Talk:Made in America (The Sopranos)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Made in America (The Sopranos) 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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] Song identification

Quick help, for those who wouldn't mind. What is the name of the song that plays over the death of Phil Leotardo? - Anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.54.155.43 (talk) 01:44, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General Discussion

All of this is ridiculous. If people insist on posting "speculation", which is pretty silly by itself, then at the very least they would have to link to non-original research like any other article. Otherwise people are just using Wikipedia to post fan fiction. Schrodingers Mongoose 04:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. There's no point trying to spoil people's anticipation or curiosity about an event that's to come. Wikipedia should be about the interpretation and representation of what's already happened and been seen, etc. There are plenty of blogs out there for spoilers, fan fiction, and speculative nonsense. Bgibson1 05:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC) BGibson1, 11:45 MT

I've given up trying to revert vandalism because "good people" are editing the page too fast. ThunderE6 02:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

  • The article is mistaken - "Made In America" opens up with Tony lying prose in his hideout bed, backdropped by a pop song that begins with church bells (read: as in a funeral). Please tell me someone remembers that, and will be responsible enough to insert that within this article! I cannot BELIEVE that the so-called editors of this page missed that! David Chase (in my opinion only) made it clear that Tony died - in various ways - but left it ambiguous so that fans don't feel short-changed by some random and sudden shooting scene that ends Tony's life. That show ended perfectly. Either way, Tony was screwed in the end (even for people who don't believe that he was shot and killed, he was still probably facing charges from the government).

"The car crawls forward, rolling over and crushing Phil's head, causing an onlooker to vomit, but is brought to a stop by an onlooker who reaches inside the vehicle."

Can we please have the editing ban lifted so that this grammatical hack-job can be cleaned up?

74.101.253.224 14:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Lady, or the Tiger?

  • I would suggest putting a link to The Lady, or the Tiger? in discussing the ending. It's intentionally left vague, in the same way that the story's ending was left vague. How you interpret it or what you think will happen next is supposed to be an insight into your own psyche. 24.107.23.241 02:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


I think that if the cut to black and lack of music has to be read as Tony's death. If they wanted an ambiguous, why not just end the episode? As many people commented, if the black screen was an ambiguous ending, it was a bit lame. I think that we need to give the writers / producers more credit than that - I suspect they thought that it was obvious that he was dead.


Definitely a link to The Lady, or the Tiger?, a classic story that involves the reader as much as it involves good narrative, which in a sense is what this series has done.

Of course they didn't "think it was obvious he was dead". They left the whole thing perfectly ambiguous, and there's plenty of subtext to suggest that he is not dead - the movie never ends, it goes on and on and on and on, and so forth. john k 21:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hommage?

  • Was It another Godfather reference?

A Hommage to the scene in the Godfather when whoever comes out of the bathroom??--68.94.62.131 20:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

24.60.217.164 (talk) 21:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)==Twilight Zone== Does anyone which Twilight Zone episode that was? MrBlondNYC 03:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

What you're gonna do? Everything's black. Kakun 03:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


It's called "The Bard".

[edit] Why are anonymous IPs still shown in the edit list?

It says that they were banned from editing this article until the 11th. It doesn't look like they're doing this article much good either.--Folksong 04:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

it seems to have calmed down now...~ Tarabyte 22:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tony's probable death

I believe that Tony dies right as the screen goes black. If you recall in the episode "Sopranos Home Movies", when Tony and Bobby are talking on the lake about getting shot. Bobby replies "You probably never see it coming." Well I strongly believe this explains the ending. The guy in the baseball cap looks suspicious throughout the entire scene and keeps looking back at something. Then as he gets up to go to the restroom you can see him fidgeting with something around his belt. Then it shows Tony eating an onion ring, looking up at Meadow entering the restaurant, and hearing the final "Don't Stop" before the screen goes blank. I believe the man in the baseball cap shot Tony and we were seeing death from Tony's point of view.

I also have heard all night that the man in the baseball cap had a strong resemblance to one of the guys from the earlier seasons (I do not remember his name or the episodes) but he owed Tony money and Tony ended up taking his sports shop. The guy then took his son's vehicle and presented it to Tony who in turn gives it to Meadow. Meadow recognizes that it's her friend's vehicle and denies it. The guy in the baseball cap could have been that man.

Yeah, the guy who owned the sports shop tony "busted out" was Robert Patrick, the T-1000 from Terminator. --Fxer 15:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
That link from the Phillyburbs.com is not referring to Robert Patrick though. It's referring to the man at the bar who many people think whacks Tony after coming out of the bathroom. The main reason for this is because some thought that he was Nikki Leotardo, Phil's nephew, who was seen earlier in Season 6. However this is NOT TRUE. As that link shows, the guy at the bar was never in a previous episode and was just played by some random guy from NJ.--Freepablo 03:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

TALK PAGES ARE NOT A FORUM Parjay 18:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, this entire Talk section should be removed. If you want to speculate and debate, do it at one of the hundreds of websites designed for that purpose. "I think this is what happened" is not going to improve the quality of this article.KyuzoGator 20:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

if you would look back to the original intention for this sections is was to find out if the 11 second balck out was a glich or an intended part. How it got blown to how the ending was bad is beyond me --BYMAstudent 02:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The ending was meant to be 30 seconds of black then nothing. The union forced the credits to roll, In my interpretation 30 seconds with creditsis death, 30 seconds with no credits is not. 74.167.236.69 15:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)Nick

But this is not the place to discuss your interpretation of anything. Tvoz |talk 17:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Agent Harris...

It seemed that Agent Harris was gloating about the news of Phil's death. Like he wanted Phil to die, to get him off the streets. But I was trying to figure out though if he also thought it'd tie back to Tony somehow, and perhaps secretly wanted Tony to go down. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but am trying to figure out what Agent Harris' real thoughts were when he seemed pleased upon hearing that news. ~Tarabyte 08:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I am pretty sure agent Harris excitedly said "they're winning", after hearing of Phil's death, meaning that he was rooting for Soprano to win the war." Justinmcl 209.146.241.93 12:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

From some additional research, this appears to be the "official" explanation of that scene. I didn't keep the links, but in an interview with David Chase, as well as a youtube clip of the actor playing Agent Harris, they seemed in agreement that Harris was in fact rooting for Tony. -Tarabyte 04:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I think Harris was supposed to be so stressed with the Anti-Terror thing that he was kind of living vicariously through Tony, in a world where there actually were results for all his hard work. --W.marsh 15:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought Harris said: "We're gonna win this!" Which I suppose could mean 2 things, either he wants Tony to simply win the gang war, or he wants Tony to live to face trial, because he knows the Fed's hand.
Harris wasn't working Organized Crime anymore so I don't think he cared about bringing Tony down because it wasn't his case anymore. Tony helped him out and he returned the favor. MrBlondNYC 02:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Screen goes blank

When the screen went blank at the end, I thought something was wrong with the transmission signal to my TV and I was going to miss the ending of the show (Did anyone else experience that?). I don't know whether such 'screw with the viewer' approach was intended, but if we can find a WP:RS that indicates such a view, it should be included in the article. -- Jreferee 14:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The screen blacking out was the intended ending. ~Tarabyte 21:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research in the Speculation

"This scenario is weakened by the fact that the final screenshot was on Tony, yet you did not seen a gun, see a gun shot flash, or hear a sound. If Tony had been shot, the shot would have been heard or seen before the bullet impacted him. In order for the shot and death to be instantaneous, the gun would have had to be against his head, which it was clearly not."

Many bullets are supersonic. He'd likely be dead before he ever heard a thing. For example, a 9 mm bullet travels at about 1150 ft/s, whereas the speed of sound is 1128 ft/s. I'm deleting this last part. KyuzoGator 16:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I would think you would hear it. If the speed of a 9mm bullet is only 22 ft/s faster then sound and the bullet slows down by more then that (by the skin/skull before hitting the brain) then it would be very possible that the sound wave could reach the ear before the bullet exploded your brain. (what a strange argument). C5mjohn 20:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

This is all OR. john k 21:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

It's Tony's life, and they say you never hear the one that gets you. --Golbez 22:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, silencers exist. Yeah, they don't really "silence" the sound of the shot, but it's TV. Regardless, complete OR. ShaleZero 13:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Specific brands?

Why are the specific cars named and linked? While I realize that the Sopranos always have used some placement of car brands, the "BMW M3", "Nissan XTera," and Meadow's car (can't remember its name) all disrupt the flow of the article and seem unimportant. Anyone else?

75.185.245.122 17:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


Because as said later in the article, the two people who seem to have problem with the American dream in the series drive foreign cars. In this episode there was a large amount of Americana.--Freepablo 03:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DeVecchio's "we're going to win this thing" reference.

I don't know how to edit citations so if someone could do this I'd appreciate it. This real life incident is detailed on page 341 of Selwyn Raab's book Five Families: The Rise, Decline, and Resurgence of America's Most Powerful Mafia Empires. I just finished the book a few days ago and dug up the source.

  • I added the citation for you. ~Tarabyte 21:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] original research or fact?

An anon user claimed that a gunshot was heard after the credits finished rolling. Tarabyte 22:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I just watched the episode for about the forth time, and I heard no gunshot when the screen went black. --Raderick 23:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
OR, and in any case, not one reliable source has claimed that there was a gunshot at the end of the credits, so it couldn't go in the article anyway. Me suspects vandalism. Ramsquire (throw me a line) 23:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Re: "Did My cable go out?" reaction

As a user mentioned above, a lot of people (myself included) thought their cable went out when the screen went black. Here's an excerpt from an article on CNN.com referencing that:

"One thing was clear: around office water coolers, on blogs and on message boards, people wanted to talk about the finale. Their most immediate question: had the cable gone on the fritz? (The final cut was followed by a few seconds of darkness and silence before the credits rolled.) For some watching on DVRs or TiVo, there was also a moment of fear that the show had run over and they'd missed the ending -- a frustration that occurred with this year's "American Idol" finale."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/06/12/tv.sopranos.ending.ap/index.html

I can't help but think that that reaction, from millions, is alone a powerful, though unintentional, social criticism. Something happens and the first reaction of the media consumer is "OMFG WHERE IS TEH CABEL?!". TV: Teacher, Mother, Precious Lover. - AD

I guess this can be included in the article now. 12.43.92.140 14:17, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What the ending meant

Suggestion for people who insist on including speculation about what the ending meant: Write another article called "Speculation on the end of The Sopranos" or something like that, put in all of your theories, speculations, interpretations, guesses - and see if it will fly as a separate article. If you're creative, you may get away with it - but it doesn't belong in this article, and it will be removed when you put it in. So why not save yourselves and others the work, and try another approach. Thanks. Tvoz |talk 15:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Here is the removed text. It does need to be cleaned up, but the point it makes; that Tony dies at the instant the scren goes black, has a place in the episode aricle.

Another ending could be referred to "You probably don't even hear it when it happens, right?": Back to the final few moments of the second-last episode, just before Tony (James Gandolfini) lies down with a gun in his "safe house." There was a brief flashback to the first episode of Season 6B, as Tony and his brother-in-law Bobby (Steve Schirripa) were conversing in a boat on a calm, serene lake. The talk turns to the biggest and most obvious drawback of working in organized crime -- namely, the danger of getting whacked. Bobby says, "You probably don't even hear it when it happens, right?" Tony replies, "Ask your friend in there on the wall," referring to an unfortunate deer who has been stuffed and mounted. Which brings us to the final moments of the finale. Tony, Carmela and A.J. have gathered in a diner and they are surrounded by several suspicious-looking characters. Just as Meadow comes rushing in to join her family, Tony looks up ... and then the screen suddenly goes black. Could the ending have been a direct reference to Bobby's words? After all, series creator David Chase went out of his way to have that line inserted as a flashback in the penultimate episode. So the theory goes like this: Tony is, in fact, dead. The series ended at the exact, precise moment of his death. Through his eyes, the world went black. And he never heard it when it happened.

Mytwocents 16:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
There will be a sufficient body of published criticism to source a thorough section on the ending. Newsweek is even comparing Soprano's possible fate to Harry Potter's (??). Find a decent source (not personal blog) to substantiate discussion of all the possible outcomes. As an aside, I've removed the HBO.com synopsis as it is copyrighted text and doesn't really provide any insight. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 16:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
I've added bit from amNewYork on the subject. Hopefully it can be expanded with additional sourced information. Just64helpin 16:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)



Since most of the episodes in Season 6B opened with Tony waking up, the final cut can be seen as a sharp "lights out" response, or a sudden "Yes" in answer to Carmela's question which opens the first episode of Season 6B, "Soprano Home Movies": "Is this it?" (Tony also asks Melfi in "Kennedy and Heidi", "Is this all there is?")

does this make sense to anyone? Carmela was referring to Tony's imminent arrest when she said that; it wasn't about his death or a question about life itself. this should be removed. 75.57.134.78 00:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Assurance to Steve Perry by David Chase

David Chase assured Steve Perry that his song would not be 'remembered' as the soundtrack to Tony's demise. Is this any hint of Tony not been killed off during the blackout??? I've included in the media section anyway... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.229.185.180 (talk • contribs)

The assurance is that he wouldn't use the song during a death scene. Just64helpin 10:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
yes, that is an important distinction - it's only proof that Chase assured Perry the song would not be used as soundtrack while we see anyone being killed. Tvoz |talk 14:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Any addition of this would probably result in original research. The Filmaker 15:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] setting info deleted...

Just wondering, why was the info I added to the "Production" section about there really being no jukeboxes or neon sign deleted? Wasn't vandalism or anything like that... Beep Beep Honk Honk 20:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It may have been unsourced. See WP:NOR. Just64helpin 20:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
It is irrelevant, that's why it was removed. So what if they took down an awning or added jukeboxes - or that they dont' have onion rings? This isn't a documentary, it's a fictional piece that used the restaurant as a set. Doesn't matter if it's true - what makes these little factoids about the location shot notable?? Tvoz |talk 21:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Given that Holsten's is a real restaurant, I don't see why this wouldn't be of interest. It's a section about production, so it makes some sense, at least, to talk about changes that the producers made to the location. john k 03:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
It's fiction - they made changes to suit their script - what possible notability is there in a missing neon sign? If you find some source that has discovered significance in those cosmetic changes, it might possibly be notable - but all we seem to have are production decisions that have no meaning. So what is of interest? Tvoz |talk 04:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have to counsel here. The subheading is "Production." Anything relevant to the production of the show should be included. I don't know where the contributor got that information though...there are onion rings at Holsten's, it's a burger joint for God's sake. And why remove the information about the gas station? It was production information. People who have interest in production would go to the production subheading. That's why it's there, to list information about the production - not to tapdance. Don't get cutesy here. EatMan167 09:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

oh wow I was just thinking that perhaps I made some big faux-pas in regards to adding something, wasn't tryin' to throw down a debate or anything. Regarding sourcing, how would you source something like that? For instance if the article were about a nature reserve and one were to add "there are four waterfalls on this reserve" even though there's no newspaper article or other similar source for that, yet it simply exists that way. Just wondering, 'cause it's a learning experience, if ya dig. Beep Beep Honk Honk 02:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

If there are no sources than the information can/should not be included. Also, if there are no sources, it is unlikely the subject is notable enough for Wikipedia. I mostly found the information to be trivial, and agree with Tvoz in that the episode makes no attempt to claim that the restaurant used for filming is the same restaurant in terms of the Sopranos continuity. Therefore, to mention that the restaurant does not actually serve onion rings, is irrelevant. The Filmaker 03:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I thought perhaps that the fact that there are no jukeboxes at the tables might be quasi-notable since the whole jukebox/song thing played a pretty decent role in that scene, and seeing as I don't really contribute alot in respect to adding new info, as I can't say I know alot of encyclopedic things that aren't already on here, I might as well add that little tidbit. Ah well, it's the thought that counts I guess.Beep Beep Honk Honk 23:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Production vs Trivia: problem

We have a problem here - trivia sections are discouraged (guideline, not policy - please note) but changing the heading from "trivia" back to "production" doesn't change the content, much of which is actually trivia. So if we want to keep the Steve Perry and FBI allusion, we have to consider how to incorporate them into other sections, or come up with a section head that is more acceptable than "trivia" (although I don't think we have to slavishly follow the guideline - we don't have a laundry list, just a few selected items). But the FBI story in particular is not production, and the Steve Perry isn't really either. Any ideas? Tvoz |talk 15:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

We shouldn't encourage contributing to a "trivia" section, even if it's a few items. That being said, the Steve Perry bit could be included in the final scene interpretation. Just64helpin 16:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
The only information in the Production section that could be construed as trivia is the bit on where the final scene was filmed. Even that I consider to reasonable enough to be included. Instead a merge, the section should be attempted to be expanded. A simple tag will do for now. The Filmaker 01:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
No, that's wrong - where the scene was filmed actually is production - the FBI allusion is not at all production, and the Perry story is only marginally so. Tvoz |talk 16:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I moved the FBI allusion to a footnote - it has nothing to do with production, and should not be in the text of plot summary as it is parenthetical information. This is one way of integrating material that is otherwise lumped into trivia sections. Tvoz |talk 16:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The allusion was placed in the episode during the writing phase. The writing phase is an element of the production of the product. Remember, "Production" does not simply refer to the pre-production, production, and post-production method used by most studios. "Production" can also encompass all three phases. For instance, it could be said that an executive will "oversee the production of the film". However, he will be involved in everything from beginning to end of the "production". The Filmaker 16:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
The section currently contains two tags - one stating that it should be merged, another stating that it should be expanded. Just64helpin 18:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of references to other episodes and other media

I'm sure there's some debate on the relevance of individual items, but why were all references deleted? 67.87.36.247 01:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, some were merged into other sections to avoid redundancy. Just64helpin 01:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hint from HBO?

http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSN0644006120070615?pageNumber=1 "Sopranos rub out theory gain credence" Have added this to the final scene interpretation.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.42.21.56 (talk • contribs)

I think that it is a definite, although far from conclusive, hint for the ending.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mesodan (talk • contribs)
CNN has weighed in on Tony's possible demise CNN: Think Tony Soprano's dead? You may be right Mytwocents 15:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I've included the CNN link as a reference. Just64helpin 16:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Or it's misdirection. Tvoz |talk 16:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Is "misdirection" referring to my contribution, or the news article's report? Just64helpin
I meant the HBO guy's comments, not yours. Tvoz |talk 03:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
A lot of people have realised that it was the audience that got whacked, and we never heard it coming. Has there not been any citable source that has mentioned this theory? --Hopex 23:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Remember the last episode of Dallas? JR seemed to have committed suicide. But we saw no body, and later there were several made-for-TV films in which he was actually alive. My guess is that they are playing the same game.
The last few episodes removed some of the regulars. Some are dead, others like Sil and the psychiatrist would not be expected to be there but might pop up. All depending on negotations on salary and what other jobs they get, I'd suppose.--GwydionM 18:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leotardo's Nephew?

  • Why do I keep hearing from people that the suspicious guy in the final scene who walks into the bathroom is Phil's nephew? Nothing pointed that out so where is this obvious rumor starting from? 4.167.228.106 21:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

HBO have confirmed that the 'mystery man' has never appeared in any previous episode... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.229.185.180 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Don't Stop Believing

It has been confirmed that Steven Perry didn't make his decision to allow David Chase to use "DSB" in "Made in America" until three days before airtime. Chase doesn't leave things to chance. Does anyone know what the alternate song choice was if Perry didn't allow Chase to use "DSB"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.176.243 (talk • contribs)

This is obviously just speculation on your part. The Filmaker 17:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Lexus

While I didn't see the episode, the car in the trailer that I saw appeared to be a Lexus LS 460, not an IS as the link implies. I just got a glance, but I'm pretty sure I'm right... can anyone confirm this? 67.41.231.131 21:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Disregard last post. I watched the clip and it was indeed an IS. 67.41.231.131 21:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clinton Campaign Spoof

Somebody removed what I added about Hilary Clintons final scene spoof. [1] SpecialAgentUncleTito 18:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

It was moved to Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, 2008. It is not particularly relevant to the Made in America article. Just64helpin 20:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. When an episode becomes enough of a cultural phenomenon to spark a presidential candidate to spoof it, that's relevant to the episode, not just the campaign. (By way of comparison, the Where's the beef Wikipedia entry addresses both the Wendy's commercial and its being referenced in the 1984 Democratic primary debates.) MJFiorello 21:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Are you suggesting we create a WP:TRIVIA section to accomodate one item? Just64helpin 21:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
So... what should be done here?SpecialAgentUncleTito 21:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I think it should be kept until other users see a problem. I'm reverting it.SpecialAgentUncleTito 21:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
There should not be a section specifically about the campaign, nor should "campaign" be capitalized. Please see WP:TRIVIA and WP:MOS. Just64helpin 22:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right, perhaps you're wrong, one thing I do know is that it does deserve mention in the article. The problem is we need to agree on how. Maybe there should be a section created for "References in other media" that contains this and other references (Or even a trivia section contain interesting tidbits).SpecialAgentUncleTito 00:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for trivia, as I have repeatedly explained. The article had a "to other media" section, which was merged and deleted. Just64helpin 00:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Understood that Wikipedia is not the place for trivia...but let's be real. This article discusses an episode of a TV series. Is a presidential advertisement trivial but a plot summary of a fictional series not trivial? Also, I read this on the WP:TRIVIA page: "Don't simply remove such sections, but seek to integrate each fact into the article in a more organized fashion. " MJFiorello 02:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
As previously stated, it was moved to a relevant article, not deleted. If you can work the information into an existing, non-"trivia" section, you are free to. Just64helpin 02:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Point taken. I shouldn't have implied that you deleted material. MJFiorello 19:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did Tony Really Choose Journey?

The article states as a matter of fact that Tony selected Don't Stop Believin' on the jukebox, but I'm not so sure. I'm going to have to review the tape myself later today, but this Slate.com forum post, [2], makes a pretty good case that he actually chose one of the two Tony Bennett songs we saw on the menu. The Journey song could have just been the next one on someone else's song list.75.3.81.209 18:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I see somebody made this edit. It now states that Tony "selects a song from the tabletop jukebox, and Journey's song 'Don't Stop Believin begins to play." I can live with that.75.3.122.222 15:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I think another comment to be made here is that Chase likely had a back-up selection in place in case Don't Stop Believing wasn't cleared. I suspect the idea was to have Tony look through a couple of song titles, so that whatever song eventually came on (that is, was cleared to put on the show) would have been showing in the jukebox listings Tony was flipping through.
Donahuea 22:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
It's clear that he chose this song, the Bennett song is playing before he sits down and starts to flip through the choices. Lb34 01:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
No it's not, Lb34. Why are you making stuff up? The song playing before "Don't Stop Believing" is "When You Dream" by Little Feat. Geeky Randy 06:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
The Little Feat song is entitled "All that You Dream," not "When You Dream." I agree, however, as I stated above, that it is far from "clear" (as Lb34 claims) that Tony chose Journey. Lowell33 21:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge: Meadow Ending

The article Meadow Ending is thinly sourced and implausible. Nevertheless, if it belongs in WP at all, it should be incorporated into this article. Clconway 16:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

As I said in the other discussion page, the article contains no reliable sources. Just64helpin 16:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
If it is "thinly sourced and implausible", why would it make any sense to incorporate it here? Let that article be deleted and add at most a passing reference here - or not at all, if there's not reasonable sourcing. Tvoz |talk 05:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Agree with Tvoz. Nothing in there worth merging.--Wehwalt 14:47, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
The article has been deleted. Clconway 15:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Members Only jacket?

The article refers to a man in a Members Only jacket. And I concede that the credits for the episode include such a character. However, as far as I can tell, the Members Only logo was not actually visible on screen at any point. I'd like to change the text of the article to something like "a man (generally referred to as "man in Members Only jacket", even though the Members Only logo does not appear in the episode)". Comments?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Keeves (talk • contribs).

I believe that would be OR. Just64helpin 18:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Good point. I'll meet you and raise you: Since the logo does not appear on-screen, it would be OR to describe that character in that manner. Let's delete the reference to Members Only entirely. (PS: Sorry I forgot to sign that comment. Thanks for catching it and fixing it.) --Keeves 18:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I suppose we could reword it to the name used in the credits, "Man in Members Only" (or something to that effect). Just64helpin 20:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link to first episode?

I was rewatching the first season of the Sopranos this week and something struck me from the first episode, that is, the Pilot, that may be linked to the series finale.

I haven't confirmed this yet, but I suspect that almost every episode of the Sopranos begins with the lead-in credits, display of "The Sopranos" title card, and then a fade in to the first scene. The exception I saw was in the very first episode. Here, after "The Sopranos" is displayed, there's a one- or two-second black screen, and then, no fade in, the first scene, with Tony sitting in Melfi's waiting room. A sudden, abrupt cut from black to the first scene, much as the finale cut from the last scene to black, with no fade out. I was wondering if any other episodes begin like this and, if not, if this may have some link to the final episode. I thought to myself when I noticed it, "This can't be a coincidence." But perhaps I'm overanalyzing.

Donahuea 22:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image removal

I have removed the image, simply because I feel like it actually negatively illustrates the scene. The default for an animated .gif file is to loop, meaning that, rather than showing the impact of the sudden cut to black, the illustration shows the exact opposite - the perpetual un-ending of the series, with Tony's continual return from the final cut. This gives a very, very different sense from the final scene, making it a poor illustration. Phil Sandifer 03:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I have restored the original, non-animated version. Just64helpin 12:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clue in credits to the fate of Tony, Carmela an AJ.

I am a bit curious as to what happened to an earlier entry regarding the fate of the family at the end of Made To America. It was shown that in the credits the listing "Man in members only jacket" and the name of the actor formed an anagram. Since the entry was removed there has been no reference to it as speculation nor has there been any discussion in the talk forum? I can understand that it might have been removed to protect the actor who after all was an amatuer. However it cannot be a mere coincidence. The odds of a perfectly placed anagram spelling out the demise of Tony, Carmela and AJ must be extremely remote.Conkom 21:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoofs

As theres now 4 examples of the ending being spoofed, shouldn't there be a new section for them??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.229.185.180 (talk) 10:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

That should probably be moved into "Reception" section at this point. Just64helpin 11:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ep86 02.jpg

Image:Ep86 02.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 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 08:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RIP?

Just watched the last episode (it was only shown over here a few weeks ago) and there was something at the end of the credits that I've not seen mentioned anywhere. I don't know whether it was in the US broadcasts too, or if it was tacked on at the end by the UK sponsors. However, after the credits finish in silence and after the various production company logos, the letters 'r.i.p' appear in red and in the Sopranos font, with gun for the R. Whether that's meant to be for the series or the characters, I don't know. Could anyone confirm whether that appeared in other countries? I can probably upload a screen grab if that helps... sjwk 03:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think they had it over here in America, so it was probably a UK exclusive.--CyberGhostface 03:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dream section

After finally seeing the episode and reading a lot about it online, it seems the analysis should at least include a nod to the idea that the entire final episode is a dream (including the supporting evidence). Has this been done in the past and removed? Jstohler (talk) 16:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a source to back that theory up? Although I should point out that Chase pretty much rendered 90% of the theories moot.--CyberGhostface (talk) 16:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Only my own theories, and those of some others online. Here's one example, posted the day after the show aired. Jstohler (talk) 17:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
That example isn't an reliable source as its a fan's comment on the article. Had it been the subject of the article (or mentioned by the author) it would have been notable. Personal theories usually count as original research.--CyberGhostface (talk) 18:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)