Talk:Chuck Bartowski

Undeleted

Requested for the page to be undeleted and did some editing and added a reference, will work on getting more to add further credibility to the page. --Ngeunit1 (talk) 08:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ChuckBartowski.jpg

Image:ChuckBartowski.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) 20:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Copy vio?

The article text is a direct copy of that on the Internet Movie database site (or they have copied WP). I like the series greatly and was going to update the artuicle but can't find any third party material other than imd johnmark†talk to me 22:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Fraternity

In the first season episode "Chuck vs. the Alma Mater" a clear shot of the Greek symbols for Chuck's fraternity can be seen. Could anyone identify this fraternity and add the information to the article? Is this relevant? 161.130.162.249 (talk) 23:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Γ Δ Φ Gamma Delta Phi 194.138.39.56 (talk) 16:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Changing Personality

At the beginning of S1 Chuck hated being an Agent and we see through S1 how he would like to leave the CIA/NSA, however through S2 we start to see this change - in Chuck vs. The Third Dimension he even seems upset about not going on the mission and being given a night off rather and gets in the car. Worth comment? Stuartjmanton (talk) 21:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd say most definitely worth noting. I really think the page could stand a rewrite akin to the one I did for Sarah Walker. The current page is bordering a little too close on being written as "in-universe." Ambaryer (talk) 00:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Chuck as certainly changed since the beginning, though his core values haven't. He'll go to any lengths to save his friends and family, and I don't think he'll listen to the instruction to "stay in the car" anymore. Part of this is he's finally gotten his ruined life out of his system. He now has the Standford degree he earned, and is completely over Jill. I suspect his experiences in Suburbs was a tipping point; he was violated and forced to watch the dark intersect. He took the only way out to save Sarah, letting Fulcrum's agents get the full dose of the dark intersect, knowing they'd probably die or be driven insane. It probably gave him a new level of respect from John Casey, and while Sarah looked very hurt at his apparent betrayal, she may respect his plan in retrospect.

This brings up some interesting thoughts. What if we're misinterpreting the events of this episode. Why does Chuck using the Fulcrum Intersect against them in this manner necessarily have to only be a SIGN of his evolution of his character. What if something actually HAPPENED to him--whether from the sheer trauma of forcibly retaining the data or some information hidden in the imagery that he's subconsciously aware of. What if this CAUSED the change: The last straw that made him realize what he has--and NEEDS--to become? Ambaryer (talk) 06:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

It is possible. I guess I just believe Chuck is evolving. The idea he might be corrupted via the dark intersect is a very interesting idea though. The data via the dark intersect is useful. Chuck flashed on loads of useful Fulcrum information. The real test is if he treats his friends and family and different. Many episodes have shown his deep love for his sister. Shes's #1 in his life.

I'm not saying he was CORRUPTED by it, just that something happened to push him over the line between being unwillingly trapped in this life and realizing that he HAS to fight. Ambaryer (talk) 15:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Chuck can be corrupted. But the intersect has cost him virtually everything, and the dark intersect even more. The dark intersect made him more valuable to the intelligence agencies, but I'm sure he'd prefer to be closer to his sister. Still, Chuck has a breaking point. He realizes he no longer has a normal life. But he does want his sister, Awesome, and Morgan to have one. So maybe his new agenda is to realize his normal life is over, but he has to make one possible for his friends. He's self-sacrificing in that way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jclinard (talk • contribs) 10:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Chuck is getting proactive now. He found Orion, and is defying General Beckman and his handlers. The huge mistake Beckman and Casey are making is that they don't see the human element. Sarah sees it to some extent, but she's making the same mistake... all of them are underestimating Chuck. They all believe in combat training, while Chuck, the pacifist, tries to find ways out of situations where nobody gets hurt. It's worked for the most part. Chuck has the grudging respect of both his handlers and General Beckman because he's gotten results. But they still see him as an asset, where Chuck has his own motives. Ironically, because they don't respect him as a spy, he's able to conduct his own covert operations under their noses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jclinard (talk • contribs) 10:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I disagree entirely with this assessment being made about Sarah. Sarah was the FIRST one that acknowledged Chuck is very good at what he does, even though it wasn't the job he asked for (Chuck Versus the Crown Vic) and she has always done so openly, including defending him against Casey and Beckman. Whenever he has doubts about his abilities Sarah is always the one there supporting him. Sarah KNOWS he's good, and Chuck Versus the Broken Heart proves that her personal feelings and closeness to Chuck AS AN INDIVIDUAL is a substantial part of why they work so well together. Early in Season 2 she called him "Just her asset" because she was trying to shield her personal feelings for him from others (notably in vs. the Seduction when Roan was grilling her about her feelings for him in the van). Sarah's respect for Chuck as a spy is FAR from grudging and I don't think she underestimates him at all. She tries to protect him because he doesn't have the combat skills, but she openly respects his other abilities and has from VERY early in the series recognized his full potential. Ambaryer (talk) 16:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

You know what. Chuck might finally be getting angry. He accepted his new life as a spy. He's gone on dangerous missions. He's risked his life. But despite a few minor incidents like Mother's Day in the past, the events of "Chuck Verses the Broken Heart" have pushed him too far. Chuck is self-sacrificing, but this mission caused a rift between Ellie and Awesome, and Ellie and himself. Above all, Chuck tends to protect his sister from harm. He failed to do so for the first time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jclinard (talk • contribs) 08:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree here. I think this is going to go a long way towards pushing Chuck into standing up for his rights, which Beckman feels she can violate on a whim. I also think that Sarah is going to put her foot down as well. We've seen her ready to go Rogue to keep him out of Longshore's hands, (she almost drew her GUN on him when he refused to let her talk to Chuck) when she was replaced as his handler she performed a probably illegal and definitely unauthorized search on Chuck's father to help him. She's violated her orders on a number of occasions to help protect either Chuck or his friends and family. I really, REALLY see Sarah finally deciding that enough is enough, and going rogue to help Chuck. I think at some point they're going to end up in a personal war together against Beckman. Ambaryer (talk) 16:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Fiction writing

I am a huge fan of Chuck and I am thrilled to see all the effort that has gone into this article thus far. It is really well updated. But it is written in a in-universe way, and not out of universe, as Wikipedia requires. Since this is a fictional person, it should be treated this way. We as editors to this article can familiarize ourselves with the policy at WP:MOSFICT and model this article after featured character articles like Sideshow Bob and Michael_Tritter.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with your appraisal. This article presents a great deal of information directly identifying this as from a television show (particularly refering to episode titles within the article itself and not just as references). Ambaryer (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

New Ability

his new ability seem to affect a more primitive part of his brain allowing him to use many if not all martial arts. he also seemed to have more strength possibly being able to use 100% of human strength and brain and improved senses (Like a captain America type thing). He seemed to be only half aware when fighting perhaps he will develop a Berserker like ability and maybe even physic powers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.100.49.184 (talk) 02:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

During an interview with CF and JS, "The Greatest American Hero" popped up in a question by Alan Sepinwall that they were evasive with answering. I wouldn't be surprised if things aren't always going to work right. Think "Inspector Gadget." Ambaryer (talk) 02:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Aliases in the Infoboxes

Just a question which applies to the other character pages as well, but do we REALLY need to list the one-off aliases Chuck, Sarah and Casey use? Obviously Charles Carmichael is necessary for Chuck since it's his recurring cover, as is "Sarah Walker" for Sarah. I'll also argue for continuing to list Jenny Burton, since that alias gets used whenever Sarah is talking about her family with Chuck. But do we really need to continue listing each new one-time cover identity in the Infoboxes? That could easily be done in the body of each character's article. Ambaryer (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I can agree with all of that. I was going for completeness once I saw all of Sarah's childhood aliases listed, but obviously we should limit it based on notability. I've taken the liberty of removing the non-notable/non-recurring aliases and nicknames from all three characters. --DurandalsFate (talk) 18:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Branch of Service

Did anyone get a real good look at Chuck's badge/credentials in Final Exam/American Hero? American Hero seems to be introducing even MORE confusion over just who Chuck is working for. The Intersect was described as a joint CIA/NSA venture in the pilot, however for much of the series it's seemed that the CIA was primarily directing events in the series, even though Beckman, who was identified as Casey's superior with the NSA, was directly overseeing the team in Season 2. However now Chuck is seen reporting directly to Beckman in Washington (at the office of the Director of National Intelligence, adding yet a THIRD organization into the mix!) but his operational orders to deploy to Rome are coming from the CIA.

So what gives? Who does Chuck REALLY work for? The CIA? NSA? Or is the series doing a retcon by creating a special branch of the Office of the DNI to account for the fact the NSA is in reality a signals intelligence group, and neither they NOR the CIA are legally authorized to operate on US soil? Ambaryer (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the reality of the NSA or CIA plays a part here, but I do believe that Operation Bartowski (and perhaps all of the Intersect-related projects, including Beckman's old hunt for Orion) is compartmentalized within ODNI (though I think they called it the "Directorate of National Intelligence" in the pilot and "D.N.I. HQ" in "American Hero"). The ODNI was where the original Intersect was located, and Beckman is NSA but works directly in ODNI. The implication is that while both the CIA and NSA wanted to have supervisors over the operation at first, they soon came to share the same goals for the Intersect, and the CIA accepts having Beckman as the lead on the project, with Chuck being CIA (as he's said at least a couple of times now) and Sarah reporting to Beckman as if Beckman is her own superior.--DurandalsFate (talk) 22:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd still really like to get a good look at Chuck's ID badge. I rewatched American Hero on Hulu and I don't think it's ever displayed clear enough to get an idea whether it identifies him as CIA or NSA (any time Chuck's ID'ed himself as CIA had been in episodes PRIOR to Final Exam. He hasn't specified since then which department he was assigned to. Yet). Ambaryer (talk) 23:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Just looked at the badge in the final part of "Final Exam." If you look beneath Chuck's photo, there's an identifiable CIA logo. Also, at the beginning of "American Hero," Beckman says the CIA wants him in Rome right away.--DurandalsFate (talk) 04:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Aside

Just a quick side note here, does anyone think it's necessary to mention that Chuck appears in almost every episode wearing black Chuck Taylor's? It seems to kind of be a definig characteristic for him, being a nerd and all. Nadanon (talk) 13:01, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it WAS mentioned.... Ambaryer (talk) 16:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Merge?

Perhaps this article should be merged with other articles to form a "list of characters in Chuck(TV series)"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.121.58.70 (talk) 10:17, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

For those articles, see List of Chuck cast members and List of Chuck characters.

--Boycool (talk) 11:50, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chuck Bartowski. 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://archive.is/20130221061531/http://www.buy-more.net/ to http://www.buy-more.net/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226000044/http://www.insidebuymore.com/ to http://www.insidebuymore.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:02, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Abandoned expansion in user sandbox

Checking changes to categories, I stumbled across an old copy of this article in user space, where a user was starting to draft an expansion to this page, including some new citations.

Please would an interested editor review these changes [1] , incorporate whatever may be useful into this article, and leave a note here to say this has been done. – Fayenatic London 20:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

References?

More than half of the references given in this article are to Wikipedia itself. Wikipedia isn't a reference. Should these references be removed, or is there a viable replacement for them? -- Mikeblas (talk) 20:37, 26 November 2020 (UTC)