Talk:Sam Axe

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 November 2023. The result of the discussion was redirect.

Chuck Finley (Burn Notice) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 01 July 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Sam Axe. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about (title). Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this redirect. You may wish to ask factual questions about (title) at the Reference desk.

Edited out the 'alcoholic' part. Bruce Campbell has said he doesn't see the character as an alcoholic in an interview with NPR, and while a constant drinker, Sam is never shown as drunk. More than likely he takes his time in between drinks for the alcohol to be absorbed, which of course isn't shown in the show. -Anonymous

In the show Sam initially describes himself as a social drinker who likes to keep a mild buzz on as much as possible. That implies that Sam is in fact drunk, just a controlled one, rather than a complete fall down drunk. The early Sam buzz is about celebrating retirement but also possibly also covering being mildly depressed about retirement. Sam most likely does carefully space his drinks, as Sam mentions several times to Micheal that he likes a buzz but can always defend himself. On the other hand, Sam indicates that he is drunk enough that he is careful about not getting caught driving "within walking distance" or "you drive".

Micheal Westin also called Sam a washed up drunk several times in the first couple seasons. Although there were apologies it was more for implying Sam was not a good friend and was unable to perform. However, as the seasons pass, Sam does less and less drinking to keep a buzz on...probably because Micheal has more or less brought him out of retirement. Currently Sam's drinking seems to have dropped to simple relaxation short of a real buzz or as part of cover.65.26.139.168 (talk) 04:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll rewrite this section to avoid copyright infringement.

As for the image, I'm not sure I understand why it's against copyright rules. Aren't images on the USA Network site free to all as promotional images? Ytoabn 16:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia only uses images that are released with no restrictions on usage. ~Cr∞nium 16:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is to say it is NOT against copyright rules to use the USA pictures in Wikipedia. But Wikipedia desires to keep everything completely "strings free" so that stuff copied off of Wikipedia can never involve Wikipedia in lawsuits due to improper usage by a 3rd party. Also Wikipedia leans heavily toward "open source" activism, but the legal side only. That is USA pictures do have some restrictions including that they can not ever be sold. Pictures with no restrictions can be sold to idiots foolish enough to pay without legal impact.65.26.139.168 (talk) 04:15, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Costuming - military uniforms

In light of the recent edits, I thought it would be a good idea to address the issue of the uniform discrepancies. This way we'll have the section here for the record if any consensus issues come up down the line. Unless something drastic has changed since my childhood (grew up on Air bases, was enlisted Navy 15 years ago), Hollywood is required to make the uniforms a little off for military casting for legal reasons; typically they do this with medals and ribbon boards, and sometimes rank insignia, from what I have witnessed. However, if enough reliable sources commented on the inaccurate uniform in this instance (say because it was especially off compared to the Hollywood norm), I could see addressing the topic (very) briefly in the article in neutral, encyclopedic language. None of the previous edits have met these criteria. The comments on personality types were particularly glaring. So, with all of that said, has anyone read any coverage of the show that discussed these issues? Millahnna (talk) 07:02, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sam Axe. 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: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]