![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I moved the unsourced material below out of the article page. Of course, if anyone finds good sources to back up this interesting stuff, please feel free to add that portion of the material back in, with the appropriate citation. Cirt ( talk) 10:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC).
Krusty's return to the underground comedy scene may be considered an homage to George Carlin and Bill Hicks, known for their harsh, cynical comedy material in which they frequently criticised corporate America. Numerous parallels between the two can be drawn (such as Krusty adopting an all-black wardrobe, similar to Hicks and Carlin, and his more cynical, truth-driven material).
These scenes were not included in the episode:
Trying to get this one up to WP:GAC status. I don't have the DVD for this. If anyone wants to add some info from DVD commentary and add a Production section, it'd be much appreciated. In the meantime, I will see about getting the DVD, and finding if there are any secondary sources that mention Production info. Also, if anyone else wants to take a crack at expanding the plot section a bit, that'd be appreciated too. Cirt 13:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC).
Some sources misspell the title of this episode as "The Last Temptation of Krusty". Cirt 14:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC).
Cirt ( talk) 11:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC).
Please leave the image aligned on the right-side for now. I'm going to expand that section a bit more in the near future, so that will resolve your whitespace issue. As for the left-alignment, the last sentence wraps around and it doesn't look that great. Cirt ( talk) 20:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC).
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of January 14, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
With this in mind, I shall be passing this article. There is nothing of importance to be reported back after this review. Just a very good job indeed. Also note, that I won't be removing this or placing this on the relevant GA boards just yet as I'm backlogged by a few articles and would rather remove them all at once. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you. Rudget . 17:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you to Indopug ( talk · contribs) for the latest bit of copy-editing, much appreciated. Cirt ( talk) 19:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
There's a lot of redudant information in the article summary that is written almost exactly or stated further on in the article. Has anyone considered rewriting/reorganizing the article intro for less redudancy? Just a thought. I don't want to tear it up without any further thoughts. P.Mk ( talk) 22:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
It should be noted that Krusty's anti-establishment persona in this episode is a tribute to the late comedian Bill Hicks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.77.139.254 ( talk) 17:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Re: Bill Hicks
After seeing a bio pic on Bill Hicks, I realized who the writers were modeling Krusty on - and apparently, I am not the only one. There is a detailed analysis and commentary on the parallels between both comedians at this link:
http://www.snpp.com/episodes/5F10
(search the voluminous text for "Hicks")
It is an interesting analogy, but I don't think Hicks went on to endorse an SUV before he died (although his bio pic shows him quite fond of his Jeep).
Should a reference to Bill Hicks be added to this description? Seems like the Canyonaro thing really drowned out the real point of the episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.179.167.146 ( talk) 16:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I post updates to the article, to the effect that the song makes reference to the Ford and Firestone controversy, and it keeps getting deleted. Why is this? JIMfoamy1 ( talk) 19:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
i.e. that it refers to The Last Temptation of Christ (film), that the plot is recapitulated, etc. 72.228.189.184 ( talk) 03:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
This article doesn't mention the obvious reference of the episode title to the novel and film " The Last Temptation of Christ". Is there any specific reason for this? I would add it but since it's a featured article, I assume this has been discussed before. Thanks. Hamsterlopithecus ( talk) 03:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
In this case it doesn't but in general it does. Reality/truth always trumps local conventions at the level of principle/character/etc. I've no doubt this could be sourced if there's someone with nothing better to do with their time, especially given it was used in more than one episode. Also a distinction should be clear between "apparent"/"obvious" and a situation like this which is more than just that. 72.228.189.184 ( talk) 13:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, you have not let the statement sit in the article long enough for someone else to see the citation needed next to it and help us out. Unverified statements should ONLY be removed if they are harmful, on an article about a living person, or if consensus has been reached about removing it (which it hasn't). What you are doing, deleting things as soon as they are written because you may not agree with them, is the REAL slippery slope (see WP:FACTS#Pedantry, and other didactic arguments). You cannot single-handedly claim consensus. I think we need more opinions about this issue before we can decide that it is settled and to do that we should let the statement sit in the article with a citation needed tag. Hamsterlopithecus ( talk) 16:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you.
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I moved the unsourced material below out of the article page. Of course, if anyone finds good sources to back up this interesting stuff, please feel free to add that portion of the material back in, with the appropriate citation. Cirt ( talk) 10:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC).
Krusty's return to the underground comedy scene may be considered an homage to George Carlin and Bill Hicks, known for their harsh, cynical comedy material in which they frequently criticised corporate America. Numerous parallels between the two can be drawn (such as Krusty adopting an all-black wardrobe, similar to Hicks and Carlin, and his more cynical, truth-driven material).
These scenes were not included in the episode:
Trying to get this one up to WP:GAC status. I don't have the DVD for this. If anyone wants to add some info from DVD commentary and add a Production section, it'd be much appreciated. In the meantime, I will see about getting the DVD, and finding if there are any secondary sources that mention Production info. Also, if anyone else wants to take a crack at expanding the plot section a bit, that'd be appreciated too. Cirt 13:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC).
Some sources misspell the title of this episode as "The Last Temptation of Krusty". Cirt 14:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC).
Cirt ( talk) 11:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC).
Please leave the image aligned on the right-side for now. I'm going to expand that section a bit more in the near future, so that will resolve your whitespace issue. As for the left-alignment, the last sentence wraps around and it doesn't look that great. Cirt ( talk) 20:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC).
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of January 14, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
With this in mind, I shall be passing this article. There is nothing of importance to be reported back after this review. Just a very good job indeed. Also note, that I won't be removing this or placing this on the relevant GA boards just yet as I'm backlogged by a few articles and would rather remove them all at once. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you. Rudget . 17:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you to Indopug ( talk · contribs) for the latest bit of copy-editing, much appreciated. Cirt ( talk) 19:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
There's a lot of redudant information in the article summary that is written almost exactly or stated further on in the article. Has anyone considered rewriting/reorganizing the article intro for less redudancy? Just a thought. I don't want to tear it up without any further thoughts. P.Mk ( talk) 22:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
It should be noted that Krusty's anti-establishment persona in this episode is a tribute to the late comedian Bill Hicks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.77.139.254 ( talk) 17:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Re: Bill Hicks
After seeing a bio pic on Bill Hicks, I realized who the writers were modeling Krusty on - and apparently, I am not the only one. There is a detailed analysis and commentary on the parallels between both comedians at this link:
http://www.snpp.com/episodes/5F10
(search the voluminous text for "Hicks")
It is an interesting analogy, but I don't think Hicks went on to endorse an SUV before he died (although his bio pic shows him quite fond of his Jeep).
Should a reference to Bill Hicks be added to this description? Seems like the Canyonaro thing really drowned out the real point of the episode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.179.167.146 ( talk) 16:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I post updates to the article, to the effect that the song makes reference to the Ford and Firestone controversy, and it keeps getting deleted. Why is this? JIMfoamy1 ( talk) 19:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
i.e. that it refers to The Last Temptation of Christ (film), that the plot is recapitulated, etc. 72.228.189.184 ( talk) 03:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
This article doesn't mention the obvious reference of the episode title to the novel and film " The Last Temptation of Christ". Is there any specific reason for this? I would add it but since it's a featured article, I assume this has been discussed before. Thanks. Hamsterlopithecus ( talk) 03:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
In this case it doesn't but in general it does. Reality/truth always trumps local conventions at the level of principle/character/etc. I've no doubt this could be sourced if there's someone with nothing better to do with their time, especially given it was used in more than one episode. Also a distinction should be clear between "apparent"/"obvious" and a situation like this which is more than just that. 72.228.189.184 ( talk) 13:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, you have not let the statement sit in the article long enough for someone else to see the citation needed next to it and help us out. Unverified statements should ONLY be removed if they are harmful, on an article about a living person, or if consensus has been reached about removing it (which it hasn't). What you are doing, deleting things as soon as they are written because you may not agree with them, is the REAL slippery slope (see WP:FACTS#Pedantry, and other didactic arguments). You cannot single-handedly claim consensus. I think we need more opinions about this issue before we can decide that it is settled and to do that we should let the statement sit in the article with a citation needed tag. Hamsterlopithecus ( talk) 16:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you.