Talk:Issues addressed in Nip/Tuck

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Sodomy

I removed sodomy from the "illegal behavior" subsection of the "sexual issues" because sodomy is no longer illegal (at least in the United States, this show's setting and country of origin), and because I felt the presence of anal sex in the "fetishes" section made sodomy redundent (though because sodomy encompasses other acts than just anal sex, I added oral sex as well). Jeff Silvers 02:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] In which episodes did these happen?

I remember several events that fit into this article, but I cannot recall specifically what episodes they occured in (and I don't really feel like searching through the DVDs).

  • Sean tries to have anal sex with Julia in the shower. I think this happened in season 1, or early in season 2.
  • Sean performs oral sex on Julia using Christian's alphabet strategy. I think this was in the same episode as the one above.
  • A woman offers Christian sex with her and her daughter at the same time if he gives them free surgery. Christian declines. I think this happened around the time he started attending the Sexaholics Annonymous meetings.
  • In what episode does Annie get her first period?
  • In an early episode in season 1, Christian takes Matt to a porn party and a woman gives him oral sex. She later tells Matt that she had an STD that she may have passed onto him. Was the STD VD?

Jtrost 05:31, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Frankenlaura

How does "Silas Prine has been preserving body parts from people at the morgue and combining the parts to create a whole corpse." relate to the incest list? I think it only belongs in the necrophilia list. --OGoncho 20:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:NOR violation?

This seems like a bit of a WP:NOR violation to me. There are no references cited among other things. Who is to say which issues are to be included here? What about the issue of whether John Smith should have worn a blue shirt with black pants on episode xxx.yyy? The article's concept doesn't seem real encyclopedic to me. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

This article is a result of a section in the original Nip/Tuck article that was simply a meaningless list. I created this article and expanded it to provide some context for the issues. I'll address each one of your concerns to the best of my ability:
  • Could you elaborate on what parts of this article you think are original research? As I'll describe later, this article is very similar to an episode guide, however it provides information on specific parts of each episode instead of episodes as a whole.
  • There are no references because the information was taken directly from the television show. No third party sources were used. Each issue does have an episode associates with it, which in itself is like a citation, where someone can watch that episode to verify the information here.
  • The issues that are included here are controversial and bizarre issues that have shaped the show. While no guidelines were setup to determine what kind of issues are to be included here, there has never been any vandalism regarding that, so it's been sort of a non-issue; all of the authors who contributed to this article understood the types of issues this article is about.
  • Perhaps this article should be renamed to List of issues addresses in Nip/Tuck, as it is a list and not a regular article. Whether or not the information is encyclopedic is a matter of opinion, however my opinion is that this article is just as encyclopedic as any episode summary article. The only difference is this article provides a quick reference to a very specific part of the series. Jtrost (T | C | #) 22:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I'm not going to make a big stink but any article with a title that starts "Issues addressed..." sounds like original research to begin with. Since which issues qualify as controversial is decided by the editors here and not by some third-party source, the overall concept of the article is original research. Like I said, I'm not going to pursue it but it's something someone might want to think about. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Jtrost that this article should be renamed to "List of issues addressed in Nip/Tuck." This is not a proper article, but rather a list. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 21:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another AIDS/HIV inclusison.

I'm not sure what episode this was in but if I remeber correctly they had a paitent come in that had HIV/AIDS. He wanted surgury because the medications he took gave his face a hollowed out apperence.ShadowWriter 17:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and added it. I just used the summarry for episode 3.05. If anyone has a problem with it they can discuss it here.ShadowWriter 18:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Missed scene.

You missed Christian trying to give himself a nosejob.

Nir 18:23, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

If you can list which episode it's in I will add it.ShadowWriter 22:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Monica Wilder

I added that she was hit by a bus in the most recent episode. I do have some qeustions concerning her that I belevie belong in this article. First, what epsiode did Sean sleep with her? Would it be considered adultry seeing as Sean and Julia were not remarried at that time? And lastly could she be classified as having a mental illness? If so which one?ShadowWriter 21:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Sean slept with her in episode 4.03, Monica Wilder. I don't think it would technically count as adultery because they were still unmarried at the time. I can't think of any mental illness Monica would've had (though she was obviously unhealthily obsessed). Jeff Silvers 14:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ava and MAtt

I feel that their relantionship is not considered Pedophila. By defenition Pediophila is an sexual act or desire for childre under the age of 13 and Matt was over the age of 13 by the time of his relantionship with Ava.ShadowWriter 19:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there is an official "cut-off age" of thirteen for pedophilia, but I do agree Ava's relationship with Matt probably doesn't qualify. Jeff Silvers 01:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I've read some psycology texts and that's when they state the cut-off age. Ava's and Matt's relantionship is more Statutory Rape then anything. I checked an age of consent website and the legal age of consent in Flordia is 18. Here's the link if you would like to verify. http://www.coolnurse.com/consent.htmShadowWriter 23:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I see. I removed Ava and Matt's relationship from the pedophilia section. It was mentioned later in the underage sex section, anyway (which I have subsequently renamed "statutory rape"). Jeff Silvers 00:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Burt's Death

How would we describe Burt's death? Is it murder? If it is I will add it to the list of illegal behavior.ShadowWriter 00:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Negligent homicide. I guess that counts as murder. Jeff Silvers 03:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Alright. I added it to the list.ShadowWriter 18:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Organ Theft

Should we go ahead and add this? It has been seen it a few episodes so far. ShadowWriter 18:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, most definitely. I'd just put it under a general season four topic. In fact, I will.

[edit] .......

"Silvio Perez wants plastic surgery after he slept with the boss's daughter, who was 6 years old." ......slept with her...H*LL NO.

Another thing that bothers me are the controversial issues. I've seen a number of these on other shows, epecially the law & order series, and some are needless. "Sean and Julia have to deal with Annie getting her first period." Come on. This was addressed on Degrassi. And Liz Cruz? South of Nowhere has way more on lesbianism. Car accidents, come on.

"THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!" 03:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
It isn't that Nip/Tuck is the ONLY show to have ever covered these topics, it's just that Nip/Tuck covers controversial issues in such high consistency. Jeff Silvers 17:21, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Murder

The Murder section be better suited for the illgeal behavior section instead of under the genral issues section. I just don't have the time to move it at the moment.ShadowWriter 18:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, the illegal behavior is a subsection of the sexual issues, and so I feel that general issues is the only place that it really fits. BigD527 06:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

On another note, similar to that, I feel like we should create another major section for criminal behavior. But now I need to go to bed. BigD527 06:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

But murder is illegal in the U.S last time I checked. Under that reasoning it should go in the right catogery.ShadowWriter 18:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


I think we should make a seprate illegal behavior section for stuff like this.ShadowWriter 19:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Incorrect information to 'Drug smuggling' in Illegal Behavior

The information to the labeled to the pilot as the man being a drug lord is incorrect, he was just a worker. And it was in the last episode of season one where the drug lord is given a new face. Thanks Aeryck89 17:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] =======================================================================

Yep, TV is getting better. Wonder how this show will survive when the "freak of the week" list runs out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.83.138 (talk) 13:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Image:Seanandchristian.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) 10:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

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

Image:Seanandchristian.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) 05:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)