Talk:Ghost Hunters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ghost Hunters article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute. Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, which collaborates on television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia.

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Archives
1 2 3

Contents 1 Older Discussion Archived 2 NPOV Opinion 3 Separate articles for episodes 4 3rd season Observation 5 Irish Castle 6 Comment

[edit] Older Discussion Archived

The discussion sections that are currently 'active' remain. Everything else is now archived in the Archive 1. You can click on the "1" at the filing cabinet icon to get there. The archiving was to help cleanse the page of past bickering and allow the page to be more easily navigated. It was not intended to stifle or 'close-off' discussion of older topics. Anyone wishing to pursue meaningful discussion of an older topic is welcome to do so. (Please don't reply to this here. Let's leave it as a 'notice'). Thanks. LuckyLouie 22:23, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I archived again. Archive 1 is full. Archive 2 has been started. Same stuff as written above applies. Thanks. LuckyLouie 05:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

More archiving into Archive 2. - LuckyLouie 04:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Archive 3 begun - LuckyLouie 17:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Moved more material to Archive 3 LuckyLouie 23:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV Opinion

In removed what I consider an NPOV opinion posted in the Criticism section. Regarding TAPS not releasing detailed records for peer review, etc. a contributor wrote:

"(this is likely due to a confidential nature which TAPS has with certain investigations. Certain individuals and groups wish for the findings to be kept secret, much like a catholic confessional)"

This is speculative opinion, and does not explain TAPS across-the-board policy of not releasing ANY records, even for public locations, such as Waverly Hills, Eastern State Penitentiary, etc. LuckyLouie 23:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I specificaly remember at least one episode where they hid the faces of the owners for their privacy. Mapetite526 15:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

That's true. They withold case data about private individuals...like you said, for their privacy. But they also withold case data about locations that operate commercial ghost tours. Certainly ALL those locations don't have issues of privacy. TAPS can give whatever reason it wants for not releasing any data for peer review or indy exam, it doesn't mitigate the fact that they don't release any data - period. LuckyLouie 18:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Separate articles for episodes

Many tv shows here have articles on every episode there, i think GH should have a separate article on each episode, explaining what was shown, who were the investigators, and other tid bits. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.72.30.112 (talk • contribs) .

Detailed synopsis of each episode is available on SciFi's "Ghost Hunters" site. Since the group's "findings" are controversial, perhaps a link to this mught suffice? LuckyLouie 17:59, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

No, don't start adding detailed synopses for each episode. What are you gonna say anyway? Ghost Hunters isn't really a story driven show like other TV shows and don't need to be detailed. Cyberia23 19:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It may be more reasonable to have separate articles for each season, broken into heading for each episode therein. However, you would have to consider how much this would denude the main article - you shouldn't put the same info on two or more articles.LessHeard vanU 20:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

i like the idea of episode details. especially if each location includes a note stating if the investigation was concluded as haunted, has paranormal activity, inconclusive, or not haunted etc. but i also dont think including epidode details, more than whats already listed, would help or hurt the article. if the details were added, they could include who investigated, what evidence was found, what evidence was diproven, what drama the investigators had, etc M8gen 20:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

A paragraph summary below each entry might be okay. I thought you guys were talking about individual articles being written up for each one. That would be a little much IMO. I present an example below, but you have to change the table's script a bit. It may be confusing to edit. Cyberia23 02:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Example:

#	Original Airdate	Location
219	May 3, 2006	St. Augustine, FL - St. Augustine Light
TAPS records ghostly voices inside the lighthouse, one of which Jason and Grant believe said "Help Me". Later a shadowy figure is seen moving up and down the staircase above them. At one point it peeks over the edge to look down at them. A motion switch light did not activate until Jason and Grant made it to the top. They use this as evidence that a "real" person wasn't on the staircase.

I wouldn't mind seeing a column added to the right as to whether they think it was haunted or not. At least in the earlier episodes, they would spend some time trying to get Jason to admit it was haunted (or not). -- Mapetite526 21:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

TAPS claims to record ghostly voices...Jason and Grant claim a motion light switch did not activate until they reached it...TAPS claims it is evidence of....etc. (You'll have to be strictly NPOV regarding the factual nature of these investigations. ) LuckyLouie 04:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah "claims" like 30 thousand times - and good reason why we probably shouldn't add details since every freakin word will be nitpicked. Cyberia23 05:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

In a contentious area like the paranormal it must be that the article reflects an encyclopedic approach, in that claims must be reported as such unless it can be proven that a)instances occurred, and/or b)that they were caused by paranormal activity (and there are just as many people who will dispute any such finding, as there are who will support). As Cyberia23 comments, it would not be good for the article if inferred acceptance of any claimed "evidence" was made - the best method is detached third party reporting. I would also comment that it is encyclopedic practice to refer to individuals by surnames (unless there is very good reasons not to, such as differing family/namesakes being discussed in the same article - and then the full name is given).LessHeard vanU 19:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

should be okay if we state facts of each episode. it is a fact that they claimed to find paranormal activity.. a little note stating soemthing like: these are claims made by the show and we do not question or support their claims but are presenting episode events. M8gen 16:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think a disclaimer is needed. If you simply insert the comment "claim/ed" in the first sentence detailing the content of the episode then you can list whatever activity and/or conclusions the programme makes - you have indicated that it is the programme that is making the statements, not Wikipedia.LessHeard vanU 20:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

At any rate, if you guys want to go with expanded summaries then by all means do so. I think it's a lot of work so I'm not gonna do it ;P (I'm lazy) Besides, I don't have every episode memorized and I've missed a couple myself. I know some of the early episodes - like the private home investigations were pretty boring and the team caught nothing and managed to give logical explanations for what the residents were experiencing. I also suggest using various synonyms of "claimed", (like alledges, asserts, declairs, maintains, supposes, states, etc...) as it will keep it NPoV but make it not such a repetitive read. Cyberia23 20:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Paranormal TV shows need not necessarily have huge episode summaries. Take a look at how the Most Haunted wiki entry handles it. LuckyLouie 19:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3rd season Observation

Does it look like Steve has more tattoos than he did in the 2nd season? Cyberia23 05:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that, too. He must have been busy during the off season. -- Mapetite526 18:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Cashing in on royalties :) We all know what Jason and Grant do for a living outside of TAPS, but I wonder what everyone else does. Maybe Steve opened up a tattoo shop or something. Cyberia23 20:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought I heard them say once that Steve was a police officer, or at least used to be a cop. I'd like to see separate articles for at least Brian, Steve, Andy, and Tango. -- Mapetite526 20:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Yep, he's a cop. Check out the new article! -- Mapetite526 21:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow, a COP??? I thought maybe he was an electrician or audio/video engineer by trade which is why he's the technical guy. Cyberia23 06:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Andy is a 'college professor' and also a 'dork.' He isn't on the show anymore so no article for him, in my opinion. Steve is definately a cop, they mention it on air a few times. --Ira-welkin 07:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mind Andy so much, I wonder why he left, aside from periodic clashes with Brian. Brian is the one I don't like. Cyberia23 09:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Irish Castle

Not entirely sure if this is the right castle or not, I think they said Birr (it sounded like "Beer") so anyway - if someone can confirm the name that would be great. Cyberia23 04:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It's probably this one, Leap Castle: http://www.explore.ie/features/index.php?aID=34 LuckyLouie 04:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Leap? Not sure. Well anyway, I just put Ireland Castle for now. Cyberia23 05:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It's Definately 'Leap Castle' but it's not pronounced 'Leep.' Insert non-formatted text here

Leap Castle has an article here - funny, it's supposedly near Birr Castle - in the same county at least. I can't wait to watch this episode, I hope it's good. Nice to see some haunts outside the USA. There are a lot of creepy places especially in the British Isles. Cyberia23 09:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

Why would someone go into a persons home and be viewed by millions of people and try to debunk everything that they have been told by the home owner if the show was fake, now that doesnt sound like ratings to me. If the show was rigged would'nt there be a whole lot more ghost popping up then what does, sometimes they done find anything, thats just the way it goes. I am Ghost Hunter fanatic, and believe that all there journys are real indeed. - 11:41, 9 November 2006 192.234.149.224

To 192.234.149.224, There are plenty of websites to discuss/debate the show at; TAPS, SciFi, etc.. but Wikipedia is not a discussion board. LuckyLouie 18:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)