Pilot (House) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 24, 2010. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Good amount of information for a TV pilot, I don't see how it can get much better...maybe a little more on the Behind the Scenes. ....( Complain)( Let us to it pell-mell) 23:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I think that whoever played Adler should be in the infobox, as she is a main character (per se) for this episode. However, the other two currently listed guest-stars are not notable as they appear (from what I can tell from the article) only in one scene. Therefore, I am removing them from the list. If they appear more than once, this article does not mention it, which is a flaw that needs to be remedied. Goiter McWilliostein, P. I. You can't control me! I'm a P. I.! Save Stargate SG-1! 08:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
OK, listen up, boys and girls. I've done my major clean-up. There are several flaws that I have found, which I believe need be tended to. See the to-do list above for details. Goiter McWilliostein, P. I. You can't control me! I'm a P. I.! Save Stargate SG-1! 09:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I was attempting a spell check and noticed a "humour" outside of a direct quote. I expected this article to be in US English, as it is a US produced series that has its first broadcasts in the US. Is there some other aspect I'm missing? Jay32183 22:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
This page was marked as a copyright violation, which I feel is in error. The blanking of the page and requesting deletion is for when every version in the history is a copyright violation. The most recent version was not. Jay32183 17:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
How is this article a copyvio? The original version was a copyvio, that is not being argued here. But the article has since been revised to the point that it is nothing like the TV IV version. How is this an issue? How is this harming Wikipedia? Furthermore, your link that you placed in your edit summary means nothing to me and I don't believe any other user around here. Please explain yourself before you so rashly block out this article which is currently in the middle of an FAC. The Filmaker 01:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
That's also not what I said. The two points I am making:
Is there any reason why the episode always had such an orange color to it? Both the TV aired version and the ones distributed on the web always look as though someone filmed it with some orange filter on the lens. -- MacAddct1984 16:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Uh guys, the series pilot was filmed in black & white and then colourized, with the exception of the establishing shots and the interior of the school which used full colour. Now why this was done, is unknown. Perhaps it was initially done as a way of linking it with the working title of "Chasing Zebras", with the idea of doing the series in black & white. Evil Doctor 1 ( talk) 19:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
The plot is a bit long. For a 42 min episode, is there a reason it's 600 words? It's a blow-by-blow of the show, with the only thing missing being the actual dialogue exchange (which is still kind of seen in paraphrased form). It needs to be trimmed; there is no reason why it should be 600 words long, when feature length films are 600 words and twice as long as a television episode. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 13:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, but this is a complicated medical television show, not a feature film. It's 42 minutes long, not 90 mins. We don't need detail for detail on the diagnoses. Everything they guess, and turns out to be wrong isn't necessary. You could summarize their mistakes into more concise sentences, instead of just relaying each of them as they happened. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
What I pointed out was that you are using the film guideline as the episode guideline, and that this plot is 600 words, which is a bit much for a 42 minute show. Also, Wikipedia:Television episodes#Content, which states that you should have a brief summary of the episode. That which is on this page is not brief.
Why can I not view the version of the page before October 31, 2006? -- thedemonhog talk • edits 05:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Since 'House' has so many connections to Sherlock Holmes, should the possibility that Adler is a refernce to Irene Adler be mentioned? Or has it already been disproven, or? Ayries 14:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this article. As this article has already tried for FA, I expect to be able to finish the review fairly quickly. – sgeureka t• c 16:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Most of the stuff below are suggestions and not GA-fail-worthy (I am a very thorough reviewer); fixing them should also be quick (it should be obvious what needs fixing and what can be ignored). I also think that, apart from these minor issues, this article is Feature-worthy.
Can't find anything else; good job all in all. If you feel you have addressed the above concerns in as far as you think is necessary, please leave a quick note here (it's on my watch list), and I'll promote this article as soon as possible. – sgeureka t• c 17:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sgeureka, I've did what you asked, to answer your question, yes, Dr. House already has his team together when the show starts. Please reply, -- Music 26/ 11 09:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC).
At Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#TV pilot naming standards, there is a discussion about how articles about untitled pilots should be named. A change has been proposed which would affect this article. Regular editors of this page are invited to join the discussion. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 20:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Unofficial House guide at [1] - 81.139.76.64 ( talk) 21:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm new to all of this, so I don't know how to do it myself, or if there's a reason, but why is this page formatted differently from those for the rest of the season? Comradephate ( talk) 15:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh, ok. I understand. It just seemed odd that no other episode has the same "episode chronology" element. That element was replaced with a drop-down menu of sorts, along with some minor stylistic changes in the rest of the entries. - Comradephate ( talk) 01:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
←Well, I'm asking the question again, because I don't understand. Is this the extent of the discussion that took place regarding the use of the generic infobox instead of the House-specific infobox in use for the 100+ following episodes? I am interested in the reasoning behind the decision, and any discussion that took place, as just a statement that the other infobox is "uglier" doesn't seem to me to be compelling, nor is the argument that this brings this pilot in line with other FA-class episode articles. Maybe there is discussion elsewhere, and if so, I'd appreciate a pointer to it. Seems to me that having this article conform to other House episodes is more of a consideration than having it conform to the pilots of other tv-series. But maybe there's more to it - I'd appreciate some more information here. And, as I said elsewhere, I'm not particularly commenting on or defending the aesthetics of either design - I'm merely saying that the one designed by someone for this series has a different form, and other information, than this one does. So I'm asking why it was decided to not change it. This is not at all a big deal, but since my good faith update was reverted twice, I think a response is in order. Thanks. Tvoz/ talk 20:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I like the idea of incorporating some more libre-licensed images if they're appropriate, but I'm lockstep agreement with David Fuchs ( talk · contribs) in reverting these inclusions. What about using these images—both of which are found at Wikimedia Commons—of Shore ( File:David Shore Cropped.jpg) and Laurie ( File:Hugh Laurie 2009.jpg)? Much better images I think. Bear in mind of course, that these aren't the only images of these men at Commons, just the ones I liked best. Thoughts? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The combination of the photo of Laurie with the show's logo seems to be a very shady area when it comes to copyright trademark law. This photo is not of the character House, nor is it in any way approved by Fox. I suggest we either use the photo of Laurie or the logo, but not both in conjunction implying an official nature to the photo.
It also is a poor identifier for the pilot episode, and I don't know if it needs to appear in the infobox at all. If a good-quality image can't be found, there's no need for any image. — Noisalt ( talk) 02:59, 24 November 2010 (UTC) (edited)
""Pilot", also known as "Everybody Lies",[1] is the first episode of the television series House."
I think the proper phrasing would be something like:
"The pilot of the television series House is also its first episode, alsa known as "Everybody Lies."
Because the word pilot in the title refers of course to it's being the series pilot. It's like Life on Mars, where Episode 3 is titled Episode 3. You can't say that Episode 3 was the 3rd episode of Life on Mars. This is something like a placeholder. 81.182.237.222 ( talk) 12:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Folks, this discussion reminds me of the story about some ancient philosophers who were trying to determine how many teeth a horse has. They debated for days about whether God would give a horse more or fewer teeth than humans. No one bothered to open the horse's mouth and count them. In situations like this, it's usually best to go directly to the source. Fox can call the first episode anything they wish. If they wanted to call it "The First Show", or "We Haven't Named This Episode" they could. For whatever reason, if you look at Fox's page describing the episode, you'll see that they call it "Pilot". Now, they may have given the alternate title, Everybody Lies, that some source picked up along the way, but there is nothing wrong with using the title "Pilot" if it is used by Fox, regardless of personal preferences, or Wikipedia precedent, or how it's done for other shows. Cresix ( talk) 17:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pilot (House). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
There was a section of the article that didn't make grammatical sense, so I checked the source it referred to and it's clear the intended meaning at the ending was mangled and I believe an edit should be made.
Wikipedia Article Text: "Shore wrote the pilot with a vivid memory of a doctor's visit:[4] he once had to wait two weeks to get a doctor's appointment for a sore hip, by which point his pain had disappeared. Nevertheless, Shore stated that the doctors were "incredibly polite". Shore later stated that, as he wrote the pilot, he fell in love with a character who, as a doctor, would actually ask the question "Why am I wasting your time?".[4]"
Actual Source Text: [4] [1] "As he wrote the pilot, Shore drew upon the memory of a sore hip. The earliest he could get a doctor’s appointment was two weeks. By the time it came, the pain was gone — but he went anyway. ”The doctors were incredibly polite, and I couldn’t help thinking, ‘Why?! I am wasting your time!”’ says Shore. ”Writing House, I fell in love with the idea of a guy who would actually say that to a patient.”"
- So basically, David Shore, after incredulously wondering 'Why?!' would doctors be incredibly polite to him despite having no medical problems, is saying he fell in love with the idea of a doctor who would actually say "You're wasting my time!" to a patient - not a doctor who says "Why am I wasting your time?" which makes no sense as written in the wiki article. 138.229.19.48 ( talk) 16:48, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Pilot (House). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Pilot (House). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
I just watched this episode again in 2019, after watching the series when it originally aired 15 years ago, and having a knowledge of the characters from the past, to me it did not seem that Dr. House thought that the case was boring, he was saying that Dr. Wilson's field, Oncology, was boring in comparison to his field. It was East Coast USA sarcasm, and being a native, that's how it came across to me. While I'm grateful to everyone that contributes to Wikipedia, the "plot section" is missing many of the plot subtleties that were conveyed through the tone of the dialogue. House was ribbing his friend Dr. Wilson, like male friends do, and he was never seriously pondering not taking his only friend's cousin's medical case. He was going to help from the second he asked. That's just how MISUNDERSTOOD guys like House communicate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.88.43.62 ( talk) 08:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Reviewing as part of the
2020 FA sweeps. Plot and lead is fine. Production goes a bit off-topic to broader context of the first season/conception, and it would be good to shorten it and introduce concrete detail about the pilot itself (the Berton Roueché fact is really all there is). Is there DVD commentary available? Or the source
The House That Hugh Laurie Built linked above may be good. There are also a couple of weird sentences like Epps and co-star Jennifer Morrison read the scripts and believed that the show would be either a hit or miss
(well, what else could it be?).
The Reception and lack of Analysis section is the main issue. The two paragraphs of reviews have little structure, overuse quotes and do not contain much meaningful information. See Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections. It would be good to have an Analysis section saying things like "In contrast to later episodes, the pilot was shot with this filming style" or "The pilot establishes the format of each episode being centered around one patient" or "These tropes reoccur in X, Y, Z" or "The finale later mirrors this bit of the structure". Additionally, more meaningful reviewer commentary is needed: paragraphs with topic sentences could address in turn reception to the characterization and acting; the plot; the premise/format etc.
The article is about GA-quality at the moment, possibly GA-and-a-half, but below the contemporary FA standard. — Bilorv ( talk) 14:10, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Pilot (House) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 24, 2010. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Good amount of information for a TV pilot, I don't see how it can get much better...maybe a little more on the Behind the Scenes. ....( Complain)( Let us to it pell-mell) 23:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I think that whoever played Adler should be in the infobox, as she is a main character (per se) for this episode. However, the other two currently listed guest-stars are not notable as they appear (from what I can tell from the article) only in one scene. Therefore, I am removing them from the list. If they appear more than once, this article does not mention it, which is a flaw that needs to be remedied. Goiter McWilliostein, P. I. You can't control me! I'm a P. I.! Save Stargate SG-1! 08:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
OK, listen up, boys and girls. I've done my major clean-up. There are several flaws that I have found, which I believe need be tended to. See the to-do list above for details. Goiter McWilliostein, P. I. You can't control me! I'm a P. I.! Save Stargate SG-1! 09:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I was attempting a spell check and noticed a "humour" outside of a direct quote. I expected this article to be in US English, as it is a US produced series that has its first broadcasts in the US. Is there some other aspect I'm missing? Jay32183 22:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
This page was marked as a copyright violation, which I feel is in error. The blanking of the page and requesting deletion is for when every version in the history is a copyright violation. The most recent version was not. Jay32183 17:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
How is this article a copyvio? The original version was a copyvio, that is not being argued here. But the article has since been revised to the point that it is nothing like the TV IV version. How is this an issue? How is this harming Wikipedia? Furthermore, your link that you placed in your edit summary means nothing to me and I don't believe any other user around here. Please explain yourself before you so rashly block out this article which is currently in the middle of an FAC. The Filmaker 01:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
That's also not what I said. The two points I am making:
Is there any reason why the episode always had such an orange color to it? Both the TV aired version and the ones distributed on the web always look as though someone filmed it with some orange filter on the lens. -- MacAddct1984 16:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Uh guys, the series pilot was filmed in black & white and then colourized, with the exception of the establishing shots and the interior of the school which used full colour. Now why this was done, is unknown. Perhaps it was initially done as a way of linking it with the working title of "Chasing Zebras", with the idea of doing the series in black & white. Evil Doctor 1 ( talk) 19:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
The plot is a bit long. For a 42 min episode, is there a reason it's 600 words? It's a blow-by-blow of the show, with the only thing missing being the actual dialogue exchange (which is still kind of seen in paraphrased form). It needs to be trimmed; there is no reason why it should be 600 words long, when feature length films are 600 words and twice as long as a television episode. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 13:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, but this is a complicated medical television show, not a feature film. It's 42 minutes long, not 90 mins. We don't need detail for detail on the diagnoses. Everything they guess, and turns out to be wrong isn't necessary. You could summarize their mistakes into more concise sentences, instead of just relaying each of them as they happened. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 20:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
What I pointed out was that you are using the film guideline as the episode guideline, and that this plot is 600 words, which is a bit much for a 42 minute show. Also, Wikipedia:Television episodes#Content, which states that you should have a brief summary of the episode. That which is on this page is not brief.
Why can I not view the version of the page before October 31, 2006? -- thedemonhog talk • edits 05:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Since 'House' has so many connections to Sherlock Holmes, should the possibility that Adler is a refernce to Irene Adler be mentioned? Or has it already been disproven, or? Ayries 14:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this article. As this article has already tried for FA, I expect to be able to finish the review fairly quickly. – sgeureka t• c 16:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Most of the stuff below are suggestions and not GA-fail-worthy (I am a very thorough reviewer); fixing them should also be quick (it should be obvious what needs fixing and what can be ignored). I also think that, apart from these minor issues, this article is Feature-worthy.
Can't find anything else; good job all in all. If you feel you have addressed the above concerns in as far as you think is necessary, please leave a quick note here (it's on my watch list), and I'll promote this article as soon as possible. – sgeureka t• c 17:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sgeureka, I've did what you asked, to answer your question, yes, Dr. House already has his team together when the show starts. Please reply, -- Music 26/ 11 09:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC).
At Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#TV pilot naming standards, there is a discussion about how articles about untitled pilots should be named. A change has been proposed which would affect this article. Regular editors of this page are invited to join the discussion. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 20:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Unofficial House guide at [1] - 81.139.76.64 ( talk) 21:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm new to all of this, so I don't know how to do it myself, or if there's a reason, but why is this page formatted differently from those for the rest of the season? Comradephate ( talk) 15:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh, ok. I understand. It just seemed odd that no other episode has the same "episode chronology" element. That element was replaced with a drop-down menu of sorts, along with some minor stylistic changes in the rest of the entries. - Comradephate ( talk) 01:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
←Well, I'm asking the question again, because I don't understand. Is this the extent of the discussion that took place regarding the use of the generic infobox instead of the House-specific infobox in use for the 100+ following episodes? I am interested in the reasoning behind the decision, and any discussion that took place, as just a statement that the other infobox is "uglier" doesn't seem to me to be compelling, nor is the argument that this brings this pilot in line with other FA-class episode articles. Maybe there is discussion elsewhere, and if so, I'd appreciate a pointer to it. Seems to me that having this article conform to other House episodes is more of a consideration than having it conform to the pilots of other tv-series. But maybe there's more to it - I'd appreciate some more information here. And, as I said elsewhere, I'm not particularly commenting on or defending the aesthetics of either design - I'm merely saying that the one designed by someone for this series has a different form, and other information, than this one does. So I'm asking why it was decided to not change it. This is not at all a big deal, but since my good faith update was reverted twice, I think a response is in order. Thanks. Tvoz/ talk 20:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I like the idea of incorporating some more libre-licensed images if they're appropriate, but I'm lockstep agreement with David Fuchs ( talk · contribs) in reverting these inclusions. What about using these images—both of which are found at Wikimedia Commons—of Shore ( File:David Shore Cropped.jpg) and Laurie ( File:Hugh Laurie 2009.jpg)? Much better images I think. Bear in mind of course, that these aren't the only images of these men at Commons, just the ones I liked best. Thoughts? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 17:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The combination of the photo of Laurie with the show's logo seems to be a very shady area when it comes to copyright trademark law. This photo is not of the character House, nor is it in any way approved by Fox. I suggest we either use the photo of Laurie or the logo, but not both in conjunction implying an official nature to the photo.
It also is a poor identifier for the pilot episode, and I don't know if it needs to appear in the infobox at all. If a good-quality image can't be found, there's no need for any image. — Noisalt ( talk) 02:59, 24 November 2010 (UTC) (edited)
""Pilot", also known as "Everybody Lies",[1] is the first episode of the television series House."
I think the proper phrasing would be something like:
"The pilot of the television series House is also its first episode, alsa known as "Everybody Lies."
Because the word pilot in the title refers of course to it's being the series pilot. It's like Life on Mars, where Episode 3 is titled Episode 3. You can't say that Episode 3 was the 3rd episode of Life on Mars. This is something like a placeholder. 81.182.237.222 ( talk) 12:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Folks, this discussion reminds me of the story about some ancient philosophers who were trying to determine how many teeth a horse has. They debated for days about whether God would give a horse more or fewer teeth than humans. No one bothered to open the horse's mouth and count them. In situations like this, it's usually best to go directly to the source. Fox can call the first episode anything they wish. If they wanted to call it "The First Show", or "We Haven't Named This Episode" they could. For whatever reason, if you look at Fox's page describing the episode, you'll see that they call it "Pilot". Now, they may have given the alternate title, Everybody Lies, that some source picked up along the way, but there is nothing wrong with using the title "Pilot" if it is used by Fox, regardless of personal preferences, or Wikipedia precedent, or how it's done for other shows. Cresix ( talk) 17:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pilot (House). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
There was a section of the article that didn't make grammatical sense, so I checked the source it referred to and it's clear the intended meaning at the ending was mangled and I believe an edit should be made.
Wikipedia Article Text: "Shore wrote the pilot with a vivid memory of a doctor's visit:[4] he once had to wait two weeks to get a doctor's appointment for a sore hip, by which point his pain had disappeared. Nevertheless, Shore stated that the doctors were "incredibly polite". Shore later stated that, as he wrote the pilot, he fell in love with a character who, as a doctor, would actually ask the question "Why am I wasting your time?".[4]"
Actual Source Text: [4] [1] "As he wrote the pilot, Shore drew upon the memory of a sore hip. The earliest he could get a doctor’s appointment was two weeks. By the time it came, the pain was gone — but he went anyway. ”The doctors were incredibly polite, and I couldn’t help thinking, ‘Why?! I am wasting your time!”’ says Shore. ”Writing House, I fell in love with the idea of a guy who would actually say that to a patient.”"
- So basically, David Shore, after incredulously wondering 'Why?!' would doctors be incredibly polite to him despite having no medical problems, is saying he fell in love with the idea of a doctor who would actually say "You're wasting my time!" to a patient - not a doctor who says "Why am I wasting your time?" which makes no sense as written in the wiki article. 138.229.19.48 ( talk) 16:48, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Pilot (House). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Pilot (House). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
I just watched this episode again in 2019, after watching the series when it originally aired 15 years ago, and having a knowledge of the characters from the past, to me it did not seem that Dr. House thought that the case was boring, he was saying that Dr. Wilson's field, Oncology, was boring in comparison to his field. It was East Coast USA sarcasm, and being a native, that's how it came across to me. While I'm grateful to everyone that contributes to Wikipedia, the "plot section" is missing many of the plot subtleties that were conveyed through the tone of the dialogue. House was ribbing his friend Dr. Wilson, like male friends do, and he was never seriously pondering not taking his only friend's cousin's medical case. He was going to help from the second he asked. That's just how MISUNDERSTOOD guys like House communicate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.88.43.62 ( talk) 08:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Reviewing as part of the
2020 FA sweeps. Plot and lead is fine. Production goes a bit off-topic to broader context of the first season/conception, and it would be good to shorten it and introduce concrete detail about the pilot itself (the Berton Roueché fact is really all there is). Is there DVD commentary available? Or the source
The House That Hugh Laurie Built linked above may be good. There are also a couple of weird sentences like Epps and co-star Jennifer Morrison read the scripts and believed that the show would be either a hit or miss
(well, what else could it be?).
The Reception and lack of Analysis section is the main issue. The two paragraphs of reviews have little structure, overuse quotes and do not contain much meaningful information. See Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections. It would be good to have an Analysis section saying things like "In contrast to later episodes, the pilot was shot with this filming style" or "The pilot establishes the format of each episode being centered around one patient" or "These tropes reoccur in X, Y, Z" or "The finale later mirrors this bit of the structure". Additionally, more meaningful reviewer commentary is needed: paragraphs with topic sentences could address in turn reception to the characterization and acting; the plot; the premise/format etc.
The article is about GA-quality at the moment, possibly GA-and-a-half, but below the contemporary FA standard. — Bilorv ( talk) 14:10, 22 March 2021 (UTC)