Talk:Tru Calling

Language in Use

The language in use in the article is Canadian/British English. It has been like that since way before I started editing the article. The Wikipedia convention on this matter is that majority rules, and as most contributors to the page are evidently in accordance with this, it should remain that way. I note that FYC Travis whom I know, has been here since I reverted a change back to this previously, and he doesn't miss a thing. so, if it is good enough for Travis, who's an Admin, then it should be good enough for everyone else - and this, as said previously is in keeping with the Wiki directives on this matter. Where the programme originates from doesn't make any difference.

Lost Girls Diary 19:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia convention is not "majority rules", by which I think you mean "maintaining internal consistency"; that is only one of several guidelines presented by the board. Another is national ties, which you've conveniently neglected to mention. Stating part of a truth as a whole is just as bad as presenting only part of a quote in order to skew its meaning. Tru Calling was originally a U.S. TV series, therefore strong argument can be made that American English should be used in this article. Where the programme originates can make a difference. Travis was probably trying to express that the consistency of English usage should be maintained, but if an editor is so moved to rewrite the article to avoid variations or to change to a different style of English that is perfectly allowable. Above all, usage within an article should be consistent; that is not the same thing as "majority rules". It's moot anyway, as the community has apparently moved the article back to American English since your post, but I thought it would be worthwhile to remind those following after that would-be editors must choose from all the conventions when deciding which form of English to use. 71.200.138.188 (talk) 13:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Move cancelled show list to its own entry?

There seems to be an extensive list here of scifi shows cancelled before their time. Should it get its own entry? --Cfeyrer 16:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Last name references

I think it's ridiculous for the characters (especially Tru) to be referred to by their last names throughout the article. It's awkward and stilted and just doesn't feel appropriate at all. It would be like referring to the main character of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" as "Summers," or the cast of "Friends" as Bing, Gellar, Tribianni, etc... this sort of approach might be suited to certain shows (like the CSI's or the "Law and Order" franchise), but it just doesn't feel right for this one. -- Tony

Agreed, especially as the episode guide did have the correct names. Names have now been edited so the episode guide and the rest of the page match, and so the character names are now the ones used on the show (eg. "Davies" to "Tru" and "Harper" to "Jack")

It should make the page a lot easier to read and understand.

Also corrected "Lindsay" throughout as IMDb shows that as the correct spelling. -- B33R 05:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The Relive a Day Foundation

Hi, I noticed in the article about The Relive a Day Foundation (fan-made season '3' of Tru Calling). In my opinion, this should be taken out of the article, because then, we (wikipedia) would have to show every fan made Tru Calling, or we could move this to a new article e.g. 'Tru Calling Fanon'?.. What do you think? Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 18:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Rather it should be reworded and generalized. Note that describing the influence a series has had on real world is an important aspect of an article. This includes describing the fandom that resulted, spin-offs, merchandise etc. It's much more important then character and episode descriptions (in-universe information) which is often deemed less encyclopedic of nature than real world facts TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 15:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you now, I did a slight cleanup and generalization.. Please comment about it here.. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 00:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Expanding Character Articles

Hello, I just created a few Tru Calling character articles here that need some expanding.. (Jack Harper, Harrison Davies, Davis), and the Tru Davies article (I did not create that one) needs to be expanded as well.. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 02:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Brief plot summary at beginning of entry.

All the other TV series entries I've looked at have a brief (may only be a sentence or two) plot summary in the first section. Whereas in this you have to go past the spoiler warning before you even have any idea what the show is about. For someone like myself who knows nothing about the show this if the first thing I want to know, rather than information on when the show was cancelled, when it aired, etc. as is currently there. 121.44.65.18 17:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I added a very broad and brief synopsis right at the beginning. I also added that reruns will be starting on Sci-Fi, if that seems relevant.RawrVenom27 02:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)RawrVenom27

Why on Earth would you "speedy-delete" the DVD cover?

The Season One DVD cover image is now missing, and the Season Two cover is listed as "Speedy-delete". May I ask why on Earth this is so? First, I can't believe any company would have a problem with a low-res scan of their DVD covers being posted in an article on the show, seeing as the cover itself is everywhere online where it's sold - is this not basically the exact same thing as using officially-released promotional pictures or theatrical posters in articles? It's promotional material for the series which is intended to be widely viewed, and in this case it is very relevant, given that the article includes an infobox on the DVD releases and including covers is a common practice in such infoboxes, which is pretty obvious from the fact that there's a place for such an image. Second, I'd like to know why I can't seem to reach a discussion page to debate whether it should be kept or not, as when it comes to DVD cover images, but especially this one, I would in general feel it to be defensible at least, and yet when I try to access the page to discuss the deletion proposal, all I get is a listing of the general reasons for speedy-delete, which as far as I can tell may not even apply in this case, as fair use rationale, origination, copyright tag, etc. was given for the image. :\ Is this an effect of being listed for Speedy-delete instead of regular deletion, and if so - please, can someone tell me why it's listed for non-regular deletion? 4.235.60.11 15:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I have the same problem comprehending why either were listed for speedy delete. I gave tried to remove the tag, but undortunately the picture goes down with it. for now, luckily, the season one picture survives. Hopefully, if it IS actually deleted, someone will put it back. If anyone has access to the season two picture, please add it back in the appropriate place and lets see it if survives this time. Lost Girls Diary 22:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Tru's school

Could someone please confirm where the character Tru was going to school. I am currently writing an article, and I would like to have that information available. I also would like to know in which episode it was mentioned. - LA @ 12:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Input from the fan-base

Coming Soon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flapman (talk • contribs) 15:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Just make sure it's reliably sourced! Jclemens (talk) 17:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Based on the wealth of unsourced original research I just removed, I would also reccomend reading WP:NOR. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 18:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Where on Earth has the 'What Might Have Been' Info Gone To?

It was sourced from one of the producers (if its no longer online it doesn't change the fact it was sourced at the time and so still stands true today). It was useful and told us what was GOING to happen before the show got cancelled - including the Jensen arc etc. 86.165.61.20 (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Someone deleted it a few weeks ago (check the history), since it was sourced to a blog to begin with, see WP:RS and WP:SPS. I had no problem with it being there, but I have to agree that it wasn't sufficiently well sourced to survive a challenge. Jclemens (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for asking about it almost 2 years ago now. I would have never thought to look for something like this. I never read the article while it was included. Normally a producer saying "this is where the show was going had it not been cancelled" would be taken from wherever one can get it. That typically is the creator's or producer's personal blog. Occasionally there is a featurette or commentary on a DVD release that will give this information. For things of this nature the often only option is a self-published source, aka primary source.

"Self-published material may in some circumstances be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." I contest that having produced and written episodes which were "published" on broadcast television qualifies Doris Egan as being an established expert on the show.

"if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so." Well how often does the media report anything more than "<Name of Show> has been cancelled due to <reason>."? Move on to what is new; forget what is old. As a fan of Tru Calling, and of many other shows which were abruptly cancelled, i say it is worth reporting any information on what would have been if it comes from someone who is/was in a position to personally know or/and direct where the show would have gone had it not been cancelled. Such is the case with Doris Egan and Tru Calling. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 00:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, your reasoning, such as it is, is nonsense. Egan is not "a reliable third-party source", she is a PRIMARY source, and cannot be used for that very reason. Frankly, in the absence of budget constraints, network demands, actor availability, writers product, even she cannot know what would have happened next, only what might possibly happen. Thus, the entire section is insupportable speculation, which is unencyclopedic and must be removed from the article. Canonblack (talk) 00:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Request for comment on articles for individual television episodes and characters

A request for comments has been started that could affect the inclusion or exclusion of episodes and characters, as well as other fiction articles. Please visit the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 11:26, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

original pilot?

what does "26 episodes plus original pilot" mean?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.206.242.205 (talk) 15:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

It means that the version broadcast on 30 October 2003 was not the first version but the second. For a while i looked like FOX would push the premiere back to a mid-season spot and the producers were going to use that time to make a third version of the pilot. The BBC even has mention of this in their "cult tv" section, which you can read here. I have read about it but i have been looking for that original pilot for almost seven years. Some people include it in bootleg versions of the show. I just don't feel like buying the entire show just to get it. Apparently a bit of the story and some casting changes are where much of the differences lie. delirious & lost ☯ ^~hugs~ 21:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Soundtrack?

Was there ever a soundtrack released for this series? I can't seem to find one in any online stores, but there are some covers and track listings around. Are these bootlegs/fanmade products or the real deal? Cheers. 213.186.254.196 (talk) 00:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Layout of the page changed

I have completely changed the layout of this page, putting stuff about the series cancellation into a separate section and including what was proposed by Doris Egan would happen had the show received another season. I have put the main storyline into a 'series overview' section. The cast and characters section is much easier to navigate with a table introduced, and I have added pictures of the show's arguably main leads, Eliza Dushku and Jason Priestley to the side of the cast and characters section as thumbnails. The Reception section has been updated to include only the table, with a separate section for the show's awards and nominations which have been put into a table. So, the whole article looks neater and is much easier for me and us fans and casuals to navigate. Any problems with these updates, carried out by me serielover on February 16, 2015, feel free to put them here. SerieLover (talk) 23:37, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tru Calling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060708154445/http://www.hollywoodreporter.com:80/thr/television/feature_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000937471 to http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/television/feature_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000937471

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)