). I've rated the importance as mid because of the high number of other shows influenced by this one. To improve the article start adding some more sources.--Opark 77 23:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article assessment

message: In the infobox to the right, it says that there are nearly 2,000 episodes aired (circa April 2007), and then in the introductory paragraph, it states a "milestone" of 650 episodes (circa 2006).  There is surely a mistake one way or the other, or one of either of those numbers need to be specified.  Thought I'd bring this to everyone's attention. Mattygabe 20:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode Numbers 

message: So this article contained a very large amount of unreferenced material.  I have removed the gibberish and hid the stuff that is useful.  I have also fixed all the messiness in line with the manual of style.  Any new stuff, or any attempt to bring the hidden stuff back in, will need references.  See WP:V, WP:ATT, WP:NOR.  --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Okay...

message: It contains almost no information about the show and is 80% a list of parodies. Rubbish.
:Agreed.  Feel free to add sourced material to improve the article instead of complaining, eh? --Edward Morgan Blake 21:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've split off the material noted above (including a list of shows influenced by COPS and a rundown of references to COPS in popular culture) unto their own article, COPS in popular culture.  --Edward Morgan Blake 22:17, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is crap?

message: Atleast half of each show is chock full of cops committing all sorts of crimes - mainly assault and attempted murder. Where's 
the mention of that in this article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.229.240 (talk) 01:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno, but I always wonder why they never show the criminal getting away. -Rolypolyman 15:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because the actions that you see are not crimes because they occurred during the course of their duties. Equinox137 (talk) 02:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

text: More than half of the time the police officers are right to do what they do  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.205.239.163 (talk) 23:59, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Most of the episodes do start with the cautioner that everyone is proven innocent until proven otherwise. My guess is that the police officers just do their jobs and try to get control over the situation and then get the suspect(s) and the situation under control. Not every arrest ends in a conviction... 84.48.92.217 (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of the harassment, brutality, attempted murder, & assault by the cops? 

message: :Image:Cops Logo.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Cops Logo.JPG

message: I think a something that is notable about this series is that from the eighth season to the seventeenth season, the first two to three episodes those seasons were episodes regarding police enforcing the law during Mardi Gras. Since Katrina, the show has not covered Mardi Gras. --Brian(view my history)/(How am I doing?) 03:04, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  mardi gras 

message: I have no specific claims or facts to dispute, but I'm curious as to this article's sourcing. I go onto the official 'Cops' website and click on 'History' and it links here. It seems rather circular.Lord of the Ping (talk) 03:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: "COPS" isn't an acronym. Shouldn't the title of the show be Cops instead of COPS? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As  far as I know, it was always shown in all caps and perhaps people distinguish the show from it? - ShootinPutin109 Talk. 03:44, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  While Cops is not an acronym, and you are correct, it should be lower cased, the show title from Fox is COPS, in all Caps, so the article name matches the show title. NECRATSpeak to me 06:49, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's great disagreement about where the term "cops" comes from, but in any event it's moot: We don't do all-caps for company names, titles, etc. (It's Time magazine, not TIME magazine) per WP:MOSCAPS and WP:ALLCAPS. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this article titled [[COPS (TV series)]] instead of [[Cops (TV series)]]? 

message: In the article, it is quoted "Police departments in Austin, Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, Honolulu, Orlando, Fairfax County, Virginia, and San Jose, California have refused requests to tape in their cities". With no citation or reference. I have been a faithful watcher of COPS for almost 15 years and know for a fact they've shot in Honolulu, and I seem to remember them in Detroit as well early on. NECRATSpeak to me 07:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In any case, "refused" is a bit strong and POV. More likely, it would be accurate to say these places "declined" to have COPS film with them for whatever reason. 76.22.32.86 (talk) 03:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that statement 100%  NECRATSpeak to me 11:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refusal to tape in certain cities 

message: The Criticism section is not supported by references, and is pretty clearly POV. The one single reference refers to a single comment by the Chicago Deputy Director of News Affairs that has little or no connection to the rest of the section. Johnny Squeaky (talk) 03:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism Section 

message: Is it possible to create an episode list? -- 91.66.20.249 (talk) 17:55, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode list 

message: How many total of episodes from March 11, 1989 to now? Well, I am not sure and I make it clear. Thanks! —Sheenmeister (talk) 22:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total of episodes 

message: This has been a constant source of "bickering", and article editing and reverting. It was totally unsourced, wasn't worthy enough of a point to be it's own anyways. So it has been removed and a single line blurb was added to the production section. Please don't revert this beyond this, or else I will get the article locked again.   NECRATSpeak to me 06:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  End Credit Audio Clip 

message: "The series is currently one of only two remaining first-run prime-time programs airing on Saturday nights on the four major U.S. broadcast television networks..."  Arcanicus (talk) 01:31, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: What does this sentence mean?

message: Most other sources state Cops to be filmed "as it happens," that is, it is not reenacted as would be the case with cinema verite. If there is some reliable first source to discount this, please advise.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.107.80.115 (talk) 03:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cinema verite verification 

message: I came to this article to understand more about the filming art/process of COPS and why the suspects never look directly or approach the camera. The article does not go into detail as to the legality of being filmed if it is in fact real life non-actors being filmed. Maybe this is edited out, but it does not seem so. I am very disappointed that I do not know if COPS is just another so called "reality" with amateur acting TV show or true real life. Most of the police officers on the show always seem to use excessive force, are overly vigilant, and excessively violent.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.92.63.39 (talk) 03:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vague Article 

message: I would guess the COPS employee killed was not killed by the "gun" but by an officer's bullet, right?  Thanks, 66.25.212.112 (talk) 18:31, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wendy's shooting 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support I am the nominator -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 06:33, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This TV show is usually stylized as "COPS" allcaps, and frequently appears that way, so using lowercase doesn't really show which show this is about since people expect this show to be capitalized, thus adding the "reality" will show which show this is about. -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 03:23, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I addressed this claim above.  Did you read my comments?  —David Levy 03:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:RECOGNIZABILITY That this show is using "Cops" is not the way that it appears in the world at large to a large portion of the readership, so it is not recognizably distinguished from the All-Caps TV show link COPS (TV series). It clearly is not a primary topic, as they do not use disambiguators, being primary topics, they reside at the undisambiguated location. This topic therefore is not a primary topic, because it uses a disambiguator.  -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 04:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You're conflating recognizability and ambiguity.Regarding the former, are you suggesting that "Cops" is unrecognizable as the program's title?  In other words, do you expect readers seeking the article about the reality show to see "Cops" and not recognize it as that topic's name?Regarding the latter, I'll reiterate that the cartoon's title isn't formatted as "Cops" in any normal context; it's an acronym, not merely a stylized logotype.Because the reality show's title sometimes appears as "COPS", the word's all-uppercase form – either alone or with "(TV series)" appended – realistically could refer to either program.  That's why additional disambiguation ("animated", which just replaced "1988") is used in the title of our article about the cartoon.  The inverse, however, isn't so; "Cops (TV series)" refers strictly to the reality show, so no further disambiguation is needed.No one asserts that the reality show is the primary topic for "Cops".  In my reply to Andrewa, I addressed the issues of disambiguation and primacy separately.  If both television programs were titled "Cops", the reality show would be the primary topic for "Cops (TV series)" (which probably would serve as a redirect, due to the ambiguity issue).  But again, the cartoon isn't titled "Cops", nor is such formatting used in any normal context.  So the reality show is the only topic for "Cops (TV series)".  Nonetheless, if someone seeking the obscure cartoon's article accidentally arrives at that of the reality show, a hatnote points him/her to the correct page.  —David Levy 06:51, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I was woundering why French, German and Spanish versions of Wikipedia (COPS (fr), COPS (es), COPS (de)) have Cops stylized as COPS in the article title, and here instead it is Cops. --Giacomo Sarrocco (talk) 11:28, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stylized form as article title 

message: this section is outdated. "Her retrial is due to begin with jury selection on December 1, 2016."
this date already happened.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.67.120.61 (talk) 20:57, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impact of filming on the Dalia Dippolito case 

message: The opening paragraph of the "Camera crew involvement" section has been deleted. It had long been flagged (since 2010) as being unsourced, and (as of May, 2017) no one had ever fixed that problem -- leaving this paragraph without any indication of a valid, independent source.
Furthermore, the paragraph appeared very much as if it were written by a corporate public-relations office, or as a legal disclaimer by the production company's lawyer (either of which would be a violation of WP:NPOV) -- rather than an independent editor's summary of information from any neutral third-party, secondary source, as called for by WP:NPOV and other elements of WP:STYLE.
It originally read:
:The camera crew that follows the officers are instructed to maintain a fly on the wall position,  not interfering or making their presence known on camera unless otherwise necessary for the safety of officers and civilians on scene. However, there have been multiple instances where the safety of the officers has necessitated their involvement.
In particular, the last sentence makes a very subjective, and potentially litigious, claim:
:there have been multiple instances where the safety of the officers has necessitated their involvement.
Such a serious claim needs a substantial source.
This section could, concievably, benefit from a similar opening paragraph -- IF (and ONLY if) it is from an independent source, citing appropriate third-party, secondary source(s) (preferably major-media or academic sources) as called for by WP:NPOV and other elements of WP:STYLE.
~ Penlite (talk) 10:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Camera crew involvement" - 1st paragraph deleted 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cops (TV series). 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/20111103084545/http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-fox-cancels-americas-most-wanted-show-helped-solve-some-local-cases-20110516%2C0%2C5549397.story to http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-fox-cancels-americas-most-wanted-show-helped-solve-some-local-cases-20110516%2C0%2C5549397.story
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) 00:36, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified