Template:Did you know nominations/Hill Street Station
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Hill Street Station[edit]
- ... that "Hill Street Station", the first episode of Hill Street Blues, endured so much confusion and conflict in its marketing that it was a surprise to survive to be aired?
Created/expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nom at 04:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
-
- I know this has already passed GA review, and this could be a formality, but I'll do my best anyway. First question: "The episode also introduces a host of unique characters." in the lead makes no sense. It's not a spinoff of some other show; all the characters are unique and being seen for the first time. I believe what was meant was that all of the 'original cast' is introduced in this episode, but that several main characters were introduced in later seasons. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:34, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, for a cast of a crime drama the characters were considered relatively unique.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. It should probably be written more explicitly. Though it kind of contradicts the later part of the article that says how much Furillo has in common with Barney Miller. (But I should try to stay focused on DYK criteria...) --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, for a cast of a crime drama the characters were considered relatively unique.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
- I know this has already passed GA review, and this could be a formality, but I'll do my best anyway. First question: "The episode also introduces a host of unique characters." in the lead makes no sense. It's not a spinoff of some other show; all the characters are unique and being seen for the first time. I believe what was meant was that all of the 'original cast' is introduced in this episode, but that several main characters were introduced in later seasons. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:34, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Hook checks out -- I didn't have access to the specific sources cited for the hook so AGF, but on top of that, I saw other news articles from the same period that corroborated that there was confusion leading up to airing the pilot and that it seemed an unlikely candidate to be aired. Length and date good. No sign of close paraphrasing. Some notes…The phrase "The original version of the pilot had one mortal wound," is a little unclear; it should say more explicitly "the original version of the pilot showed one character being mortally wounded."Need clarify whether the shorthand for the Boston Globe's William A. Henry III should be "Henry" or "Henry III".I posted a talk page comment about the originality of the characters, but it's not vital. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:58, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
