Talk:The Rockford Files

Untitled

This is so gushing. Can someone do NPOV on this? Mike H 04:12, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)

I was going to, but I thought, that is such an accurate description of my experience watching that show for the first time yesterday. Rad Racer 06:27, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Was it ever established what he was convicted of? Trekphiler 21:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Armed Robbery—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.171.207 (talk) 18:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone know if the third season is going to be released on DVD?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.208.36.16 (talk) 04:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

not sure, but check this site for that kind of info. Count Ringworm 14:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Thrid Season is now out on DVD. 172.164.216.247 18:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

It's only mentioned in the pilot movie that Rockford was convicted of armed robbery. Jim, who has no reason to lie about it, also tells Angel it was a 'bad rap', however no other details were ever offered. 172.164.216.247 18:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Somehow, I've always managed to miss the pilot in syndication... Trekphiler 07:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Rockford and Angel - Sweet in the pen?

It is true that Angel was Jim's "bitch" when they shared a cell? It seems so obvious from the interplay of the two. Jim is essentially straight but still feels he "owes" his ex, as it were. Angel is still hankering for a continuation. I'm not saying it's in your face or anything - just there for those in the know. Angel's nervous edginess just says it all...213.104.160.6BeenThereDoneThat—Preceding undated comment added at 23:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Yep, this is a fact! The episode entitled "D*I*V*O*R*C*E" (scripted but not filmed) would have explored this in detail. Jim tells Angel in the script: "It's over Angel. A joint only arrangement, you're just gonna have to get over it." Angel replies: "No Jimmy! No! I need your sweetness!!" Then he tries to grab Jim and they wrestle.213.104.164.45 15:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)RockoFan

Location of Mobile Home

As I recall, and from wathcing the DVD's, there is no other mobile home anywhere near Rockford's - woldn't it be more correct to describe his mobile home as being in a parking lot, rather than in a mobile home park?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Voideater (talk • contribs) 04:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It depends on the episode. On some episodes, there are other trailers shown near him, and in one episode the residents had tried to get him removed from the community because of the ruckus his job caused. He was allowed to stay if he patrolled the trailer park at night as a security guard, if I recall correctly. Arundhati lejeune 23:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Working through the DVDs and still have seen no other trailers in the restaraunt parking lot Voideater 15:44, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Still no other trailers anywhere near him - his trailer is generally in a restaurant parking lot, though has been moved on occasion (see season four episode The House on Willis Street). In season four episode The Queen of Peru for a recreational vehicle parked temporarily by his trailer by a vacationing family. Voideater (talk) 00:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

The restaurant parking lot on which the Rockford trailer sat is actually adjacent to a genuine mobile home park in real-life Malibu. It was infrequent/never, however, that these were actually shown in the camera angles. Generally, angles did not include the restaurant or the slope upward, where the other trailers were--and are. Also, the spot is technically not "on PCH." One goes down a short road/long driveway to get there.Scooge (talk) 06:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Tourist interest

Does the location of Jim's trailer feature on any tourist trip? I was surprised, when in San Francisco, that no mention was made to the actual streets where the infamous 'Bullit' vehicle chases was made and had to ask.88.105.210.68 11:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)John T (UK)

No tourist map, but the restaraunt's parking lot that his trailer was parked at is now the Paradise Cove Beach Cafe - see http://www.paradisecovemalibu.com/beachcafe/ Voideater 02:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Presumably, the parking lot is now that of the cafe in question, and not the cafe itself as the above would suggest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.164.201 (talk) 22:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Cancelled?

The Rockford Files was canceled? I thought Garner left due to his injuries and the show just folded. -Vladimir Lenin 03:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is what happened. I think the article states that. Where does it say it was canceled? Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 03:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The section labelled "Analysis"...

...is thoroughly subjective, lacking in citations, and goes against Wikpedia's "no original research" guidelines. (I also find it laughably pretentious in spots, but that's not the main point I'm trying to make here.) Can anyone come up with a reason for this section to stay? If not, I'm targeting it for deletion... 172.149.183.11 21:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Instead of deletion, let's revise it and add references. --Jcbutler 19:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It's been a month, and there have been no references added -- I suspect because there are no references to add. I'll give it a few more days, then I'm gonna start pruning.... 172.164.216.247 18:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mtstroud, whoever you may be. Two can play at the reversion game. If you don't like the "Citation needed" and "weasel words" tags in the Analysis section, then add citations (if any exist) and rewrite the article so it's less weaselly. But simply reverting the tags away won't make the article any more credible.... 172.162.32.196 16:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the Analysis section. This seems to be a clear case of original research. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Fine by me! 172.162.32.196 17:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Pardoned?

I've never seen the pilot episode, I must have started watching shortly afterwards. I knew that Jim had been in prison, and I guess I never picked up that he was wrongly accused and pardoned. From my foggy memory, I could have sworn that several times he was threathened by the Lt.s who disliked him as violating parole? Does anyone else remember that? How could he be violating parole if he was pardoned?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Endy9 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

The police in the show (apart from Dennis) disliked Jim, and regularly used intimidation tactics against him (which generally did not work, as Rockford knew his rights as well as them), so I suppose it could be explained that way. I think a more probable explanation is that the show's writers simply did not expect the audience to remember such small details. But in the pilot episode he did say that he had been pardoned. Arundhati lejeune 23:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the writers seemed to play a little fast and loose with Jim's situation with regards to parole. Jim actually made a long speech in the pilot movie that stated he'd been pardoned for his robbery conviction, but in later episodes we meet Marcus Hayes, Jim's parole officer from "four years ago". Either Jim didn't get pardoned, or perhaps he committed another offense for which he was out on parole.

Other episodes established that Jim was a small-time black marketeer/quasi-con-man throughout the 1950s -- perhaps one of these exploits caught up with him? 172.146.121.105 20:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

We could also posit, considering the shenanigans he got up to in the course of the show, he was on parole at times, no? On a related issue, I added the fact tag, because it seems to me, the cases probably hotted up because he was investigating. (I haven't seen an episode in quite awhile...) Trekphiler 10:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Becker's made a point of Jim's pardon to more than one boss. It's also mentioned several other times during the series' run. 75.91.239.237 (talk) 22:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Will

It could have been that Jim was in prison, served his time, released on parole, finished his parole, and was later pardoned. Sometimes people are pardonned years or even decades after the prison sentence is up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.238.206.135 (talk) 02:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Jimbo would have to have been pardoned or finished parole to get a private investigator's license. Probably the former. Could he have had a period of parole during which he investigated who actually framed him, and thus cleared his name, resulting in a pardon? It would explain how he got the skills to get into the investigating business too. 2.31.164.79 (talk) 23:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Area 311

I don't recall that, but I may have a hint why it was used, because IIRC, another TV series used the 311 area (311-555-3305), recalled by Burgess Meredith's character (V.C.R. "Cam" Cameron, the "Search" function says) after being kidnapped. Big Uncle 14:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Inaccuracies

Noah Beery, Jr., did not play Rocky in the pilot. The role was played that one time by actor Robert Donley. Also, the first trivia item is complete supposition. Even if the Trivia section were allowed to stay, unless source citations can be provided for this one item it is no less than original research or opinion. 12.22.250.4 18:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

This is in there:

In the "Episodes" section:

"The series pilot aired on NBC March 27, 1974 as a 90-minute made-for-television movie. In the pilot, Robert Donley played Rockford's father; Lindsay Wagner also starred and later made a return appearance. The pilot was titled Backlash of the Hunter for syndication."

Yes, most likely that first section needs to be yanked. WikiDon 18:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. If somebody can substantiate it, & wants to source the origin of the character, look to "Maverick"; I've heard interviews ("Biography"?) saying Rockford was just an update... Trekphiler 18:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, on A&E's Biography program of Garner, Huggins wanted to do Maverick over again, but in a "present day" setting. Huggins felt there was some "magic" there with Garner playing a good guy, but with a bit of a roguish quality-self serving quality. WikiDon 18:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Not really an inaccuracy, but the following sentence in the article doesn't make sense: "the chemistry of both Garner and Santos was like having a cop getting into trouble" Huh? jmdeur 21:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Richard Brockleman is introduced in the season four episode The House on Willis Street. The character meets Rockford in this episode for the first time and is not introduced as any relation to Rockford. He is not Rockford's nephew as stated in the article. See Universal DVD. Voideater (talk) 23:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Hyperlinks in the DVD releases section

I would like to have the date-related hyperlinks in the DVD releases section removed. There is no reason why anyone interested in (for example) season three of the Rockford Files would also be interested in what other events happened on "February 27" or indeed "2007". 140.168.69.130 02:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Done. ~ WikiDon 02:39, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Full dates are not linked for clicking they are linked so that they will be formatted according to user preferences. By Wikipedia standards, full dates are to be linked, and partial dates (which do not follow a standard) are generally not to be linked. (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)) —MJBurrage • TALK • 16:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hang on a second - this is not such a clear-cut issue. Please read http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4582 and the addition I made this morning to Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Date_linking_wording (citing this article) as to why date-linking is often inappropriate. Certainly in the case of the DVD release dates, there is no problem or confusion with using a location-neutral date format such as "2008-1-15".140.168.69.130 02:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Megan Dougherty

The article states

After Corbett was dropped from the show after the fourth season (allegedly due to contract disputes), a new legal adviser and a new romantic interest for Rockford was introduced: Dr. Megan Dougherty (Kathryn Harrold), a blind, yet very independent and gorgeous psychiatrist, who made three appearances in the fifth and sixth seasons.

Was a psychiatrist really his legal adviser, or were these two separate roles? Rojomoke (talk) 12:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC) Was a psychiatrist really his legal adviser, or were these two separate roles?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rojomoke (talk • contribs) 16:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Season 6 is available online

Wikidon, I'm not sure why you and other people are being judgemental and accusing others of vandalism and advertising when they state facts.
The Rockford files season six is only available now for Netflix subscribers online. That is not an intended as an advertisement, but a statement of fact for fans who *MAY* be interested.
Maybe there is a better way to word this to inform people, so please consider a revision, and not being self-righteous and deleting it all together.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Sacks (talk • contribs) 04:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

1) Part of the problem was the way you formatted it. Please read: Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles and Wikipedia:Manual of Style

Don't make a sentence a header. You can't make it header like you did, put it inline with the other seasons, add it to the table, look at other articles for examples. Don't zig when everybody is zagging. Poor formating has the appearance of vandalism. This edit 1) Is unacceptable and 2) looks like vandalism. If you learn how to drive a car before you get on the freeway, you are less likely to get pulled over by a policeman and cited with a ticket.

2) REFERENCE it! Have a verifiable source. This is especially in poor taste when you are adding one retailer over all the others and are not contributing to Wikipedia in any other ways. See: Wikipedia:Spam

3) If you go to Netflix.com it will say: "Unavailable". It says the same thing at Amazon.com, Blockbuster.com, Target.com, Wal-mart.com, Bestbuy.com, CircuitCity.com, etc. You can put it on your "Watch list" at all of those sites, "pre-order" or whatever you want to call it. Big deal. If Netflix has a special deal with the distributors, then there is a press release available online somewhere.

• PS 1) use the "Show preview" feature so it doesn't take you five saves to add one paragraph; 2) SIGN your talk post: Wikipedia:Sign ~ WikiDon (talk) 12:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

File:Proof Rockford Netflix.JPG

Don, when I go to Netflix it *does* say it is available as "instant" under "Available Formats". I have watched season 6 episodes online from Netlflix. I think you may need to be a subscriber to see it though. I know you don't believe me, so here is a screenshot:

File:Proof Rockford Netflix.JPG I left season 1 on the screen shot so one could see the difference (6 is instant only). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Sacks (talk • contribs) 18:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC) It looks like you need to have an account or it will show up as unavailable. I wish they would show instant titles and not DVD's only to non-subscribers. Again, to subscribers the season 6 episodes are available. Doug Sacks (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, that is what I figured. So, you have to be a Netflix subscriber to get it on download only. I can't find a press release anywhere. You would think that Netflix would want to brag about exclusives to entice people to join up. Marketing 101.

I want you to remember that this is first an Encyclopedia. So, think of it as going to you bookshelf or library and picking up Encyclopedia Britanica, or Encyclopedia Americana, or World Book. Would you expect to find this in an encyclopedia? Of course Wikipedia can be better than an encyclopedia and have more information than that. But, from a thinking starting point, I want you to back up and start from there. I would like to ask you to read: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

I know, I know, your eyes are rolling, but I am telling you if we build a better foundation we'll have a stronger offering. We must be better than your blog sites. Now, I would like you to find something that says when the general DVD release will be, if you have to email Universal Studios and ask them if they have a press release on it, so be in. There is already a code for it, ASIN: B00188KUU8. I am thinking July, maybe August, maybe this month. We need something verifiable. ~ WikiDon (talk) 07:42, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Looking this over I would conclude that the availability at Netflix should be mentioned in the article, with a CITE tag. The information is valid and on topic, it's just not well sourced yet. That does not mean that we cannot include it, just that we want to add a better source than one user's screenshot. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 13:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The source is Netflix's Instant Viewing catalog. It's verifiable by anyone with an account. Just because Joe Nonsubscriber cannot follow a link to it does not mean that it's not a valid source. --99.163.50.12 (talk) 03:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Doin' a Rockford

Three things:

1. If you can source the open collar thing, do restore it. (Not sure the rhyming slang rises to notable, tho.)
2. If somebody can find a source, can you add the ref to a chase scene as "doing a Rockford"?
3. What's up with the default sort warning I'm seeing? "Warning: Default sort key "Rockford Files, The" overrides earlier default sort key "Huggins, Roy""?

TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 16:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Anyone can claim anything, but to stay on WP, it needs to be verifiable with reliable sources. I concur with evertything Trek removed,a nd in fact have remove the entire Trivia section. It has been tagged with a "Trivia" template since June 2007, which is certianly long enough for items to have been sourced, and moved to relevant sections. Perhaps sopme of hte items could be kept uder a "Cultural effects"-type section, but they need proper sources that show they have had the claimed effect, not just a vague reference some announcer of football games making allusions or calling something a something. Also, this is an encyclopedia article, not a fan site or a book devoted to the show: addresses and phone numbers are very minor, usless there is some citeable reason that makes them esecially notable. - BillCJ (talk) 22:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Bill, I would argue for keeping some of the in-show stuff, 'cause it is about the show; the phone # & plate # even long-time fans may not know about, & the 29 Cove Rd address contradiction I've wondered about. I personally liked Garner's comment, in the vein of James Marsters "vampires aren't real, Clark" from "Smallville". The rest, take it out. TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 00:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Tag

This article was tagged in 2007 as lacking references etc. This may have been so then, but I find the article to be thorough, extensive, and as well referenced as any good Wikipedia article. How can this tag be removed? Ineuw (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I disagree that it is thoroughly referenced; however, it does have a list of references now, so I removed the "unreferenced" tag. momoricks 00:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

A slight mistake

In the episode Beamer's Last Case, Jim is in San Juan for ten days and comes back to find someone has been impersonating him and taking cases, pretending to be him. To hire Jim, people would use the Yellow Pages which has a photo of him. The impersonator looked nothing like him. (193.250.53.25 (talk) 15:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC))

Also starring everybody in Hollywood

The "guest stars" bit is getting out of hand. On a long-running series, it's next to inevitable a lot of people who later go on to be stars will make brief appearances. (My personal fave is Gerald McRaney.) I don't think there's a huge need to mention them all. I can see Lauren Bacall, James Woods, Rita Moreno, Robert Loggia, Blair Brown, Isaac Hayes, Rob Reiner, & Tom Selleck (for the irony), but honestly, Jack Colvin? Some trimming is in order, & a bit of judgment in including new names definitely is. TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 17:25, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

where is Jim Rockford's trailer now who has it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.26.209 (talk) 07:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Evidently, the problem persists... Is everybody who went on to star in another show to get special mention? So why isn't my personal fave, Gerald McRaney? Or Lindsay Wagner? Gordon Jump & Howard Hesseman? Larry Hagman? Robert Walden? William Daniels & Bonnie Bartlett? Dick Gautier (things not rotten enough?)? Abe Vigoda? Or Stefanie Powers? And that's just to name just the easy ones. Or, we can show some sense, restore the really big stars, & leave off the Variety page listings. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 04:30 & 04:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

1) Anybody that doesn't already have a Wikipedia entry should AUTOMATICALLY be deleted on the spot.

2) I think anybody on the list should meat one of the following:

• A) Only people that are in the top 100 American films of all time and/or top 100 American TV shows of all time (Lauren Bacall)
• B) People that were especially cultivated: James Garner took a special interest in the career of James Woods and S. J. Cannell took a special interest in and mentored Tom Selleck

The rest of them can be removed from this article and placed in List of Rockford Files episodes where they make a lot more sense and the information is more usable and readable.

> Best O Fortuna (talk) 02:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

More/less agreed, which comes back to my above (very) short list of notables. I trust, Fortuna, you don't object to Rita (Tony winner) & Isaac (Oscar, if for music...)? TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 04:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Rita had a special connection with James, she is fine. Isaac is already listed up above in "Cast". (You didn't like my header change? I like to name the header the same as the subject or heading in the article for easy cross-over.) > Best O Fortuna (talk) 05:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

J-Turn

I've been around cars for as long as I can remember, and the evasive manuever that is referred to as the "Rockford turn-around" or "J-turn", is what is commonly called a "reverse float" by motor heads. It is accurately described in the article. It is only possible in a rear wheel drive car. It is easier to perform in gravel than on dry pavement; however, if the rear wheels are spinning fast enough (faster than the car is moving) it is achievable on dry pavement. The term comes from the fact that with the rear wheels spinning faster than the car is moving, the rear of the car is basically floating in that the tire contact patch is not in contact with the pavement, and of course, because the car is starting our in reverse. The sudden acceleration in reverse shifts more of the car's weight to the front tires, where, in a car like the Firebird, a larger percentage of the weight is already located. Unloading the rear axle by suddenly accelerating in reverse makes spinning the rear tires easier to accomplish. I don't know if a reverse float can be performed with a manual transmission, but it seems unlikely. Luckily, Rockford drove a Firebird with an automatic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.90.41.54 (talk) 14:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

J-turn has its own article; it is completely unnecessary to go to so much detail describing something so non-integral to the topic of the article. 71.200.134.47 (talk) 13:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

James Bond does the maneuver in The Man with the Golden Gun (film) using an AMC Hornet. The film was released in December of 1974, the same year Rockford started. AMCKen (talk) 05:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Written but unfilmed episodes

I knew about the unfilmed episodes because one of my writer friends in California actually wrote one of them. It was to be set in the San Francisco Bay area, but after the script was accepted, Garner withdrew from the series. Too bad - I would have been proud to say I knew the author of one of the episodes. But so it goes. Mark Sublette (talk) 09:51, 1 December 2010 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette (talk) 09:51, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Pontiac Firebird Espirt

I have watched every episode and am amazed by how many times Jim damages or crashes his car. I think it was even blown up on a couple episodes. Amazing he just showed up in the next scene or episode with the same car! He was always so broke... Anyone know how many gold Firebirds the studio went through? Must be several! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.227.204 (talk) 05:17, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Just today I was talking to a fan of the legendary James Garner, and the expenses relating to the Firebird were the subject of a lawsuit between him and the studio on the theory that Garner invested a significant amount of his own earnings into vehicle maintenance. If anybody can substantiate this with a cite to that effect, please mention it. If anybody feels like looking up the case, a number of other Hollywood legends reputedly joined him in this action. 216.99.219.134 (talk) 08:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

At the bottom of the Pontiac Firebird Espirit article in the official wiki, the author states "In the first TV movie, I Still Love L.A. in 1994, the Firebird is shown, in ramshackle disrepair, parked next to Rockford's trailer. He mentions he plans to have it "fixed up," but drives other cars throughout the films."

This is inaccurate, Rockford drives the Firebird in many of the TV movies. I say this as a person who is currently watching most of the TV movies. I also do not recall Rockford saying that he "plans to have it "fixed up" in the I 'still' Love L.A. tv movie, and I was watching for it after reading the article. BradynAustin (talk) 04:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Wrong link

The link for the "Jim Rockford" Character goes to a real person with the same name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.2.129 (talk) 04:39, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Solved! 173.216.251.78 (talk) 11:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Rocky... the flying squirrel?

I was just browsing The Moose that Roared, and discovered that James Garner was a big Bullwinkle fan. Now, Jim could have called his father "dad" or "pop", or even his first name (Joe). But he calls him "Rocky". Coincidence? WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 19:08, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

• As Garner didn't write the series, and showrunner Stephen J. Cannell is on record as saying that Garner never changed a single line of dialogue during his 6 years on the show ... yes. 70.48.47.89 (talk) 07:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Rocky, as in his last name. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:55, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with List of Jim Rockford's answering machine gags

The WP:QUOTEFARM has been removed, and there's no other justification for having the list. There's already a section on the gags here; any referenced content in the list could be added to it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

The notability of this list is warranted on several points. The opening gag was consistently played in the entirety of the original series and serves as an excellent example of a story within a story. The list is documented online as well, and this list serves as a reference for those who wish to review and study the evolution of the collaborative entry into the annals of The Rockford Files. It would be a terrible loss to have this list disappear as it is a valuable source for reference in regard to the opening gag. A linking to audio of each gag would be useful. I propose to end the alert that this list may not meet the notability guidelines.

--Ma'ath'a'yü (aka: Proofing) (talk) 19:29, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

It's an amusing gag, but hardly notable enough for its own article. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge: Anything notable from there can be covered in this article. This article already has a paragraph about the answering machine openings which can be expanded some if justified. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Maybe the messages are not always meaningful, but at the end of season 1 episode 13, Rockford punches a guy in the face and believes he broke his hand. In the next episode, the message is: "It's Doc Jones. What did you do to the hand son? Three fractured knuckles. You hit somebody?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by PlanetObserver (talk • contribs) 03:51, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

List of minor characters per episode seems unnecessary

The "Episodes" section has a huge section detailing which minor characters appear in each episodes. This strikes me as unnecessary, and something that could much better be served as a footnote on the actual episode list page. Thoughts on deleting?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Alarumclock (talk • contribs) 04:50, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Recepetion

New section about reception and reviews? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7081:5D07:E706:3563:DE46:717C:30F (talk) 02:10, 26 December 2021 (UTC)