Talk:Law & Order franchise

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Law & Order franchise article.
Article policies
TV
Television Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-Importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Law & Order task force. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] Character images on the side.

While they are nice window dressing, I believe the cut down on the readability of the page itself. Character pictures go on character pages. Beyond that, the number of images is causing all the [edit] markers to pool at the bottom of the page near the external links. This looks very sloppy. --sigmafactor 07:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I just went with what was there and cleaned it up a bit. I don't see how the images affect readability, but then, I don't know what you mean by the markers pooling either. When I look at the page it looks very neat. But I suppose for someone with slow connection speed, it might take a long time for the page to load. While I really like the look of the page with the pictures, it isn't worth making the page difficult for some people to read. Is that what's happening? -Digresser 08:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
This is what I see when I view the page in the latest version of Firefox:
http://img143.imageshack.us/my.php?image=laof5gj.gif
Any ideas? --sigmafactor 17:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
The glut of images really reduce the readibility of the page. I'm going to be bold and remove everything but the title cards. --waffle iron 00:45, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Terminology: spinoff etc.

There's some inconsistency here; the lead sentence of the article says that all the shows in the franchise deal with the NYC criminal justice system, but down below the 2002 series Crime & Punishment is included, which dealt with San Diego, not NYC. Also, that was cancelled because of poor ratings wasn't it? So it's odd that the article expressly says that "Trial by Jury" was the first spinoff to be cancelled because of poor ratings. (Even if that might be technically correct because of a narrow definition of "spinoff".) Also this article makes no mention of the 1993 series Crime & Punishment which was produced by Dick Wolf and was supposed to have the same kind of style as Law & Order, but from the criminals' perspective. In that sense it was similar to Law & Order: Criminal Intent. --Mathew5000 23:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crossover

Was Fools for Love a crossover episode? If so, it should be listed in the crossovers section of the article. --Mathew5000 21:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conviction a related show, not a franchise show

In the interest of being bold, I have cut Conviction out of the franchise former show list. Properly speaking, the show was not a franchise member. Yes it existed in the L&O universe and shared characters, but so did other shows that are not franchise members. More importantly, the reason it did not carry "Law & Order" as part of the title was the specific intent of the producers and studio to indicate that it should not be grouped with the franchise shows. Conviction addressed substantially different story lines and themes than the franchise shows. Threephi 06:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Conviction clearly existed within the same fictional universe, with the appearance of characters Alexandra Cabot and Arthur Branch. Without the other Law & Orders, it could not have been the way it was. Therefore, by existing within the same fictional universe, it is inherently part of the franchise. Shared characters, same city, same producer, same network. All that's missing is "Law & Order: " before the title. Furthermore, Crime & Punishment (completely different -- reality show) is listed as a franchise show. I move that Conviction be listed as a past franchise show but note within its description that it was slightly further out than the primary set of spinoffs. I won't be quite so bold, but I know this isn't exactly the debate of the century, so I'll make the change if there's no objection within the week. Sean Hayford O'Leary 07:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I suppose this boils down to how one wants to define 'franchise'. My own personal take on it is that it is like a brand name. Dick Wolf and the other people who own the Law and Order brand have all carefully decided which shows they wanted to carry that brand name, and which shows would not. Crime & Punishment bore the Law & Order name, so IMO, for better or worse, it qualifies on that score. Further, this article provides a section for related shows and other non-franchise members of the L&O Universe (eg, Deadline), so the intent of the article seems to be that membership in the universe alone is not enough for franchise status. Threephi 23:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
(Sorry for the late response) Alright, I'll meet you half-way. Conviction can stay in the "Related Shows" but I'm also moving Crime & Punishment, as that's much further out. Also, since it is the most directly related of related series, I'd like to re-add it under the related section of the Law & Order template. Please pop something on my user talk if you object. Thanks. Sean Hayford O'Leary 07:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move from "Law & Order franchise" to "The Law & Order Franchise"

I'm a tad confused why this article was moved. "The" in the title is entirely superfluous and the capitalization of "franchise" is odd since the Law & Order franchise is not the name of anything other than, well, the Law & Order franchise (that is to say, it's not an official name, a name of a company, etc). I say it should be moved back to Law & Order franchise. Any objections? Sean Hayford O'Leary 00:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested Protection

In response to the repeated vandalism on this page, in which various links are repeatedly removed, character titles are needlessly abbreviated, etc by a user with a dynamic IP on a large subnet, semi-protection was recently requested. MrZaiustalk 01:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Definition of current cast

I was wondering how the current cast was defined? Specifically in regards to Criminal Intent, which lists Theresa Randle as a star. Although Randle has appeared in (at least) two episodes so far, she is credited as a Special Guest Star. Should she be removed from the current cast since she never officially joined the show? There are numerous other actors/characters who have made far more appearances (for example, Leslie Hendrix as M.E. Rodgers) -- if Randle is included, shouldn't they be as well? D'Amico 00:14, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Homicide: Life on the Street ?

Does the series Homicide: Life on the Street qualify as a Law & Order Franchise?

After all John Munch does appear in Homicide and Law & Order: Special Victims Unit and a number of producers are involved in both show.

In the same universe, but I would certainly not say it's in the franchise. I would say that when Homicide ended, they eventually moved Munch to SVU because of the connection. However, I don't see any involvement from Dick Wolf. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Rip From the Headlines: fact to fiction section

I would propose that a section be created either here, independently or within each show's wiki article that would detail the real cases that "inspired" the episodes they are based on. This would also help the articles about the true crime events as people hunt for sources and additional information.

Actually, it's puzzling that at the moment, the "ripped from the headlines" aspect of the every show isn't mentioned as another unifying theme to the franchise. RoyBatty42 23:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stricter criteria for character articles.

I believe that we must establish a stricter criteria for articles, and consider making a list of Law & Order detectives, containing a short summary of each detective (and a list for the other characters). And in this, we'd merge the less notable character articles such as Nicolas Falco or Alfred Wentworth. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Lawandorder01.jpg

Image:Lawandorder01.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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CIopening.jpg

Image:CIopening.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) 06:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Law and Order: London

I read on the BBC News Website (here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7169580.stm) that there is another Law & Order show being produced in London called Law and Order: London. Should this be added to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.202.71.11 (talk) 23:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Title Law & Order franchise to Law & Order (franchise) please

If it won't upset too many people, could this article's title please be changed from Law & Order franchise to Law & Order (franchise)? It would help when I link to it.

Here is how I would like to be able to type a link to this article.

[[Law & Order (franchise)|]]

Here is how I have to type the link now.

[[Law & Order franchise|Law & Order]]

The first is simpler. A lot of articles about franchises are already named with franchise in parentheses. Would it be too much a pain to do it here? - LA @ 14:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)