Jump to content

Talk:One Tree Hill (TV series): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 305646180 by MadMoovz (talk) - restore signature
MadMoovz (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 114: Line 114:
::Okay, I have tweaked the timeline section in response to what you have stated above. Are you okay with it now? Either way, I must state that the series has had several timeline inconsistencies, and did not even seem to follow being 2011-2012 in Season 5 (if that was even the year they were in, LOL). [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] ([[User talk:Flyer22|talk]]) 11:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
::Okay, I have tweaked the timeline section in response to what you have stated above. Are you okay with it now? Either way, I must state that the series has had several timeline inconsistencies, and did not even seem to follow being 2011-2012 in Season 5 (if that was even the year they were in, LOL). [[User:Flyer22|Flyer22]] ([[User talk:Flyer22|talk]]) 11:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
:::Dammit I know the show started in 2003 but it's called FLOATING TIMELINE!!!There were no references to the real world events just to make script-writers work easier to upgrade the timeline.And read the birthdate on wiki-pages of Luk Scott1988) Haley(1988) Marv(1988)They are OFICIAL.They are 23 in the 5th season.So:1988+23=2011!!!!
:::Dammit I know the show started in 2003 but it's called FLOATING TIMELINE!!!There were no references to the real world events just to make script-writers work easier to upgrade the timeline.And read the birthdate on wiki-pages of Luk Scott1988) Haley(1988) Marv(1988)They are OFICIAL.They are 23 in the 5th season.So:1988+23=2011!!!!
I am deleting your section AGAIN if you want to proove that you're right add some source and don't use word PROBABLY.
About inconsistencies:there are plenty of them. It is a TV show not a documentary. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:MadMoovz|MadMoovz]] ([[User talk:MadMoovz|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MadMoovz|contribs]]) 15:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
About inconsistencies:there are plenty of them. It is a TV show not a documentary. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:MadMoovz|MadMoovz]] ([[User talk:MadMoovz|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MadMoovz|contribs]]) 15:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Revision as of 15:43, 2 August 2009

WikiProject iconTelevision Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Notice of One Tree Hill episode article review

The individual episode articles for One Tree Hill (TV series) are now being reviewed according to episode notability guidelines. Please contribute to the discussion on Talk:List of One Tree Hill episodes#Episode article review. Thanks. -- Jack Merridew 10:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Merge proposal

On the grounds that "One Tree Hill: Fast Forward" is not its own tv series, or even miniseries. Not that the following are absolutely definitive, but neither imdb nor tv.com list this as a series in its own right. Having the various video documentary/commentary clips listed as "episodes" on the official site does not mean it should have its own article here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.252.211.226 (talk) 02:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Major Rewrite

Having just rearranged and renamed the overall sections, and understanding this is a big change, please refer to the Wikipedia styleguide for television shows.

The next step (and hopefully someone else will pitch in so I'm not alone in this daunting task) is to condense the season recaps by a LARGE margin, and to rewrite them so the tone reflects a real-world perspective.

Also, there are too many lists, for instance the character list. Wikipedia is not the IMdB!

One of the final things which needs to be done (as per a wiki guideline I just read) is not to give so many characters their own pages, this is an encyclopedia.

Thank you, brandon.macuser (talk) 03:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should something be mentioned on this page about how each season is equivalent to half a school year? 72.224.21.120 (talk) 21:02, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music

First of all a reminder. Before anyone makes an edit in an article HAS TO come here and discuss about it and come to final conclusion. Second of all, I renewed the Music article with more information. I added a list with the artists that have appeared to the show & in which episode can be found. I mentioned the One Tree Hill Tour embarking by the WB. Last, I listed the soundtracks by volumes.

If there's anyone that disagrees with the changes, DO NOT change the article unless we all have a nice talk about it and conclude to something common! Any change tha will be made without coming through discussion will be erased and put back as it was(at least for "music").ClassicDude

Did you come to discuss the changes you made to a well written section, before changing it to a messy list? No. The current version is well written, and follows wikipedia's standards. This isn't a fan site. Russell [ Talk ] 19:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Origin of Name?

Does anyone know where the name of the show originates from? Is it related in anyway to One Tree Hill (song), by U2? There was an episode in season 5 called "Running to Stand Still" -- which is also a song by U2, from the same album (Joshua Tree), if I'm not mistaken. FashionNugget (talk) 03:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Might check the Disambiguation page for leads...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_tree_hill Biffjohnson (talk) 04:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Tree Hill is the name of the town they live in. In one episode (I can't currently remember which one) one of the characters say's "There is only One Tree Hill". Laboviorodruin (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Oth209.jpg

Image:Oth209.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 ensure 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) 14:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Oth223.jpg

Image:Oth223.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 ensure 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) 14:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Othseason4.jpg

Image:Othseason4.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 ensure 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) 14:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Synopsis

Going through the article for the first time, I notice there is no overall description of what the series is about, I guess a two-line synopsys might be worth considering. Just a suggestion (I do not know the series, or I would propose one myself). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpadinha (talkcontribs) 10:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This should be done. The article as it stands makes it very difficult to discover the major themes of the show. For instance, in the section on the cast, in the discussion of character Nathan Scott, the article states that he is "the son that Dan did claim". This is the first time any suggestion of a son being claimed or not claimed is mentioned. This seems to be a major theme, and so surely should be mentioned right up front, but in fact nowhere in the article is this idea clarified. I would suggest that the major themes of the show should be made clear in the very first paragraph, and not left to be pieced together from random bits of information picked up elsewhere. Ash211263 (talk) 18:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie Jones

As a regular member of the cast for season 5 and the beginning of season 6, I believe he should be included in the cast list. Thoughts? EBY (talk) 17:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Carl.bunderson (talk) 04:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, he was a guest star, and never in the main cast. He hasn't even been in as many episodes as other guest stars. There is no reson that a guest character should be listed in the main cast. The main cast are the regulars! Russell [ Talk ] 11:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Robbie Jones was at the very least recurring, not guest. He appeared in over half of season 5. "Guest" is a short-term designation that is contractually well-defined (as it also is for award shows).
CW doesn't list him in the cast but then again they don't list many of the recurring characters that are noted in the Wiki article, so that isn't a helpful barometer.
His notability in regards to the show has clearly been demonstrated. I suggest, if this is an issue for some, that we organize the cast in the way that is done for other shows - Main cast, Recurring & Notable guest stars.
This isn't a popularity contest on how people feel about a character. Including a character in the article and where is an issue based on criteria like notability and impact to the storyline, contractual status, and tenure. There's no questions "Quentin" should be included in an article on One Tree Hill - there question is, how & where. EBY (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

one tree hill

Is the best show ever made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.157.9.61 (talk) 17:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music section

sountracks aid the national breast cancer foundation. apparently there's only one. the *American national breast cancer foundation* maybe?? or something like it anyway. 86.40.184.8 (talk) 14:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline

This section is an original research.It is stated within the show that they graduated in 2007.The season 5 takes place 4.5 years later.So it's 2011-2012(sason 5 and 6).Please edit or delete this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadMoovz (talkcontribs) 20:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is original research? The section is backed up by primary sources (meaning...the show itself), and additional reliable sources for other parts. It is fact that the characters were age 16 in 2003 when the show aired. It is fact that seasons 1 and 2 equate to one year, and seasons 3 and 4 equate to another year; the creator has said this, and it is shown within the series. What you have stated is simply an example of the inconsistencies of the timeline. The whole section should not be removed, but I can tweak it to include what you state if it is indeed stated within the series that they graduated in 2007. Flyer22 (talk) 11:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have tweaked the timeline section in response to what you have stated above. Are you okay with it now? Either way, I must state that the series has had several timeline inconsistencies, and did not even seem to follow being 2011-2012 in Season 5 (if that was even the year they were in, LOL). Flyer22 (talk) 11:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dammit I know the show started in 2003 but it's called FLOATING TIMELINE!!!There were no references to the real world events just to make script-writers work easier to upgrade the timeline.And read the birthdate on wiki-pages of Luk Scott1988) Haley(1988) Marv(1988)They are OFICIAL.They are 23 in the 5th season.So:1988+23=2011!!!!

About inconsistencies:there are plenty of them. It is a TV show not a documentary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadMoovz (talkcontribs) 15:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]