Talk:CSI (franchise)

Direction

The idea for this came up on the CSI talk page with inspiration from Law & Order franchise which can provide a bit of a template to the general direction we are aiming at. (Emperor 23:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC))

Go for it. It's nice to see someone else working on the CSI-related articles.— Sandtiger 12:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Merges

I say no to either. I think we should try and outline the issue and use Template:Main to link through to the relevant entry. (Emperor 23:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC))

I say no to each of the proposed merges. This article should give an overview of the franchise. --Oscarthecat 19:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Novels

Good work getting it started. When it is looking more solid I'd suggest splitting the bulk of the content off to: CSI (novels) where it can be expanded further. (Emperor 12:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC))

Templates

How about rationalising the templates? Template:CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, Template:CSI: Miami and Template:CSI: NY

Strikes me what might work is a main one (Template:CSI main) with links to the common elements like series main entries and related broad entries (like this one, the CSI Effect, etc.) Then trim the other 3 down to just with characters, episodes, etc. That way you can mix and match them - possibly having all 4 here, the main one and the relevant one for the relevant series and possibly just the main one for the CSI Effect, etc. I can easily mock up the main one to demonstrate what I mean. (Emperor 01:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC))

Now being discussed on th project talk page. (Emperor 15:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

CSI: London/possible expansion

It was confirmed in late 2006 that there is no intention to expand on the spinoffs, see CSI Vegas talk page. Referenced to CSI:London removed. Editus Reloaded 19:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

NCIS?

I think that it was on the halloween episode that they busted into a party and someone commented on their hats saying "You spelled 'CSI' wrong" (the hats say 'NCIS'). Should something like that be added to the 'NCIS' section?

Tricky - a lot of the pop culture references are trivial off the cuff remarks and difficult to source. I'd be happier with more substantial mentions of CSI. If you can reference it then add it in but I suspect trivia clean-up may try and remove it when they are done deleting entries so don't bust your hump looking for the information ;) (Emperor 23:19, 9 August 2007 (UTC))

In Popular Culture

shouldn't the "In popular culture" section of the CSI franchise article be in this article main article ? i have seen many TV show's articles with this section in the main article (see Friends ).Yamanbaiia 15:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Friends is not part of a franchise (there is only one Friends show...thank God), but CSI: Crime Scene Investigation is so this article covers general information about the three franchise shows. See also Law & Order franchise. Editus Reloaded 18:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

• what i meant is why not put a "in popular culture" section in each CSI article instead of just one in the CSI franchise article , for example South Park and MADtv have made many references to CSI las vegas, however it seems a bit out of place to put that in the CSI franchise article since it has nothing to do with "the franchise" but only to CSI las vegas. Yamanbaiia 22:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree; much of the character of the shows (the "CSI shot", increased public awareness of forensics etc) which makes it such fertile ground for cultural references or occasionally parody (cf. Weebl and Bob sketch "CSI: Pieami" - Google it and see!) extends across all the shows. Besides, if we split the pop culture into shows, there would be only one line for CSI:M - not much of a section, more of a footnote. Editus Reloaded 17:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd forgotten about Lenny Henry's parody: "You killed a LIFT ENGINEER...you're going down for a very long time." :-D Editus Reloaded 17:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes more often that not the pop cultural references are about the franchise CSI:X. Splitting it would either lead to very short sections (that would probably get deleted if there is just one or two) or replication of material as it could be deemed relevant to the different bits of the franchise. (Emperor 17:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC))

Yes, ok, this section goes here. got it. I agree now.Yamanbaiia 19:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Obviously if it gets bigger and there are enough items for each series you can split them off. The big thing is to avoid trivial mentions and make sure things are referenced. (Emperor 21:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC))

i don't think it will get much bigger, i mean i added those pictures and some text, and that made it grow a bit, but i think we won't have to worry about size for at least 5 more yearsYamanbaiia 21:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Literary & Other Precedents

At first (and second & third) readings I did not have a clue what this section was trying to say.

Eventually it dawned on me (but only because I have the Brother Cadfael novels and some Kay Scarpetta novels) that the protagonist is a sort of forensic scientist. I have no idea about Wojeck and Da Vinci's Inquest (never having seen them). I have seen snippets of Quincy, ME in passing but not enough to offer an opinion. However I would have thought that there is a clue in the title and that he is an ME rather than forensic scientist.

If that is supposed to be the point of this section I think it should be removed. 'An idea in a TV programme has been used before' is not really a revelation.

FerdinandFrog (talk) 18:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

There has been no response so I was bold and removed this section. FerdinandFrog (talk) 10:07, 23 June 2008 (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 episode and character, as well as other fiction articles. Please visit the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 11:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

No "controveries" section?

In some cities, when screening jurors for jury duty, one the questions is if the person watches CSI or not. If they do, then they're rejected from service. NOBODY has heard about this? Come on! --24.21.148.155 (talk) 04:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

It needs to be sourced and I'd assume the bulk of this would be dealt with over on CSI effect. (Emperor (talk) 04:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC))

I cannot source it either, but in Reno, many defense attorneys are asking jurors if they watch any shows with forensics and sometimes how they feel about what they see in the fictional "CSI" type world. If it ever can be sourced, it should likely be added to the "CSI Effect" article(s). Bloo (talk) 03:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

CSI portrays an american middle to upper class that seems to be eager to use homicide as a solution to any kind of rather stupid problems, as well as some of the less simpathetical protagonists in the world of tv series. For some foreign commentators (in Italy, for example; the country has actually less homicides per year than Detroit - ~320 aganst ~380 - comprised the routinary Mafia killings, so homicide among "normal people" is almost unknown of) that have been exposed to the franchise, it is a truly disturbing, bordering on obscenity, view. Most of the homicides portrayed are view as a product of utter idiocy. Maybe it's not the best image of the USA to send around the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.46.214.73 (talk) 10:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

"Notable" Guest Stars

I am noticing - especially in the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation page but also in CSI: Miami & CSI: New York - the list of guest stars is becoming rather unwieldy and is full of people (mostly teens and early 20s) only notable for playing a character in a WB or CW show mainly popular with the 12 to 25 year old viewer. I am sure that any dispute on who is actually "notable" will bring fire raining down and likely start some edit warring, so may I suggest an alternative? Move the Guest Stars into the List of Characters. This might help keep the main page of the CSI articles from becoming too messy. Feel free to disagree with me - but please tell me why. Cheers, Trista (user Triste Tierra - cannot log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The "Movie" reference

The reference to the movie with William Peterson is over 18 months old and nothing but sketchy rumours have been heard since then. I propose removing the information, as it is unencyclopaedic to have a very old rumour in the article. If I hear no objection, I will take it down in the next week or so. Trista (user Triste Tierra -cannot log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 00:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Documentaries

"In early 2007, British channel ITV broadcast a special of its flagship documentary Tonight With Trevor McDonald"

In 2001 ITV plc changed the name of its main channel from "itv" to "itv1", which lasted until earlier this year.

I've changed the channel name on the page.

1701Will (talk) 17:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Why shouldn't Grissom's appearance in Without a Trace be included in the character table?

The character tables for the Chicago and NCIS franchises show appearances in shows outside their franchises. What's wrong with the CSI character table including Grissom crossing over to Without a Trace? --StewieBaby05 (talk) 21:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Just because other pages do something doesn't mean this page has to. If you put back Without a Trace would you then add another column for Nick's crossover on Two and a Half Men? A single visit by a single character doesn't require a column; that's what the crossover tables are for. 99.155.192.21 (talk) 22:32, 6 December 2015 (UTC)