![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
The one and only Bill Oakley has agreed to do an IRC chat with us so that we can ask questions about things that we can use in articles. The transcript of this chat will hopefully be posted at NHC, which I think will be a good enough sorce. Failing that, we'll try The Simpsons Archive. Because not everyone will be able to make the chat (which hasn't been scheduled yet) Xihix and I have made a page where any member can post questions that can be asked. Remember, no fan questions, and due to a lack of time, try to limit it to ones that will help improve an article. That page is here. -- Scorpion 0422 02:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I have an issue with many articles about specific Simpsons episodes. Is this the right place to talk about it? My issue is that many articles contain unreferenced "Cultural references" sections. There are so many articles that it would take forever to tag them with {citation needed} or even delete the unreferenced information. What's the best way to go about fixing this? • Supāsaru 16:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:FICT, the notability guideline for elements within a work of fiction (characters, places, elements, etc) has a new proposal/revision that is now live [1] Everyone is encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page. Ned Scott 22:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal to split WP:EPISODE into a more general notability guideline, Wikipedia:Notability (serial works), and make the rest of WP:EPISODE just a MOS guideline. Please join in at WT:EPISODE#Proposed split of EPISODE and/or Wikipedia talk:Notability (serial works). -- Ned Scott 22:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Some guy just created this. I need to go, so could someone speedy delete it or something? Thanks. Rhino131 ( talk) 02:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I reported TheFreshPrinceOfBel-Air0 ( talk · contribs) to WP:AIV. Cirt ( talk) 04:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I put both of those 2 FreshPrince accounts back up on WP:AIV, obvious vandalism only sockpuppets. Cirt ( talk) 04:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
The page is an absolute mess and desperately needs references. For example, it says the show has only been dubbed in 14 languages and has no source for that at all. Anyone interested in cleaning the page up? -- Scorpion 0422 19:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I've been working through a list of TV episodes that have made it to WP:GA, many which are Simpsons episodes, and yet to have any serious problems with these. However, I will offer a few comments to consider:
But keep up the good work in this area. -- MASEM 05:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Primary sourced plot summaries are accepted by consensus among experienced editors at WP:FILMS, among others, and have been accepted with multiple FAs. But a relevant thread has yet again been discussing this, at A Minor Quandary: Or, How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Primary Source. Cirt ( talk) 05:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Apparantly some publicists have complained about the page and have claimed there are many inaccuracies. Some of the stuff they removed can be seen here (this includes all mentions of her ex-husband and scientology, which is the only portion of the article that is well sourced). In fact, some of the stuff that was removed comes from her biography at Fox's promotional website. Anyway, I promised to clean the page up and source it, so if anyone would like to help, it would be much appreciated. -- Scorpion 0422 03:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Peer review/The Principal and the Pauper/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 22:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
BBM has an archive of the top 20–30 highest rated programs of the week in Canada going back to January 2003 ( season 14, episode 7) and The Simpsons often makes that list up here. This is good information for reception sections. – thedemonhog talk • edits 02:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
The Featured topic criteria has recently been changed and requires that a topic have twenty percent of its articles featured. Both Simpsons topics The Simpsons (season 8) and The Simpsons (season 9) will need to get two more (four more overall) for a 6 total FAs and will have six mounts to do this. Zginder ( talk) ( Contrib) 21:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Did you just unilaterally change this yourself, or was there a significant period of discussion that came to a consensus for this major change? Cirt ( talk) 22:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
In any event, Season 9 won't be too hard to address, I'm not sure about Season 8 as I did not participate in that featured topic drive. Zginder ( talk · contribs) said above that we need 2 more FAs for each season. For Season 9, The Last Temptation of Krust is currently on WP:FAC, and I have just started a peer review for The Principal and the Pauper. Cirt ( talk) 22:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Season 9 seems to be pretty close, but I have no idea what article we would do for season 8... Perhaps The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show. -- Scorpion 0422 23:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Brother From Another Series looks pretty good, and The I&S&P Show wouldn't be to hard to expand. Gran 2 10:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I've recently noticed that several shows have been getting rid of their "DVD releases" pages by merging relevant info into season pages. If there are no objections, I would like to try to do the same. The vast majority of the page is a list of episodes, and all extras and other things can easily be added to a table in the article. I tried this out here and I think it looks pretty good. -- Scorpion 0422 19:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
This looks to be close to FA status so I've started a PR for it. Just letting you know. Buc ( talk) 18:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Still looking for comments. Buc ( talk) 16:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
For those curious about how much traffic Simpsons articles get, this is a list of the Top 10000 most viewed articles in February, and these are the rankings of the Simpsons articles that made it: (that I noticed)
I'm a little surprised that Lisa's article isn't there and Matt Groening's is - Bart's article gets a LOT more vandalism. I also didn't realize that new episode pages got that many views. There probably would have been a lot more articles on the list back in July or August. If it were a Top 20000 list, there would likely be a lot more characters on there because many articles had more than 20000 views in February. If anyone wants to see the number of views per day of any article from the last four months, you can visit this link [2] -- Scorpion 0422 18:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone wanna go through TVSquad.com and ign.com and put in receptions from the episodes with me? Ctjf83 Talk 19:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Following up on a discussion that took place at Talk:Dial 'N' for Nerder, we agree that we'd like to see some Simpson-specific guidelines on the notability of cultural references. I'd like to make a rough draft proposal:
Any thoughts? The Dominator ( talk) 03:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
People may recall that Xihix made an advertisement for our wikiproject. Here is the latest version.
I think it looks awesome. We had a slight problem with the blurring television/background, but I asked
Gurch to fix this. I'm not sure if the blurring has completly dissapeared (can anyone else see it?), but it is only a minor defect. The advertisment has been added to
WP:BANNER, so we should get some publicity now! I just want everyones opinion on two things, should we consult more people to try and get rid of the error, and is the advertisement ready for distribution to all members (ie: any more suggestions before it goes public)? --
Simpsons fan
66
06:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Treehouse of Horror V has been nominated. Buc ( talk) 17:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Could really use some help guys! Buc ( talk) 21:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I just wanted to get a discussion going in response to some recent additions to the Streetcar Named Marge article.
If I may be blunt, I think we can do without the third paragraph of "Writing" and most of the second paragraph of "Animation". I just think the information in those sections is too trivial. The regular "Plot" section of the article never reaches the same level of detail, so I don't see why we need to spend so much time describing the deleted/modified scenes. Plus, the changes described really aren't that dramatic, and probably wouldn't be all that interesting to someone who's never seen the episode.
But that's just my opinion. I'd love it if others could chime in and try to prove me wrong. Zagalejo ^^^ 18:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Xihix is away for a few days, but he got a response from Bill. In our most recent e-mail, we sent five FAs to him to look over (Homer's Enemy, Homer's Phobia, The Simpsons, Treehouse of Horror (series) and Troy McClure) and he responded.
According to Xihix: "He also asked about the questions and what to do. I responded that I will be back on Saturday to tell him what you guys want to do, so until then, decide upon yourselves what. Look at the screenshots here."
Anyway, as you can see from the e-mails, he said an IRC chat would be fine, but sending him questions via e-mail would be better for him. Again, we run into the RS issues though. He also didn't mention any images. I was hoping he would give us a quote we could stick on our page as a pit of bragging/promotion, but the closest he came is "this article is perfect". -- Scorpion 0422 02:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
I really think that Rod and Todd Flanders should have their own page. I think I'm gonna start one soon, anyone wanna join me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrior4321 ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I contacted Bill Oakley myself and he responded. He didn't say anything about images, but I think he would rather answer questions via e-mail rather than during an IRC chat. I told him that would be okay and that we would hopefully send him our question list within a week, so if you have any to add, please do so soon. -- Scorpion 0422 01:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I decided to work on Krusty's article, and cleaned up and sourced the Role in The Simpsons section. It is still rather rough, so if anyone could look at it, it would be much appreciated. I think everything important is mentioned in that section, but the rest of the article still needs expanding. -- Scorpion 0422 16:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Qst's good article nomination of " Homer's Triple Bypass" has been put on hold. I basically deleted the reception section because it was irrelevant so one needs to be written. – thedemonhog talk • edits 04:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
The more devoted fans might appreciate this: Zwieback. Equazcion •✗/ C • 14:02, 9 Apr 2008 (UTC)
This subsection of Portal:The Simpsons needs to be updated. If it seems that this section is consistently being neglected and not updated frequently enough, perhaps an easier fix would just be to remove it. Cirt ( talk) 00:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that these articles were merged into the List of Students article, but the only discussion I found was on Talk:Kearney Zzyzwicz, which was only about merging Kearny, Jimbo and Dolph into one and with a slight consensus against any merging/redirecting. Furthermore, the redirecting of the articles was done by TTN, who has since been forbidden to redirect any articles for overzealousness. I've done very little work on the project so I didn't make any changes, but I wanted to bring this to everyone's attention. Mc JEFF 03:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I am doing a study on collaborative writing on Wikipedia - I hope to present the results at Wikimania this year. If you would like to be interviewed over email, please leave a note on my talk page or email me. Thanks! Awadewit ( talk) 17:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Lost Our Lisa on Peer Review. Your comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lost Our Lisa/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 09:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[4] and his Ip is actually owned by 20th Century Fox in Los Angeles, so it could be him. Whoever it was was removing vandalism from an IP who has a history of adding fake crap to pages, like saying Homer and Agnes Skinner are based on Al Jean's parents, Frank Grimes is based on Matt Selman and Smithers is based on Mike Reiss. Jean has complained about vandalism on his page on the commentaries, so we should keep an eye on his page in the future.
As well, someone added Reid Harrison as the writer of Papa Don't Leech a week before the episode aired, so watch out for that too. -- Scorpion 0422 01:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know where Xihix is? In his last edit, [ [5]], (Wednesday 19th March) he said he was going to Washington DC until Saturday, 22nd March. Has anyone heard from him outside of wikipedia, or know whats going on? -- Simpsons fan 66 11:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Here's a RS with a list of references to Star Wars in the Simpsons. It might allow you to add a ref to a bunch of episodes if you like. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 17:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
When we last discussion merging episode articles for the later seasons, we decided to wait for the ArbCom case to finish. The recent ArbCom case is now closed and it didn't give us anything useful to go with. The discussion at Wikipedia talk:Television episodes didn't give us any answers as well. So I think we should make a decision on our own now.
I've been thinking about this for a while and I have come to the conclusion that I want The Simpsons WikiProject to be a shining example of what Wikipedia is all about. We certainly can't do that for the later seasons as we don't have any sources. There are no DVD's or books that give us any information. All in all we are going to have hundreds of crappy articles, which people then can point at as an example of how bad Wikipedia is. I think the way to go is to turn the into a season article like Smallville (season 1), which is a FA (that's right not FL). If we have some bits of information that is too small to warrant an article, we can then write it under the season summary. If one episode is very special and holds enough information, we can just keep that as an episode article, like they did with Pilot (Smallville).
The conclusion is that I'm all for merging some of the later seasons. We can later discuss which. What do you guys think? -- Maitch ( talk) 12:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Curse the time differences that plague our countries! As I write this it is 12.30 PM 24th April, yet it is 9.30 PM yesterday in Iowa, 10.30 PM yesterday in Canada, and 3.30 AM today in London! By the time I get home from school everyone else has only just arrived into the present day. I never truly appreciated these differences until I joined wikipedia. It also makes IRC chat during weekdays next to impossible. I keep forgetting on weekends, but when I remember, it is either too late or no-one is there. What times (in your respective states/countries) do you guys typically sign in? -- Simpsons fan 66 02:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I have been going through Springfield (The Simpsons) and changing all instances of (Example) "As in Bye Bye Nerdie, Lisa is shown to have 18 toes."
That exact sentence wasn't in the article, it is just an example. I have been going around and adding Cite Episode and Ref Tags "Lisa has 18 toes. <ref>{{cite episode|title= [[Bye Bye Nerdie]]|series= [[The Simpsons]]}}</ref>
Is this the proper thing to do, or should they be left the previous way. I personally think it looks better with the Cite Episode tags, and just want to make sure. <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 04:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
And the use of the citation templates vary from article to article, but this is the full version that should be used: <ref>{{cite episode |title=Today I Am a Clown|episodelink=Today I Am a Clown |series=The Simpsons |serieslink=The Simpsons |credits=Cohen, Joel H.; Kruse, Nancy|network=Fox |airdate=2003-12-07 |season=15 |number=6}}</ref> -- Scorpion 0422 05:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
I have added all of the info you posted to every single episode reference in Springfield (The Simpsons). I am pretty tired now. Turns out I was so tired that I forgot to sign <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 04:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Nice work on that article. Have you considered taking it to GA? -- Maitch ( talk) 17:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Im new with WikiProject The Simpsons and I was thinking that I would like to make or edit a page for this project so if anyone would like to help me just post a message on my talk
-- Springfield MO Native JH ( talk) 22:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Springfield MO Native JH
The Principal and the Pauper is up at WP:FAC, comments would be appreciated. FAC discussion page is here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Principal and the Pauper. Cirt ( talk) 15:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
At least they notified some of us this time, the last few Afds nobody bothered to tell us about (like the Capital City one, although I wouldn't have opposed its deletion). -- Scorpion 0422 19:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm just wondering, what is the general consensus for proper reference naming conventions. The two most common ones seem to be this [1] and this [2]. As you can see the only difference is whether the DVD is named as The Simpsons The Complete Fourth Season DVD or The Simpsons Season 4 DVD commentary. I believe the first name is the correct one, since that is the exact text printed on the boxsets. But that then raises another question, The Simpsons The Complete Fourth Season DVD is not really proper english, it should have a comma just after The Simpsons. What to do... What to do.... I realise that the adoption of a new standard would involve hours of work shanging existing GA/FA articles, so this probably isn't going to make me very popular! But I have to know, what is everyone else's opinion? -- Simpsons fan 66 23:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I forgot one thing, the code used for references automatically sorts the text into a prescribed order. So we can't move anything or change the italics unless we type everything manually and abandon the code. Maybe we should return to the original suggestion made by thedemonhog. -- Simpsons fan 66 04:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I've been considering merging the pages for the two parts (which I first split up about a year ago) into one really good, potential FA. Does anyone oppose this? -- Scorpion 0422 21:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I've started work on it, you can see what I have done here. I made custom templates for the page, and I still have some fixing to do before its ready for the mainspace, but any improvements anyone can make are more than welcome. -- Scorpion 0422 06:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Is this the right title? - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 17:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) No, but D'oh is much more used than annoyed grunt. It seems obvious to me that most english speakers will know D'oh better, but I could be wrong. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 23:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I just went through a number of Simpsons articles to double check for trivia and quote cruft (I didn't see any) and noticed that there are serious issues with tense on the Mona Simpson article and it could use a bit of work because of the recent change in tense due to her "removal" from the series as an active character. A certain number of "is"'s should be changed to "was"'s however depending on their usage some should stay the same regardless of her status. Cat-five - talk 08:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I decided to give Some Enchanted Evening a try at FAC. It would be helpful if somebody could help me by doing a copyedit. This is requested at the FAC. Thanks in advance. -- Maitch ( talk) 09:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Is this book worth buying? What exactly does it contain? I've seen it used as a reference in several articles, and I'd like to check it out for myself, but it seems like it's only available from two libraries in the United States. Zagalejo ^^^ 02:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Most of them are group shots and in most cases cropping out individual images would make them too small for use in individual bio articles. But, we can use the one for images of Bill, Josh and Jeff Martin. And we have some nice group shots for the main article. Please do not upload them yet. I still need to make sure Bill is willing to freely license them per this
-- Scorpion 0422 05:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I have sent Bill's permission e-mail to OTRS. Hopefully they'll be useable by Monday. I uploaded them onto commons: Image:The Simpsons office building.jpg, Image:Conan O'Brien - Simpsons.jpg, Image:Simpsons plane.jpg, Image:Simpsons writers2.jpg, Image:Simpsons writers1.jpg. You'll know when one of these templates is added: {{PermissionOTRS|ticket=URL}} or {{PermissionOTRS|id=ticket number}} -- Scorpion 0422 18:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
That was quick... Image:Simpsons plane.jpg has been listed for deletion because of the plane and the inclusion of the characters. At first I was hoping that I'd be able to crop out some of the people, but 1. Most of them would be too small for infoboxes, 2. Cropping out the group would only allow us to use a few people and 3. We already have some good group images. So, it could be worse. -- Scorpion 0422 23:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have season 4, 3, 1 and most of 2 at home. I was looking for a list of episodes like Lisa's first Word or And Maggie Makes Three, Homer marries Marge, etc. I'd like to create such a list and plug it into Simpsons Categories, but I'm wondering if it's appropriate. If there's a Halloween List, can there be a pre-series one? Jethro 82 ( talk) 01:50, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
We've had people who in the past claimed to be Al Jean, Wes Archer, and the guy Artie Ziff is based on (not to mention the people who keep adding writers and directors months prior to episode airdates). Now, somebody is claiming to be the real Armin Tamzarian that Ken Keeler named the character after. [7] He says the name should be spelled Armen, but all official sources spell it Armin, so I reverted it. -- Scorpion 0422 05:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Well we have another article on the main page and I can hardly contain my excitement. Troy McClure will be TFA for [[May 28] 2008. No, I'm sure it'll be great, and I love having our articles as TFA (minus the vandilism), I just generally think that three The Simpsons articles in one year is too many. Anyway, "wiki-politics" aside be on the watch for slightly higher levels of vandilism over the next week. Gran 2 10:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not a member of the project and don't wish to become one (just got drawn in by TFA), but I notice that there are more mid importance articles than there are low importance articles. It's my opinion that there should be significantly more articles in categories of lower importance than those of higher importance, i.e. more low than mid, mid than high, and high than top. This is the case for mid vs. high and high vs. top here, so should it not also be the case with mid vs. low? Richard001 ( talk) 02:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone else think this could easily be merged into the Simpson family article? They are all part of the same family, and it doesn't make sense to include Homer's relatives in the Simpson family article, but not Marges. -- Scorpion 0422 18:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm semi-back! Anyway, since there is some issues with who we should list as relatives, I'll jump start the discussion. I think we only need to list main recurring characters in the relatives section, and close relatives, like we don't need to list Abe's daughter in laws, or Ling as the kids' cousin, his parents aren't recurring at all, I don't even remember seeing them, so I don't think they should be listed Ctjf83 Talk 16:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I've edited and modified a lot of cultural references, and I was wondering if we could address the inconsistency of this. Some pages have waaay too many references, some have one or two, and most have none. I've contemplated how to address this, and the only options I've found are 1. Remove all of them - some I think are noteworthy, but there's no objective way to pick out which ones to keep, so they'd all have to go 2. Create a page called "The Simpsons cultural references" or "Cultural References in The Simpsons." I wanted to get feedback from others on what, if anything, should be done about this. I'm willing to execute the decision myself and do the work, I just wanted to make a communal decision. JW ( talk) 13:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC) - note regarding option 2, the individual articles' cultural references sections would all be removed, and a "see [ [page] ]" comment could be inserted instead JW ( talk) 13:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree w/ Gran2 ( talk · contribs), Simpsons fan 66 ( talk · contribs), .:Alex:. ( talk · contribs) and COMPFUNK2 ( talk · contribs). In general with regard to Cultural references sections for The Simpsons episode articles on Wikipedia, paragraphs = good, lists = bad. Especially unsourced lists that blatantly violate WP:OR. Cirt ( talk) 15:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The television community currently has an MOS guideline under proposal, and would appreciate all comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Style guidelines#MOS proposal in order to have the best possible guide for television related articles. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 12:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
A request for comment has been made to determine if the Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) proposal has consensus. Since this project deals with many fictional topics, I am commenting here. Input on the proposal is welcome here. -- Pixelface ( talk) 01:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I have been thinking about this list and I don't feel it is necessary. It is basically an excuse to make a list of Simpsons ads. This would have been fine if that list was sourced and complete, but that doesn't seem to be the case. We don't really need to have the season overviews as they are covered better elsewhere. So I would like to hear how you guys feel about the article before I send it to AFD. Maybe there is a way to save it. -- Maitch ( talk) 11:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I realize this is a little off topic, but I thought I'd post this before YouTube deletes it. Nazis on Tap is allegedly a lost Simpsons short that I used to think was just a rumour. I found this posted at NoHomers. It's apparantly the audio track for it and it sounds pretty legit. SNPP has had a piece about the short for a while, but this is the first proof that it was actually produced. I've previously tried to find some kind of reliable source about it so it could be mentioned here, but I've had no luck. -- Scorpion 0422 05:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Although I forgot to comment in the official discussion, I really dislike this idea, but we now have a new assessment class: the C-class. It goes between B and start and raises B to now be near-GA, while C is more in the area of where the old start class was. I guess we should start re-evaluating some articles. -- Scorpion 0422 19:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I am new to this Wikiproject, but have been working on an article. I have raised Homer's Odyssey from 6000 to 8500 bytes. I am still working on it for GA, but can the article be reassessed. I asked my adoptor about this, and he said it would be better to get it to B class first.-- LAA Fan 21:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I just found some statistics for how well we are doing cleaning up the articles. We have 33.8% of our articles tagged for cleanup. You can see how well we are doing here. It is not that bad, but it really not that good either. -- Maitch ( talk) 13:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is interested I have gotten a bot to provide a list over the articles that are tagged for cleanup. You can see it here. -- Maitch ( talk) 06:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 21:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
We have a lot of articles that are tagged for being unsourced. Most of the later seasons can only be sourced by using unreliable source. So I was wondering which is worse: An article cited by using unreliable sources or an article that is completely unsourced. -- Maitch ( talk) 09:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I live in Britain and I watch The Simpsons in Channel 4. Is it alright for me to add sections of Channel 4 Censorship, which I saw episodes full on Sky One, then saw it censor some parts out in Channel 4? I've already been doing it for a while anyway, and found many censors of episodes, comparing it to the original SCB '92 ( talk) 18:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi! As everyone here probably knows, half a Simpsons episode is devoted to H.M.S. Pinafore, making it one of the most obvious and necessary inclusions in a cultural impact section ever. However, I don't know of good sources for The Simpsons. Can anyone lend us a hand by finding us a source? =) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I was looking over them and some were in huge messes (ie. 2 identical cultural refs sections, stuff that was cut and pasted improperly from previous versions, refs to previous episodes sections) and most were protected even though they had little vandalism beforehand. What did I miss? -- Scorpion 0422 02:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Well we have about a month to save our Featured Topics. All we need to do is get The Principal and the Pauper, The Simpsons Spin-Off Showcase and The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show to Featured status. Really it's just copy-editing (Pauper is very, very close) and a bit of minor expansion and we should be there. Gran 2 15:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't think we should list ex spouses as relatives in the infobox, as they are no longer related. Any other thoughts? CTJF83 Talk 22:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Recently, I came across an article about how The Simpsons has influcenced the world of comedy, and what various writers, actors and comedians thought of the show. It was published in The Age, an Australian newspaper, in the Green Guide section, which is a mini-newspaper published every thursday. I guess it is like "TV Week" magazine, in that is contains TV listings, reviews, tech news, etc. Anyway, the article features quotes from, among other (small-time) Australians, Rove McManus and Chas Licciardello. Would there be any possible use for these? -- Simpsons fan 66 06:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I have edited The Call of the Simpsons quite a lot and it needs to be reassessed. I'm new to the project (this is the first episode article I've worked on) so if someone experienced could reassess it that would be great. =) Thanks, TheLeft orium 14:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured topic criteria#Require more FAs? about the possibility of increasing the requirements for a featured topic, namely requiring more featured articles or lists. The current requirement is 20%, or one in five. I have proposed raising this to 25%, or one in four. There are other editors who would rather go straight to one in three. As large topics, Wikipedia:Featured topics/The Simpsons (season 8) and Wikipedia:Featured topics/The Simpsons (season 9) would be among the most affected by this change. They are both under the current 20% requirement and are being retained under a grace period set to expire this month. Your comments and thoughts on the subject are welcome at the above link. Thanks, Pagra shtak 18:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Commented at the thread below Scorpion0422 ( talk · contribs). These changes are quite frustrating and almost is motivation enough to not work on WP:FT drives anymore. (Not quite at that point yet for me, but it is certainly frustrating.) Cirt ( talk) 20:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject The Simpsons participants... WikiProject Media franchises needs some help from other projects which are similar. Media franchises' scope deals primarily with the coordination of articles within the hundreds if not thousands of media franchises which exist. Sometimes a franchise might just need color coordination of the various templates used; it could mean creating an article for the franchise as a jump off point for the children of it; or the creation of a new templating system for media franchise articles. The project primarily focuses on multimedia franchises. It would be great if some of this project's participants would come over and help the project get back on solid footing. Also, if you know of similar projects which have not received this, let Lady Aleena ( talk · contribs) know. Please come and take a look at the project and see if you wish to lend a hand. You can sign up here if you wish. Thank you. LA @ 21:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject The Simpsons participants... WikiProject Media franchises is currently discussing a naming convention for franchise articles. Since this may affect one or more articles in your project, we would like to get the opinions of all related projects before implimenting any sweeping changes. Please come and help us decide. Thanks! LA ( T) @ 22:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, it should be Lane, County, Oregon. The evidence is in an article when Matt Groening HIMSELF sends a plaque to Springfield, Lane County, Oregon saying they are the "REAL Sprinfield". The Register-Guard, Eugene, Oregon, USA-- Alkalinetrio78 ( talk) 03:07, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I posted a request to WT:WIAFT on behalf of WP:DOH, I hope that is okay with everyone. See here. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 20:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
The Crepes of Wrath was just passed, so the project now presently has 100 Good articles (congrats to TheLeftorium for snagging #100). If you want to get technical, it's the 113th good article, but 13 of those pages are now FAs. So let's keep up the good work and here's to the next 100. -- Scorpion 0422 02:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been a good article for 22 months and has been A class for about 6. The article is pretty good, but presently it lacks the little things that would make it truly comprehensive and a without a doubt featured page. I've decided it's time to drive towards FA status and some help would be great. I've gotten MOST of the information I can from the commentaries (I'd still like to add some stuff about his temper and strangling, which is discussed) and I wanted more influence (shouldn't be too difficult) and merchandising information. That, combined with an overhaul of the Role section and a complete copyedit should be enough. So, who wants to help? -- Scorpion 0422 15:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
It's not as big as I was hoping, but I think the page is as big as it's going to get for the time being (well, the analysis section could likely be expanded and I'm getting a book in the mail today that should help with this). I've had several copyeditors look over the page and asked as many people as possible (including Bill Oakley) to peer review it. So, I am going to nominate it on Saturday. Could everyone please take a look at the article and let me know what you think? Thanks, Scorpion 0422 14:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Why does every episode list the people that appear on the DVD commentary? Perhaps I'm missing something, but list like that appear to be nothing but a collection of indescriminate information. -- Hydrokinetics12 ( talk) 07:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Just to say it here :) rst20xx ( talk) 01:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
The pages with characters from the episode have different names, so I'm proposing uniform names, changing words to "on":
Thoughts? CTJF83 Talk 00:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
What is done with similar lists of other television programs? Cirt ( talk) 21:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Now that all episodes are GA and The Simpsons (season 1) is FA, I think we should nominate it for Good Topic. Is everyone OK with this? TheLeft orium 16:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
It passed yesterday (see WP:GT) so congrats to everyone involved! ;) TheLeft orium 09:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested... Zagalejo ^^^ 20:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_The_Simpsons/Featured_topic_Drive#Marge_in_Chains. Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 08:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Hey guys. Sorry I haven't done much for the project lately, I've sort of lost enthusiasm. I was looking for something special for my 6th GA, and I thought it would be great to do Bart vs. Australia. Is this OK? -- Simpsons fan 66 01:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Near the very end of the end credits, there is this little exchange:
Matt Selman: "If you wanna increase the number of times your name comes up when you google yourself, do a lot of DVD commentaries"
Al Jean: "If you wanna see some off-hand remark you make end up on wikipedia for all-time"
Someone else: "Oh yeah" [everyone else laughs]
Mike Scully: "Such a reliable source of information" [more laughter]
Al Jean: "Well, everybody uses it"
Nancy Kruse: "Yeah, someone wrote I was married to David Silverman on wikipedia. I'm not." [Commentary ends].
All I can say is: go to hell Mike Scully. -- Scorpion 0422 13:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I have been working on the article and I got stuck at the production section. There is very little on the web about it and I do not have access to either the books or the DVDs. At the PR I have been told to look for some help here. Anybody having some time to take a look? Thanks, Nergaal ( talk) 19:57, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Julia Louis-Dreyfus should be added to the Simpsons cast template under recurring guest stars and the "Families" link of the characters navigation template is no longer needed. Tj terrorible1 ( talk) 17:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Vote as you please but remember to vote. Rhino131 ( talk) 21:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I've removed covers from a number of season articles ( [10] [11], etc.). There's already an image of the DVD set at the top of each of these articles. We do not need what is essentially a repeat, and this violates cover usage in X-graphies (videographies, discographies, etc). Please see WP:NFC for the guideline on this. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 23:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 31, 2008. This will be our fourth since July 27, 2007... Maybe we should wait about a year before requesting another. Anyway, everyone please take a look at the article and make any necessary changes and put it on watch. We've gotten off surprisingly easy so far with the TFA talk page complaints (only Troy McClure had calls for delisting) and a few days ago I had an excellent copyeditor give the page a once-over, so hopefully we won't have any harsh criticism. Either way, should be a fun day. -- Scorpion 0422 21:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Has to be free-use image. Cirt ( talk) 23:18, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Could everyone please keep a close eye on the Simpson watchlist? There is a lot of vandalism on Simpsons pages today, especially on THOH articles (for obvious reasons). -- Zombie Scorpion 0422 18:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
And the page received 103,900 views, a lot more than I was expecting. In comparison, Mary Shelley, the TFA the day before, had 56,600 and Tang Dynasty (the day before that) had 32,100. However, this is well under the views received by Troy McClure when it was TFA on May 28 (133,200) and The Simpsons on December 17 (130,600). -- Scorpion 0422 20:33, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
It would be helpful if someone(s) could slowly but surely work on getting this successfully to WP:FL, which would eventually help further along the process at Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/Featured topic Drive/season 10. Cirt ( talk) 23:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Season 4 is now ready for WP:GTC. Who would like to nominate it? Gran 2 12:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Voilà, season four just passed. -- TheLeft orium 15:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
From TheLeftorium's talkpage:
BTW, it looks like we could have this season done by the end of the year. What season do we do next? Season 10 has the most GAs, but I dislike a lot of those episodes, and Scully REALLY sucks on commentary. There are 3 season 7 GAs (4 including WSMB), 2 from season 5 (plus 1 FA, and Rosebud is practically ready to go, I'm just too lazy to finish it) and 2 a piece from seasons 2 and 3. My vote is for season 7, it's one of my favourite seasons and it is more recent than others. I would be okay with any of the others though. -- Scorpion 0422 19:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Since there's no episodes left (for me) in season 6, and everyone seem to think it's a good idea, I have started the season 7 page here. I haven't had time to fill it in completely though. -- TheLeft orium 15:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I like to do the initial article-formatting first, I will let you know after that when it would be helpful to do the production info. Cirt ( talk) 17:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Check that, sorry, what I meant to say is of course feel free to add sourced production info to the Production subsection on any article. Cirt ( talk) 18:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
If I may, as an external observer, I think you should work on the "Seasons of the Simpsons" topic. I know that it's harder to make FLs for seasons which aren't yet on DVD, but getting this topic to FT would mean that all the Simpsons topics would be nicely linked up - rst20xx ( talk) 17:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
User:COMPFUNK2 nominated List of one-time characters in The Simpsons for deletion. The nomination can be found here. CTJF83 Talk 17:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
The Hidden Message Vandal is an twelve year old (or so he claims) named "Cool-dude" Tim who lives in the UK. In mid-2007 he became a very annoying vandal and claimed he did it because "it was for fun to edit." He got his name because most of his early edits included a hidden message telling us why his edit should not be reverted. Generally, he was just a kid who thought it was funny to mess around with pages, and he added a bunch of nonsense and junk under 40+ IPs. He occasionally made some legitimate but mostly it was nonsense and the majority of it was Simpsons-related. For example, one of my favorite pieces of idiocy is his addition of a "fictional couches" section to the couch article. [12]
Anyway, I believe the user is back (he did promise that he would return), the IP 86.173.33.66 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) recently added a non-existant age field to a character infobox, which is one the HMV's old traits. [13] The IP is registered to British Telecom (like all of his previous IPs) and starts with 86 (like most of his previous IPs). It could be a coincidence, but I find that unlikely. Earlier today, another IP registered to BT showed up and added some nonsense to The Simpsons shorts [14]. If this is him, he has been doing mostly good faith edits with the odd bit of vandalism thrown in. However, it would be best to keep an eye out. Please check all edits to Simpsons articles from IPs that start with 86 or 81 and if they are registered to British Telecom (like this) then please add that address to my HMV page. -- Scorpion 0422 23:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
I need help from anyone who owns books that have information for the Production section of " The Day the Violence Died". Some books that could be useful are:
Thanks in advance! Gary King ( talk) 20:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I found The Simpsons and Philosophy online here. Not sure if there's anything in it that's worth mentioning. -- TheLeft orium 21:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
With Marge now under review and Bart's FAC currently going well, I could be ready to submit this to FTC as early as Saturday. My definition is going to be the five main members. I'm not going to bother including Grampa, Mona, Patty & Selma, SLH or Snowball, although I do expect a little hassling over that. This is the chance for any comments anyone might have about the topic or any articles in it. -- Scorpion 0422 15:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I decided to do an audit of our 46 individual character articles.
Character | Class | Imp. | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Patty and Selma Bouvier | Start | High | Far too much in-universe info, not enough character info. The infoboxes should probably be merged. |
Kent Brockman | Start | Mid | Too much weight is given to his Religion and language. Short profile section is good, but not enough real world info |
Montgomery Burns | C | High | I'vre been meaning to whip this one into shape, but haven't gotten around to it. Way too much in-universe info. |
Carl Carlson | Start | Mid | Considering how much weight his relationship with Lenny is given, I would almost say that their pages should be merged. Not much too this page, supporting my belief that they could be merged. |
Comic Book Guy | C | Mid | Not bad, actually. The role section needs sources and it could use more character and reception info, but it's in above average shape. |
Fat Tony | Start | Mid | Suprisingly short, and not enough character info. The "Influences" seems unnecessary. |
Ned Flanders | ![]() |
High | Probably my least favourite of the GAs I've worked on, it needs to be brought up to current standards. The "The Adventures of Ned Flanders" section is given undue weight. Interesting note, this is what passes for FA in the Russian wikipedia. Now, I don't understand a word of it, but it appears to be largely in-universe and it includes an "episodes featuring..." list. |
Professor Frink | Start | Mid | Like many of the above articles, it's pretty short with little real-world info. The "Prototype" section is oddly titled. The image should be changed to either an official one or a screenshot. I'm not a big fan of using fan-made images as iot can lead to accusations of theft. |
Groundskeeper Willie | B | High | I started to knock this one into shape a while ago, but have never gotten around to finishing it. It has a good start, but every section should be bigger and the Role section needs sources. |
Barney Gumble | ![]() |
High | |
Julius Hibbert | C | Mid | |
Lionel Hutz | Start | Mid | Like Frink, it could use an official image or screenshot (although ironically, I think I uploaded that one) |
The Itchy & Scratchy Show | B | Mid | GAC. |
Kang and Kodos | ![]() |
Mid | |
Edna Krabappel | Start | Mid | Short on real world info. |
Krusty the Clown | ![]() |
High | The role section is a little longer than I'd like and could be shortened. |
Lenny Leonard | Start | Mid | Many of the same problems as Carl's article, except with a longer section about their relationship. I really would not mind seeing Lenny and Carl merged. |
Reverend Timothy Lovejoy | Start | Mid | Tired of repeating the same things over and over, see the section for Fat Tony. |
Otto Mann | Start | Mid | See the section for Lovejoy. |
Troy McClure |
![]() |
High | |
Hans Moleman | Start | Mid | Ah, Moleman, I always forget about him. See the section for Otto. |
Nelson Muntz | Start | High | This one needs work, Nancy Cartwright's book is a good source, she mentions that someone (I forget who, it wasn't a regular) was originally cast as Nelson. |
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon | B | High | Another one that I've been meaning to work on. Unfortunately and suprisingly there really isn't a lot out there, but I have found a couple of good commentaries with Apu info. |
Martin Prince | Start | Mid | Mergable. Might propose one later this week. |
Joe Quimby | Start | Mid | They do discuss Quimby (ie. his Kennedy connection, his sash) several times on the commentaries, so it is expandable. Enough for a GA? Not sure. |
Radioactive Man (The Simpsons character) | Start | Mid | Still not sure what to do with this one. |
Dr. Nick Riviera | C | Mid | |
Santa's Little Helper | Start | High | Wouldn't complain if this one was merged, but it does have a small bit of real-world info. |
Sideshow Bob | ![]() |
High | My next target for FA. |
Abraham Simpson | Start | High | Biography is too long, character section isn't long enough. |
Bart Simpson |
![]() |
Top | "Practically perfect in every way" |
Homer Simpson |
![]() |
Top | "So am I." |
Lisa Simpson | ![]() |
Top | |
Maggie Simpson | ![]() |
Top | |
Marge Simpson | ![]() |
Top | |
Mona Simpson (The Simpsons) | ![]() |
Mid | |
Seymour Skinner | C | High | Definitely falls under the "could be a GA some day" class, there is still stuff from The Principal and the Pauper that could be added. |
Waylon Smithers | ![]() |
High | |
Snowball (The Simpsons) | Start | High | Again, I wouldn't mind if it was merged. I doubt there is a lot of real-world info out there (in fact, the only bit I can remember from the commentaries is Groening calling Snowball "the ugliest cat on television"). |
Cletus Spuckler | Start | Mid | If I could, I would delete the character from the show itself. But unfortunately that is not possible... A lot of in-universe info in this one with an entire section devoted to his last name. I think he's been discussed a bit in the commentaries, so that should be added. |
Moe Szyslak | C | High | In not-bad shape, definitely has a good start. However, my "anti-tube bar" bias prevents me from working on it. |
Milhouse Van Houten | Start | High | See the section for Otto. |
Clancy Wiggum | Start | Mid | Was listed as a B-class article, I disagreed and downgraded it to start. |
Ralph Wiggum | Start | Mid | I still can't believe this one was once a FAC. A lot of OR in this one that needs to be cleaned up. |
Rainier Wolfcastle | Start | Mid | Needs a better lead image. |
So, in short, 28% of our character articles are GA or higher, and another 10 are currently within reach (in some cases, it's a distant reach, but it's still attainable) and the rest are in poor to okay quality. -- Scorpion 0422 18:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
How should the topic look like?
Main page | Articles |
![]() |
·
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Am I missing anything? Should any of these in the list get scrapped? Nergaal ( talk) 05:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
That was one of the project's very early goals, and it has now been achieved. I don't think a lot of projects have managed to get all of their top importance articles to GA or higher, so... Yay! -- Scorpion 0422 01:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I think that the article about season 10 needs to mention how that was the first season in which almost all the episodes sucked. The Season 9 article needs to mention how that was the last real season. Thanks. Faethon Ghost ( talk) 04:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm looking for Production information for " Bart the Mother", season 10 episode 3. Ideally I'd like to double the article's prose size. If anyone's got any more information, ideally DVD commentary, then please feel free to add it to the article. Thanks! Gary King ( talk) 04:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, there. At this current FLC, an editor commented that they felt the image in the infobox section was a little big. The image in question is 200px wide, which is within the norm for episodes list as far as I understand. The editor added, "This in a way goes against WIAFL Cr 6, Visual appeal. because the image is very distracting. I would consult with the respective project(s) to discuss reducing the default size for the images in the infobox." It seems to me that the consensus about infobox image width in episodes lists goes against the FLC criteria. Your input is welcomed. Rosenknospe ( talk) 21:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
For those curious, this is what our article assessment chart looked like on December 31, 2006:
And for those curious, the 2 Featured quality articles we had at the end of 2006 were The Simpsons and List of The Simpsons episodes, while the GA was Homer Simpson.
The Simpsons articles |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | None | Total | ||
Class | |||||||
![]() |
2 | 2 | |||||
![]() |
1 | 1 | |||||
![]() |
1 | 1 | |||||
B | 6 | 26 | 15 | 8 | 55 | ||
Start | 2 | 28 | 415 | 64 | 27 | 536 | |
Stub | 5 | 22 | 84 | 53 | 164 | ||
Unassessed | |||||||
Total | 11 | 60 | 452 | 156 | 80 | 759 |
This is what it looked like on December 31, 2007:
For those curious, these are the GAs & featured content we had at the end of 2007.
The Simpsons articles |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | None | Total | ||
Quality | |||||||
![]() |
2 | 9 | 7 | 1 | 19 | ||
![]() |
1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |||
![]() |
2 | 6 | 59 | 67 | |||
B | 4 | 17 | 9 | 4 | 34 | ||
Start | 1 | 32 | 385 | 69 | 3 | 490 | |
Stub | 1 | 23 | 108 | 19 | 151 | ||
Assessed | 10 | 66 | 484 | 182 | 22 | 764 | |
Total | 10 | 66 | 484 | 182 | 22 | 764 |
And this is what it looks like right now:
The Simpsons articles |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | None | Total | ||
Quality | |||||||
![]() |
4 | 1 | 10 | 15 | |||
![]() |
1 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 14 | ||
![]() |
2 | 3 | 5 | ||||
![]() |
4 | 8 | 121 | 3 | 136 | ||
B | 15 | 8 | 5 | 28 | |||
C | 7 | 10 | 2 | 19 | |||
Start | 19 | 319 | 59 | 2 | 399 | ||
Stub | 1 | 25 | 119 | 22 | 167 | ||
List | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | |||
Assessed | 9 | 65 | 498 | 191 | 24 | 787 | |
Total | 9 | 65 | 498 | 191 | 24 | 787 |
Pretty good. In 2008, we doubled our GAs, added 6 FAs, 4 FLs, 1 FT and 3 GTs and reduced our number of start class pages by 91. Unfortunately, there was growth in the stub category (that should be a project goal in 2009: reducing the stubs).
I also set some (unofficial) goals:
I think we as a project should set some goals for 2009, and see what we can do about reaching them. -- Scorpion 0422 20:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
I believe we should try to set some project goals for 2009. Here are some of my ideas:
Any more ideas?
Main page | Articles |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Nergaal ( talk) 20:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Sounds like some good goals. I'm gonna try to get a cast member to GA status later this year. — TheLeft orium 10:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
Hi, I know it's a bit weird to give a barnstar to a WikiProject, but you people just deserve one. This project is really fantastic, example: I occasionally check the GAn list, and almost always there is at least one article nominated. When I look at this project I see what Wikipedia is all about, talking and editing together. To everybody here at the The Simpsons WikiProject: Keep up the good work. -- Music 26/ 11 10:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
If we take a look at the two FA's Pilot (House) and Pilot (Smallville) then we can see that a lot more is allowed to be mentioned than we do on Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire. There is a section on conception, filming and casting. Most of this information also works for the main article of the show. The question is: Could we do the same thing with Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire? -- Maitch ( talk) 15:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
So, an IP, 206.253.5.135 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS), has decided to start adding succession boxes to episode pages and so far has done just about every episode in seasons 1, 2, 3 and 13. I've asked the IP to explain his reasoning, but he has ignored me so far. I don't think they are necessary since there is already a template that links every episode in a season. The only advantage is that it does allow the finale of one season to link to the premiere of the next, but that's a minor benefit (especially since the seasons are also linked in the infobox). So far, I haven't bothered to remove them, but I probably will eventually. However, does anyone think that the boxes are necessary? -- Scorpion 0422 16:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Have you guys seen these? - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 23:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Both of these subpages contain outdated material that has been stale for a while now, and both have been commented-out of the main portal page at Portal:The Simpsons. Cirt ( talk) 07:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Keyser Söze has uploaded a new image of the Simpson family (thanks a lot by the way) and I just wanted to get opinions on whether we should use it as the new lead image on The Simpsons.
File:C-SimpFamily.png - Original. Just a standard portrait shot, I guess you could call it more encyclopedic. File:Simpsons FamilyPicture.png - New one. It's more interesting, and the house is included in the shot.
Personally, I like the new one. Maybe use it on the main page and the old one at Simpson family (or vice versa). Thoughts? -- Scorpion 0422 02:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I'm currently conducting the GA review of The PTA Disbands and would like to know definitively (with evidence if available on the web) if Edna Krabappel is a "Ms." or a "Mrs.", given that even divorced women can still be known as "Mrs." A Wikipedia search was inconclusive (if you have a definitive answer then you may want to organise a tidy up), while the nominator has said that her bio at thesimpsons.com (which refers to her as "Mrs. Krabappel" is incorrect). Thanks. -- Jameboy ( talk) 13:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I found a package of official images here and took the chance to upload some of them. Some of them need to be fair use reduced as well.
Also, there are new versions of images for:
But I felt the current versions work fine. If anyone would like to see them, let me know. -- Scorpion 0422 23:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
So, Nancy Cartwright is now using Bart's voice to promote scientology. And, very quickly, a section of this appearead at Bart Simpson. It was also very quickly removed, but I highly doubt that this will be the last IP to add this. I don't think this should be mentioned at Bart's article (unless there are huge public repercussions from this), it belongs more at Nancy Cartwright's page (BTW, everyone keep an eye on it). Thoughts? -- Scorpion 0422 20:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Interesting note, Nancy Cartwright had 13 times more views than normal on the day the story broke (In January it averaged 800-900 views per day, on the 28th it had 13800). [16] It still has abnormally high traffic. The Joy of Sect has also had more than double the traffic [17] and Bart Simpson had a small jump, but nothing huge. -- Scorpion 0422 05:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I have started a discussion related to the Simpsons episode articles at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_criteria#Comprehensive.3F_Special.3F if anyone is interested. -- Maitch ( talk) 21:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 22:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
This is one I've recently started thinking about, the definition would strictly be the six main voice actors. Gran2 took Hank Azaria's article to GA a while back I recently overhauled Cartwright's page and I hope to take it to FAC by the end of the month. The other four would likely be able to reach at least GA. I did a quick expansion of Julie Kavner's page and I think it will be the hardest because she hasn't done a full interview since 1994, so a lot of the details of her life - ie. her relationship - are that old. Anyway, anyone who would like to help pitch in on this one are more than welcome to help, as are any thoughts about the topic. -- Scorpion 0422 21:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Kavner's page is nearly done. All I need to do is add a few more cites (and some more personal life info would be nice too). I think I'm going to do Dan Castellaneta next. -- Scorpion 0422 18:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Any way someone could get better images for Missionary: Impossible ? The images currently in the article seem out of focus. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 02:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey, in case no one else read the new Signpost, there's a new alertbot out for the WikiProjects... add the {{ ArticleAlertbotSubscription}} template to the projects main page, and the bot will automatically let us know about any changes in any articles that have the project banner on their talk page... more info here and here... I was going to add it, but I didn't know where to put it with our main projet page formatted the way it is... if someone else wants to add it, feel free... - Adolphus79 ( talk) 01:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. - Drilnoth ( talk) 00:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I messed up on Lost our Lisa. It's now fixed but you may want to check if any other Simpsons are misplaced. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 05:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm trying to clean up alt.tv.simpsons and one line is really bugging me. It is:
The reference for it is:
The line was there before I started to work on the article and I want to know what exactly Matt Groening was implying in that cartoon. It needs to be more specific. Does anyone have that cartoon and is able to help me? -- Maitch ( talk) 05:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
The one and only Bill Oakley has agreed to do an IRC chat with us so that we can ask questions about things that we can use in articles. The transcript of this chat will hopefully be posted at NHC, which I think will be a good enough sorce. Failing that, we'll try The Simpsons Archive. Because not everyone will be able to make the chat (which hasn't been scheduled yet) Xihix and I have made a page where any member can post questions that can be asked. Remember, no fan questions, and due to a lack of time, try to limit it to ones that will help improve an article. That page is here. -- Scorpion 0422 02:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I have an issue with many articles about specific Simpsons episodes. Is this the right place to talk about it? My issue is that many articles contain unreferenced "Cultural references" sections. There are so many articles that it would take forever to tag them with {citation needed} or even delete the unreferenced information. What's the best way to go about fixing this? • Supāsaru 16:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:FICT, the notability guideline for elements within a work of fiction (characters, places, elements, etc) has a new proposal/revision that is now live [1] Everyone is encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page. Ned Scott 22:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal to split WP:EPISODE into a more general notability guideline, Wikipedia:Notability (serial works), and make the rest of WP:EPISODE just a MOS guideline. Please join in at WT:EPISODE#Proposed split of EPISODE and/or Wikipedia talk:Notability (serial works). -- Ned Scott 22:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Some guy just created this. I need to go, so could someone speedy delete it or something? Thanks. Rhino131 ( talk) 02:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I reported TheFreshPrinceOfBel-Air0 ( talk · contribs) to WP:AIV. Cirt ( talk) 04:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
I put both of those 2 FreshPrince accounts back up on WP:AIV, obvious vandalism only sockpuppets. Cirt ( talk) 04:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
The page is an absolute mess and desperately needs references. For example, it says the show has only been dubbed in 14 languages and has no source for that at all. Anyone interested in cleaning the page up? -- Scorpion 0422 19:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I've been working through a list of TV episodes that have made it to WP:GA, many which are Simpsons episodes, and yet to have any serious problems with these. However, I will offer a few comments to consider:
But keep up the good work in this area. -- MASEM 05:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Primary sourced plot summaries are accepted by consensus among experienced editors at WP:FILMS, among others, and have been accepted with multiple FAs. But a relevant thread has yet again been discussing this, at A Minor Quandary: Or, How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Primary Source. Cirt ( talk) 05:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Apparantly some publicists have complained about the page and have claimed there are many inaccuracies. Some of the stuff they removed can be seen here (this includes all mentions of her ex-husband and scientology, which is the only portion of the article that is well sourced). In fact, some of the stuff that was removed comes from her biography at Fox's promotional website. Anyway, I promised to clean the page up and source it, so if anyone would like to help, it would be much appreciated. -- Scorpion 0422 03:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Peer review/The Principal and the Pauper/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 22:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
BBM has an archive of the top 20–30 highest rated programs of the week in Canada going back to January 2003 ( season 14, episode 7) and The Simpsons often makes that list up here. This is good information for reception sections. – thedemonhog talk • edits 02:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
The Featured topic criteria has recently been changed and requires that a topic have twenty percent of its articles featured. Both Simpsons topics The Simpsons (season 8) and The Simpsons (season 9) will need to get two more (four more overall) for a 6 total FAs and will have six mounts to do this. Zginder ( talk) ( Contrib) 21:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Did you just unilaterally change this yourself, or was there a significant period of discussion that came to a consensus for this major change? Cirt ( talk) 22:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
In any event, Season 9 won't be too hard to address, I'm not sure about Season 8 as I did not participate in that featured topic drive. Zginder ( talk · contribs) said above that we need 2 more FAs for each season. For Season 9, The Last Temptation of Krust is currently on WP:FAC, and I have just started a peer review for The Principal and the Pauper. Cirt ( talk) 22:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Season 9 seems to be pretty close, but I have no idea what article we would do for season 8... Perhaps The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show. -- Scorpion 0422 23:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Brother From Another Series looks pretty good, and The I&S&P Show wouldn't be to hard to expand. Gran 2 10:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I've recently noticed that several shows have been getting rid of their "DVD releases" pages by merging relevant info into season pages. If there are no objections, I would like to try to do the same. The vast majority of the page is a list of episodes, and all extras and other things can easily be added to a table in the article. I tried this out here and I think it looks pretty good. -- Scorpion 0422 19:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
This looks to be close to FA status so I've started a PR for it. Just letting you know. Buc ( talk) 18:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Still looking for comments. Buc ( talk) 16:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
For those curious about how much traffic Simpsons articles get, this is a list of the Top 10000 most viewed articles in February, and these are the rankings of the Simpsons articles that made it: (that I noticed)
I'm a little surprised that Lisa's article isn't there and Matt Groening's is - Bart's article gets a LOT more vandalism. I also didn't realize that new episode pages got that many views. There probably would have been a lot more articles on the list back in July or August. If it were a Top 20000 list, there would likely be a lot more characters on there because many articles had more than 20000 views in February. If anyone wants to see the number of views per day of any article from the last four months, you can visit this link [2] -- Scorpion 0422 18:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone wanna go through TVSquad.com and ign.com and put in receptions from the episodes with me? Ctjf83 Talk 19:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Following up on a discussion that took place at Talk:Dial 'N' for Nerder, we agree that we'd like to see some Simpson-specific guidelines on the notability of cultural references. I'd like to make a rough draft proposal:
Any thoughts? The Dominator ( talk) 03:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
People may recall that Xihix made an advertisement for our wikiproject. Here is the latest version.
I think it looks awesome. We had a slight problem with the blurring television/background, but I asked
Gurch to fix this. I'm not sure if the blurring has completly dissapeared (can anyone else see it?), but it is only a minor defect. The advertisment has been added to
WP:BANNER, so we should get some publicity now! I just want everyones opinion on two things, should we consult more people to try and get rid of the error, and is the advertisement ready for distribution to all members (ie: any more suggestions before it goes public)? --
Simpsons fan
66
06:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Treehouse of Horror V has been nominated. Buc ( talk) 17:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Could really use some help guys! Buc ( talk) 21:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I just wanted to get a discussion going in response to some recent additions to the Streetcar Named Marge article.
If I may be blunt, I think we can do without the third paragraph of "Writing" and most of the second paragraph of "Animation". I just think the information in those sections is too trivial. The regular "Plot" section of the article never reaches the same level of detail, so I don't see why we need to spend so much time describing the deleted/modified scenes. Plus, the changes described really aren't that dramatic, and probably wouldn't be all that interesting to someone who's never seen the episode.
But that's just my opinion. I'd love it if others could chime in and try to prove me wrong. Zagalejo ^^^ 18:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Xihix is away for a few days, but he got a response from Bill. In our most recent e-mail, we sent five FAs to him to look over (Homer's Enemy, Homer's Phobia, The Simpsons, Treehouse of Horror (series) and Troy McClure) and he responded.
According to Xihix: "He also asked about the questions and what to do. I responded that I will be back on Saturday to tell him what you guys want to do, so until then, decide upon yourselves what. Look at the screenshots here."
Anyway, as you can see from the e-mails, he said an IRC chat would be fine, but sending him questions via e-mail would be better for him. Again, we run into the RS issues though. He also didn't mention any images. I was hoping he would give us a quote we could stick on our page as a pit of bragging/promotion, but the closest he came is "this article is perfect". -- Scorpion 0422 02:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
I really think that Rod and Todd Flanders should have their own page. I think I'm gonna start one soon, anyone wanna join me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warrior4321 ( talk • contribs) 20:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I contacted Bill Oakley myself and he responded. He didn't say anything about images, but I think he would rather answer questions via e-mail rather than during an IRC chat. I told him that would be okay and that we would hopefully send him our question list within a week, so if you have any to add, please do so soon. -- Scorpion 0422 01:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I decided to work on Krusty's article, and cleaned up and sourced the Role in The Simpsons section. It is still rather rough, so if anyone could look at it, it would be much appreciated. I think everything important is mentioned in that section, but the rest of the article still needs expanding. -- Scorpion 0422 16:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Qst's good article nomination of " Homer's Triple Bypass" has been put on hold. I basically deleted the reception section because it was irrelevant so one needs to be written. – thedemonhog talk • edits 04:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
The more devoted fans might appreciate this: Zwieback. Equazcion •✗/ C • 14:02, 9 Apr 2008 (UTC)
This subsection of Portal:The Simpsons needs to be updated. If it seems that this section is consistently being neglected and not updated frequently enough, perhaps an easier fix would just be to remove it. Cirt ( talk) 00:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that these articles were merged into the List of Students article, but the only discussion I found was on Talk:Kearney Zzyzwicz, which was only about merging Kearny, Jimbo and Dolph into one and with a slight consensus against any merging/redirecting. Furthermore, the redirecting of the articles was done by TTN, who has since been forbidden to redirect any articles for overzealousness. I've done very little work on the project so I didn't make any changes, but I wanted to bring this to everyone's attention. Mc JEFF 03:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I am doing a study on collaborative writing on Wikipedia - I hope to present the results at Wikimania this year. If you would like to be interviewed over email, please leave a note on my talk page or email me. Thanks! Awadewit ( talk) 17:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Lost Our Lisa on Peer Review. Your comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Lost Our Lisa/archive1. Cirt ( talk) 09:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[4] and his Ip is actually owned by 20th Century Fox in Los Angeles, so it could be him. Whoever it was was removing vandalism from an IP who has a history of adding fake crap to pages, like saying Homer and Agnes Skinner are based on Al Jean's parents, Frank Grimes is based on Matt Selman and Smithers is based on Mike Reiss. Jean has complained about vandalism on his page on the commentaries, so we should keep an eye on his page in the future.
As well, someone added Reid Harrison as the writer of Papa Don't Leech a week before the episode aired, so watch out for that too. -- Scorpion 0422 01:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know where Xihix is? In his last edit, [ [5]], (Wednesday 19th March) he said he was going to Washington DC until Saturday, 22nd March. Has anyone heard from him outside of wikipedia, or know whats going on? -- Simpsons fan 66 11:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Here's a RS with a list of references to Star Wars in the Simpsons. It might allow you to add a ref to a bunch of episodes if you like. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 17:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
When we last discussion merging episode articles for the later seasons, we decided to wait for the ArbCom case to finish. The recent ArbCom case is now closed and it didn't give us anything useful to go with. The discussion at Wikipedia talk:Television episodes didn't give us any answers as well. So I think we should make a decision on our own now.
I've been thinking about this for a while and I have come to the conclusion that I want The Simpsons WikiProject to be a shining example of what Wikipedia is all about. We certainly can't do that for the later seasons as we don't have any sources. There are no DVD's or books that give us any information. All in all we are going to have hundreds of crappy articles, which people then can point at as an example of how bad Wikipedia is. I think the way to go is to turn the into a season article like Smallville (season 1), which is a FA (that's right not FL). If we have some bits of information that is too small to warrant an article, we can then write it under the season summary. If one episode is very special and holds enough information, we can just keep that as an episode article, like they did with Pilot (Smallville).
The conclusion is that I'm all for merging some of the later seasons. We can later discuss which. What do you guys think? -- Maitch ( talk) 12:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Curse the time differences that plague our countries! As I write this it is 12.30 PM 24th April, yet it is 9.30 PM yesterday in Iowa, 10.30 PM yesterday in Canada, and 3.30 AM today in London! By the time I get home from school everyone else has only just arrived into the present day. I never truly appreciated these differences until I joined wikipedia. It also makes IRC chat during weekdays next to impossible. I keep forgetting on weekends, but when I remember, it is either too late or no-one is there. What times (in your respective states/countries) do you guys typically sign in? -- Simpsons fan 66 02:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I have been going through Springfield (The Simpsons) and changing all instances of (Example) "As in Bye Bye Nerdie, Lisa is shown to have 18 toes."
That exact sentence wasn't in the article, it is just an example. I have been going around and adding Cite Episode and Ref Tags "Lisa has 18 toes. <ref>{{cite episode|title= [[Bye Bye Nerdie]]|series= [[The Simpsons]]}}</ref>
Is this the proper thing to do, or should they be left the previous way. I personally think it looks better with the Cite Episode tags, and just want to make sure. <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 04:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
And the use of the citation templates vary from article to article, but this is the full version that should be used: <ref>{{cite episode |title=Today I Am a Clown|episodelink=Today I Am a Clown |series=The Simpsons |serieslink=The Simpsons |credits=Cohen, Joel H.; Kruse, Nancy|network=Fox |airdate=2003-12-07 |season=15 |number=6}}</ref> -- Scorpion 0422 05:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
I have added all of the info you posted to every single episode reference in Springfield (The Simpsons). I am pretty tired now. Turns out I was so tired that I forgot to sign <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 04:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Nice work on that article. Have you considered taking it to GA? -- Maitch ( talk) 17:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Im new with WikiProject The Simpsons and I was thinking that I would like to make or edit a page for this project so if anyone would like to help me just post a message on my talk
-- Springfield MO Native JH ( talk) 22:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Springfield MO Native JH
The Principal and the Pauper is up at WP:FAC, comments would be appreciated. FAC discussion page is here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Principal and the Pauper. Cirt ( talk) 15:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
At least they notified some of us this time, the last few Afds nobody bothered to tell us about (like the Capital City one, although I wouldn't have opposed its deletion). -- Scorpion 0422 19:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm just wondering, what is the general consensus for proper reference naming conventions. The two most common ones seem to be this [1] and this [2]. As you can see the only difference is whether the DVD is named as The Simpsons The Complete Fourth Season DVD or The Simpsons Season 4 DVD commentary. I believe the first name is the correct one, since that is the exact text printed on the boxsets. But that then raises another question, The Simpsons The Complete Fourth Season DVD is not really proper english, it should have a comma just after The Simpsons. What to do... What to do.... I realise that the adoption of a new standard would involve hours of work shanging existing GA/FA articles, so this probably isn't going to make me very popular! But I have to know, what is everyone else's opinion? -- Simpsons fan 66 23:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I forgot one thing, the code used for references automatically sorts the text into a prescribed order. So we can't move anything or change the italics unless we type everything manually and abandon the code. Maybe we should return to the original suggestion made by thedemonhog. -- Simpsons fan 66 04:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I've been considering merging the pages for the two parts (which I first split up about a year ago) into one really good, potential FA. Does anyone oppose this? -- Scorpion 0422 21:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I've started work on it, you can see what I have done here. I made custom templates for the page, and I still have some fixing to do before its ready for the mainspace, but any improvements anyone can make are more than welcome. -- Scorpion 0422 06:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Is this the right title? - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 17:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) No, but D'oh is much more used than annoyed grunt. It seems obvious to me that most english speakers will know D'oh better, but I could be wrong. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 23:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I just went through a number of Simpsons articles to double check for trivia and quote cruft (I didn't see any) and noticed that there are serious issues with tense on the Mona Simpson article and it could use a bit of work because of the recent change in tense due to her "removal" from the series as an active character. A certain number of "is"'s should be changed to "was"'s however depending on their usage some should stay the same regardless of her status. Cat-five - talk 08:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I decided to give Some Enchanted Evening a try at FAC. It would be helpful if somebody could help me by doing a copyedit. This is requested at the FAC. Thanks in advance. -- Maitch ( talk) 09:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Is this book worth buying? What exactly does it contain? I've seen it used as a reference in several articles, and I'd like to check it out for myself, but it seems like it's only available from two libraries in the United States. Zagalejo ^^^ 02:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Most of them are group shots and in most cases cropping out individual images would make them too small for use in individual bio articles. But, we can use the one for images of Bill, Josh and Jeff Martin. And we have some nice group shots for the main article. Please do not upload them yet. I still need to make sure Bill is willing to freely license them per this
-- Scorpion 0422 05:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I have sent Bill's permission e-mail to OTRS. Hopefully they'll be useable by Monday. I uploaded them onto commons: Image:The Simpsons office building.jpg, Image:Conan O'Brien - Simpsons.jpg, Image:Simpsons plane.jpg, Image:Simpsons writers2.jpg, Image:Simpsons writers1.jpg. You'll know when one of these templates is added: {{PermissionOTRS|ticket=URL}} or {{PermissionOTRS|id=ticket number}} -- Scorpion 0422 18:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
That was quick... Image:Simpsons plane.jpg has been listed for deletion because of the plane and the inclusion of the characters. At first I was hoping that I'd be able to crop out some of the people, but 1. Most of them would be too small for infoboxes, 2. Cropping out the group would only allow us to use a few people and 3. We already have some good group images. So, it could be worse. -- Scorpion 0422 23:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have season 4, 3, 1 and most of 2 at home. I was looking for a list of episodes like Lisa's first Word or And Maggie Makes Three, Homer marries Marge, etc. I'd like to create such a list and plug it into Simpsons Categories, but I'm wondering if it's appropriate. If there's a Halloween List, can there be a pre-series one? Jethro 82 ( talk) 01:50, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
We've had people who in the past claimed to be Al Jean, Wes Archer, and the guy Artie Ziff is based on (not to mention the people who keep adding writers and directors months prior to episode airdates). Now, somebody is claiming to be the real Armin Tamzarian that Ken Keeler named the character after. [7] He says the name should be spelled Armen, but all official sources spell it Armin, so I reverted it. -- Scorpion 0422 05:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Well we have another article on the main page and I can hardly contain my excitement. Troy McClure will be TFA for [[May 28] 2008. No, I'm sure it'll be great, and I love having our articles as TFA (minus the vandilism), I just generally think that three The Simpsons articles in one year is too many. Anyway, "wiki-politics" aside be on the watch for slightly higher levels of vandilism over the next week. Gran 2 10:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not a member of the project and don't wish to become one (just got drawn in by TFA), but I notice that there are more mid importance articles than there are low importance articles. It's my opinion that there should be significantly more articles in categories of lower importance than those of higher importance, i.e. more low than mid, mid than high, and high than top. This is the case for mid vs. high and high vs. top here, so should it not also be the case with mid vs. low? Richard001 ( talk) 02:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone else think this could easily be merged into the Simpson family article? They are all part of the same family, and it doesn't make sense to include Homer's relatives in the Simpson family article, but not Marges. -- Scorpion 0422 18:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm semi-back! Anyway, since there is some issues with who we should list as relatives, I'll jump start the discussion. I think we only need to list main recurring characters in the relatives section, and close relatives, like we don't need to list Abe's daughter in laws, or Ling as the kids' cousin, his parents aren't recurring at all, I don't even remember seeing them, so I don't think they should be listed Ctjf83 Talk 16:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I've edited and modified a lot of cultural references, and I was wondering if we could address the inconsistency of this. Some pages have waaay too many references, some have one or two, and most have none. I've contemplated how to address this, and the only options I've found are 1. Remove all of them - some I think are noteworthy, but there's no objective way to pick out which ones to keep, so they'd all have to go 2. Create a page called "The Simpsons cultural references" or "Cultural References in The Simpsons." I wanted to get feedback from others on what, if anything, should be done about this. I'm willing to execute the decision myself and do the work, I just wanted to make a communal decision. JW ( talk) 13:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC) - note regarding option 2, the individual articles' cultural references sections would all be removed, and a "see [ [page] ]" comment could be inserted instead JW ( talk) 13:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree w/ Gran2 ( talk · contribs), Simpsons fan 66 ( talk · contribs), .:Alex:. ( talk · contribs) and COMPFUNK2 ( talk · contribs). In general with regard to Cultural references sections for The Simpsons episode articles on Wikipedia, paragraphs = good, lists = bad. Especially unsourced lists that blatantly violate WP:OR. Cirt ( talk) 15:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The television community currently has an MOS guideline under proposal, and would appreciate all comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Style guidelines#MOS proposal in order to have the best possible guide for television related articles. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 12:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
A request for comment has been made to determine if the Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) proposal has consensus. Since this project deals with many fictional topics, I am commenting here. Input on the proposal is welcome here. -- Pixelface ( talk) 01:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I have been thinking about this list and I don't feel it is necessary. It is basically an excuse to make a list of Simpsons ads. This would have been fine if that list was sourced and complete, but that doesn't seem to be the case. We don't really need to have the season overviews as they are covered better elsewhere. So I would like to hear how you guys feel about the article before I send it to AFD. Maybe there is a way to save it. -- Maitch ( talk) 11:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I realize this is a little off topic, but I thought I'd post this before YouTube deletes it. Nazis on Tap is allegedly a lost Simpsons short that I used to think was just a rumour. I found this posted at NoHomers. It's apparantly the audio track for it and it sounds pretty legit. SNPP has had a piece about the short for a while, but this is the first proof that it was actually produced. I've previously tried to find some kind of reliable source about it so it could be mentioned here, but I've had no luck. -- Scorpion 0422 05:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Although I forgot to comment in the official discussion, I really dislike this idea, but we now have a new assessment class: the C-class. It goes between B and start and raises B to now be near-GA, while C is more in the area of where the old start class was. I guess we should start re-evaluating some articles. -- Scorpion 0422 19:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I am new to this Wikiproject, but have been working on an article. I have raised Homer's Odyssey from 6000 to 8500 bytes. I am still working on it for GA, but can the article be reassessed. I asked my adoptor about this, and he said it would be better to get it to B class first.-- LAA Fan 21:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I just found some statistics for how well we are doing cleaning up the articles. We have 33.8% of our articles tagged for cleanup. You can see how well we are doing here. It is not that bad, but it really not that good either. -- Maitch ( talk) 13:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is interested I have gotten a bot to provide a list over the articles that are tagged for cleanup. You can see it here. -- Maitch ( talk) 06:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 21:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
We have a lot of articles that are tagged for being unsourced. Most of the later seasons can only be sourced by using unreliable source. So I was wondering which is worse: An article cited by using unreliable sources or an article that is completely unsourced. -- Maitch ( talk) 09:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I live in Britain and I watch The Simpsons in Channel 4. Is it alright for me to add sections of Channel 4 Censorship, which I saw episodes full on Sky One, then saw it censor some parts out in Channel 4? I've already been doing it for a while anyway, and found many censors of episodes, comparing it to the original SCB '92 ( talk) 18:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi! As everyone here probably knows, half a Simpsons episode is devoted to H.M.S. Pinafore, making it one of the most obvious and necessary inclusions in a cultural impact section ever. However, I don't know of good sources for The Simpsons. Can anyone lend us a hand by finding us a source? =) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I was looking over them and some were in huge messes (ie. 2 identical cultural refs sections, stuff that was cut and pasted improperly from previous versions, refs to previous episodes sections) and most were protected even though they had little vandalism beforehand. What did I miss? -- Scorpion 0422 02:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Well we have about a month to save our Featured Topics. All we need to do is get The Principal and the Pauper, The Simpsons Spin-Off Showcase and The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show to Featured status. Really it's just copy-editing (Pauper is very, very close) and a bit of minor expansion and we should be there. Gran 2 15:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't think we should list ex spouses as relatives in the infobox, as they are no longer related. Any other thoughts? CTJF83 Talk 22:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Recently, I came across an article about how The Simpsons has influcenced the world of comedy, and what various writers, actors and comedians thought of the show. It was published in The Age, an Australian newspaper, in the Green Guide section, which is a mini-newspaper published every thursday. I guess it is like "TV Week" magazine, in that is contains TV listings, reviews, tech news, etc. Anyway, the article features quotes from, among other (small-time) Australians, Rove McManus and Chas Licciardello. Would there be any possible use for these? -- Simpsons fan 66 06:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I have edited The Call of the Simpsons quite a lot and it needs to be reassessed. I'm new to the project (this is the first episode article I've worked on) so if someone experienced could reassess it that would be great. =) Thanks, TheLeft orium 14:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured topic criteria#Require more FAs? about the possibility of increasing the requirements for a featured topic, namely requiring more featured articles or lists. The current requirement is 20%, or one in five. I have proposed raising this to 25%, or one in four. There are other editors who would rather go straight to one in three. As large topics, Wikipedia:Featured topics/The Simpsons (season 8) and Wikipedia:Featured topics/The Simpsons (season 9) would be among the most affected by this change. They are both under the current 20% requirement and are being retained under a grace period set to expire this month. Your comments and thoughts on the subject are welcome at the above link. Thanks, Pagra shtak 18:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Commented at the thread below Scorpion0422 ( talk · contribs). These changes are quite frustrating and almost is motivation enough to not work on WP:FT drives anymore. (Not quite at that point yet for me, but it is certainly frustrating.) Cirt ( talk) 20:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject The Simpsons participants... WikiProject Media franchises needs some help from other projects which are similar. Media franchises' scope deals primarily with the coordination of articles within the hundreds if not thousands of media franchises which exist. Sometimes a franchise might just need color coordination of the various templates used; it could mean creating an article for the franchise as a jump off point for the children of it; or the creation of a new templating system for media franchise articles. The project primarily focuses on multimedia franchises. It would be great if some of this project's participants would come over and help the project get back on solid footing. Also, if you know of similar projects which have not received this, let Lady Aleena ( talk · contribs) know. Please come and take a look at the project and see if you wish to lend a hand. You can sign up here if you wish. Thank you. LA @ 21:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject The Simpsons participants... WikiProject Media franchises is currently discussing a naming convention for franchise articles. Since this may affect one or more articles in your project, we would like to get the opinions of all related projects before implimenting any sweeping changes. Please come and help us decide. Thanks! LA ( T) @ 22:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, it should be Lane, County, Oregon. The evidence is in an article when Matt Groening HIMSELF sends a plaque to Springfield, Lane County, Oregon saying they are the "REAL Sprinfield". The Register-Guard, Eugene, Oregon, USA-- Alkalinetrio78 ( talk) 03:07, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I posted a request to WT:WIAFT on behalf of WP:DOH, I hope that is okay with everyone. See here. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 20:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
The Crepes of Wrath was just passed, so the project now presently has 100 Good articles (congrats to TheLeftorium for snagging #100). If you want to get technical, it's the 113th good article, but 13 of those pages are now FAs. So let's keep up the good work and here's to the next 100. -- Scorpion 0422 02:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has been a good article for 22 months and has been A class for about 6. The article is pretty good, but presently it lacks the little things that would make it truly comprehensive and a without a doubt featured page. I've decided it's time to drive towards FA status and some help would be great. I've gotten MOST of the information I can from the commentaries (I'd still like to add some stuff about his temper and strangling, which is discussed) and I wanted more influence (shouldn't be too difficult) and merchandising information. That, combined with an overhaul of the Role section and a complete copyedit should be enough. So, who wants to help? -- Scorpion 0422 15:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
It's not as big as I was hoping, but I think the page is as big as it's going to get for the time being (well, the analysis section could likely be expanded and I'm getting a book in the mail today that should help with this). I've had several copyeditors look over the page and asked as many people as possible (including Bill Oakley) to peer review it. So, I am going to nominate it on Saturday. Could everyone please take a look at the article and let me know what you think? Thanks, Scorpion 0422 14:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Why does every episode list the people that appear on the DVD commentary? Perhaps I'm missing something, but list like that appear to be nothing but a collection of indescriminate information. -- Hydrokinetics12 ( talk) 07:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Just to say it here :) rst20xx ( talk) 01:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
The pages with characters from the episode have different names, so I'm proposing uniform names, changing words to "on":
Thoughts? CTJF83 Talk 00:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
What is done with similar lists of other television programs? Cirt ( talk) 21:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Now that all episodes are GA and The Simpsons (season 1) is FA, I think we should nominate it for Good Topic. Is everyone OK with this? TheLeft orium 16:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
It passed yesterday (see WP:GT) so congrats to everyone involved! ;) TheLeft orium 09:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested... Zagalejo ^^^ 20:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_The_Simpsons/Featured_topic_Drive#Marge_in_Chains. Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 08:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Hey guys. Sorry I haven't done much for the project lately, I've sort of lost enthusiasm. I was looking for something special for my 6th GA, and I thought it would be great to do Bart vs. Australia. Is this OK? -- Simpsons fan 66 01:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Near the very end of the end credits, there is this little exchange:
Matt Selman: "If you wanna increase the number of times your name comes up when you google yourself, do a lot of DVD commentaries"
Al Jean: "If you wanna see some off-hand remark you make end up on wikipedia for all-time"
Someone else: "Oh yeah" [everyone else laughs]
Mike Scully: "Such a reliable source of information" [more laughter]
Al Jean: "Well, everybody uses it"
Nancy Kruse: "Yeah, someone wrote I was married to David Silverman on wikipedia. I'm not." [Commentary ends].
All I can say is: go to hell Mike Scully. -- Scorpion 0422 13:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I have been working on the article and I got stuck at the production section. There is very little on the web about it and I do not have access to either the books or the DVDs. At the PR I have been told to look for some help here. Anybody having some time to take a look? Thanks, Nergaal ( talk) 19:57, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Julia Louis-Dreyfus should be added to the Simpsons cast template under recurring guest stars and the "Families" link of the characters navigation template is no longer needed. Tj terrorible1 ( talk) 17:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Vote as you please but remember to vote. Rhino131 ( talk) 21:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I've removed covers from a number of season articles ( [10] [11], etc.). There's already an image of the DVD set at the top of each of these articles. We do not need what is essentially a repeat, and this violates cover usage in X-graphies (videographies, discographies, etc). Please see WP:NFC for the guideline on this. -- Hammersoft ( talk) 23:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 31, 2008. This will be our fourth since July 27, 2007... Maybe we should wait about a year before requesting another. Anyway, everyone please take a look at the article and make any necessary changes and put it on watch. We've gotten off surprisingly easy so far with the TFA talk page complaints (only Troy McClure had calls for delisting) and a few days ago I had an excellent copyeditor give the page a once-over, so hopefully we won't have any harsh criticism. Either way, should be a fun day. -- Scorpion 0422 21:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Has to be free-use image. Cirt ( talk) 23:18, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Could everyone please keep a close eye on the Simpson watchlist? There is a lot of vandalism on Simpsons pages today, especially on THOH articles (for obvious reasons). -- Zombie Scorpion 0422 18:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
And the page received 103,900 views, a lot more than I was expecting. In comparison, Mary Shelley, the TFA the day before, had 56,600 and Tang Dynasty (the day before that) had 32,100. However, this is well under the views received by Troy McClure when it was TFA on May 28 (133,200) and The Simpsons on December 17 (130,600). -- Scorpion 0422 20:33, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
It would be helpful if someone(s) could slowly but surely work on getting this successfully to WP:FL, which would eventually help further along the process at Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/Featured topic Drive/season 10. Cirt ( talk) 23:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Season 4 is now ready for WP:GTC. Who would like to nominate it? Gran 2 12:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Voilà, season four just passed. -- TheLeft orium 15:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
From TheLeftorium's talkpage:
BTW, it looks like we could have this season done by the end of the year. What season do we do next? Season 10 has the most GAs, but I dislike a lot of those episodes, and Scully REALLY sucks on commentary. There are 3 season 7 GAs (4 including WSMB), 2 from season 5 (plus 1 FA, and Rosebud is practically ready to go, I'm just too lazy to finish it) and 2 a piece from seasons 2 and 3. My vote is for season 7, it's one of my favourite seasons and it is more recent than others. I would be okay with any of the others though. -- Scorpion 0422 19:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Since there's no episodes left (for me) in season 6, and everyone seem to think it's a good idea, I have started the season 7 page here. I haven't had time to fill it in completely though. -- TheLeft orium 15:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I like to do the initial article-formatting first, I will let you know after that when it would be helpful to do the production info. Cirt ( talk) 17:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Check that, sorry, what I meant to say is of course feel free to add sourced production info to the Production subsection on any article. Cirt ( talk) 18:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
If I may, as an external observer, I think you should work on the "Seasons of the Simpsons" topic. I know that it's harder to make FLs for seasons which aren't yet on DVD, but getting this topic to FT would mean that all the Simpsons topics would be nicely linked up - rst20xx ( talk) 17:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
User:COMPFUNK2 nominated List of one-time characters in The Simpsons for deletion. The nomination can be found here. CTJF83 Talk 17:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
The Hidden Message Vandal is an twelve year old (or so he claims) named "Cool-dude" Tim who lives in the UK. In mid-2007 he became a very annoying vandal and claimed he did it because "it was for fun to edit." He got his name because most of his early edits included a hidden message telling us why his edit should not be reverted. Generally, he was just a kid who thought it was funny to mess around with pages, and he added a bunch of nonsense and junk under 40+ IPs. He occasionally made some legitimate but mostly it was nonsense and the majority of it was Simpsons-related. For example, one of my favorite pieces of idiocy is his addition of a "fictional couches" section to the couch article. [12]
Anyway, I believe the user is back (he did promise that he would return), the IP 86.173.33.66 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) recently added a non-existant age field to a character infobox, which is one the HMV's old traits. [13] The IP is registered to British Telecom (like all of his previous IPs) and starts with 86 (like most of his previous IPs). It could be a coincidence, but I find that unlikely. Earlier today, another IP registered to BT showed up and added some nonsense to The Simpsons shorts [14]. If this is him, he has been doing mostly good faith edits with the odd bit of vandalism thrown in. However, it would be best to keep an eye out. Please check all edits to Simpsons articles from IPs that start with 86 or 81 and if they are registered to British Telecom (like this) then please add that address to my HMV page. -- Scorpion 0422 23:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
I need help from anyone who owns books that have information for the Production section of " The Day the Violence Died". Some books that could be useful are:
Thanks in advance! Gary King ( talk) 20:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I found The Simpsons and Philosophy online here. Not sure if there's anything in it that's worth mentioning. -- TheLeft orium 21:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
With Marge now under review and Bart's FAC currently going well, I could be ready to submit this to FTC as early as Saturday. My definition is going to be the five main members. I'm not going to bother including Grampa, Mona, Patty & Selma, SLH or Snowball, although I do expect a little hassling over that. This is the chance for any comments anyone might have about the topic or any articles in it. -- Scorpion 0422 15:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I decided to do an audit of our 46 individual character articles.
Character | Class | Imp. | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Patty and Selma Bouvier | Start | High | Far too much in-universe info, not enough character info. The infoboxes should probably be merged. |
Kent Brockman | Start | Mid | Too much weight is given to his Religion and language. Short profile section is good, but not enough real world info |
Montgomery Burns | C | High | I'vre been meaning to whip this one into shape, but haven't gotten around to it. Way too much in-universe info. |
Carl Carlson | Start | Mid | Considering how much weight his relationship with Lenny is given, I would almost say that their pages should be merged. Not much too this page, supporting my belief that they could be merged. |
Comic Book Guy | C | Mid | Not bad, actually. The role section needs sources and it could use more character and reception info, but it's in above average shape. |
Fat Tony | Start | Mid | Suprisingly short, and not enough character info. The "Influences" seems unnecessary. |
Ned Flanders | ![]() |
High | Probably my least favourite of the GAs I've worked on, it needs to be brought up to current standards. The "The Adventures of Ned Flanders" section is given undue weight. Interesting note, this is what passes for FA in the Russian wikipedia. Now, I don't understand a word of it, but it appears to be largely in-universe and it includes an "episodes featuring..." list. |
Professor Frink | Start | Mid | Like many of the above articles, it's pretty short with little real-world info. The "Prototype" section is oddly titled. The image should be changed to either an official one or a screenshot. I'm not a big fan of using fan-made images as iot can lead to accusations of theft. |
Groundskeeper Willie | B | High | I started to knock this one into shape a while ago, but have never gotten around to finishing it. It has a good start, but every section should be bigger and the Role section needs sources. |
Barney Gumble | ![]() |
High | |
Julius Hibbert | C | Mid | |
Lionel Hutz | Start | Mid | Like Frink, it could use an official image or screenshot (although ironically, I think I uploaded that one) |
The Itchy & Scratchy Show | B | Mid | GAC. |
Kang and Kodos | ![]() |
Mid | |
Edna Krabappel | Start | Mid | Short on real world info. |
Krusty the Clown | ![]() |
High | The role section is a little longer than I'd like and could be shortened. |
Lenny Leonard | Start | Mid | Many of the same problems as Carl's article, except with a longer section about their relationship. I really would not mind seeing Lenny and Carl merged. |
Reverend Timothy Lovejoy | Start | Mid | Tired of repeating the same things over and over, see the section for Fat Tony. |
Otto Mann | Start | Mid | See the section for Lovejoy. |
Troy McClure |
![]() |
High | |
Hans Moleman | Start | Mid | Ah, Moleman, I always forget about him. See the section for Otto. |
Nelson Muntz | Start | High | This one needs work, Nancy Cartwright's book is a good source, she mentions that someone (I forget who, it wasn't a regular) was originally cast as Nelson. |
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon | B | High | Another one that I've been meaning to work on. Unfortunately and suprisingly there really isn't a lot out there, but I have found a couple of good commentaries with Apu info. |
Martin Prince | Start | Mid | Mergable. Might propose one later this week. |
Joe Quimby | Start | Mid | They do discuss Quimby (ie. his Kennedy connection, his sash) several times on the commentaries, so it is expandable. Enough for a GA? Not sure. |
Radioactive Man (The Simpsons character) | Start | Mid | Still not sure what to do with this one. |
Dr. Nick Riviera | C | Mid | |
Santa's Little Helper | Start | High | Wouldn't complain if this one was merged, but it does have a small bit of real-world info. |
Sideshow Bob | ![]() |
High | My next target for FA. |
Abraham Simpson | Start | High | Biography is too long, character section isn't long enough. |
Bart Simpson |
![]() |
Top | "Practically perfect in every way" |
Homer Simpson |
![]() |
Top | "So am I." |
Lisa Simpson | ![]() |
Top | |
Maggie Simpson | ![]() |
Top | |
Marge Simpson | ![]() |
Top | |
Mona Simpson (The Simpsons) | ![]() |
Mid | |
Seymour Skinner | C | High | Definitely falls under the "could be a GA some day" class, there is still stuff from The Principal and the Pauper that could be added. |
Waylon Smithers | ![]() |
High | |
Snowball (The Simpsons) | Start | High | Again, I wouldn't mind if it was merged. I doubt there is a lot of real-world info out there (in fact, the only bit I can remember from the commentaries is Groening calling Snowball "the ugliest cat on television"). |
Cletus Spuckler | Start | Mid | If I could, I would delete the character from the show itself. But unfortunately that is not possible... A lot of in-universe info in this one with an entire section devoted to his last name. I think he's been discussed a bit in the commentaries, so that should be added. |
Moe Szyslak | C | High | In not-bad shape, definitely has a good start. However, my "anti-tube bar" bias prevents me from working on it. |
Milhouse Van Houten | Start | High | See the section for Otto. |
Clancy Wiggum | Start | Mid | Was listed as a B-class article, I disagreed and downgraded it to start. |
Ralph Wiggum | Start | Mid | I still can't believe this one was once a FAC. A lot of OR in this one that needs to be cleaned up. |
Rainier Wolfcastle | Start | Mid | Needs a better lead image. |
So, in short, 28% of our character articles are GA or higher, and another 10 are currently within reach (in some cases, it's a distant reach, but it's still attainable) and the rest are in poor to okay quality. -- Scorpion 0422 18:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
How should the topic look like?
Main page | Articles |
![]() |
·
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Am I missing anything? Should any of these in the list get scrapped? Nergaal ( talk) 05:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
That was one of the project's very early goals, and it has now been achieved. I don't think a lot of projects have managed to get all of their top importance articles to GA or higher, so... Yay! -- Scorpion 0422 01:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I think that the article about season 10 needs to mention how that was the first season in which almost all the episodes sucked. The Season 9 article needs to mention how that was the last real season. Thanks. Faethon Ghost ( talk) 04:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm looking for Production information for " Bart the Mother", season 10 episode 3. Ideally I'd like to double the article's prose size. If anyone's got any more information, ideally DVD commentary, then please feel free to add it to the article. Thanks! Gary King ( talk) 04:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, there. At this current FLC, an editor commented that they felt the image in the infobox section was a little big. The image in question is 200px wide, which is within the norm for episodes list as far as I understand. The editor added, "This in a way goes against WIAFL Cr 6, Visual appeal. because the image is very distracting. I would consult with the respective project(s) to discuss reducing the default size for the images in the infobox." It seems to me that the consensus about infobox image width in episodes lists goes against the FLC criteria. Your input is welcomed. Rosenknospe ( talk) 21:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
For those curious, this is what our article assessment chart looked like on December 31, 2006:
And for those curious, the 2 Featured quality articles we had at the end of 2006 were The Simpsons and List of The Simpsons episodes, while the GA was Homer Simpson.
The Simpsons articles |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | None | Total | ||
Class | |||||||
![]() |
2 | 2 | |||||
![]() |
1 | 1 | |||||
![]() |
1 | 1 | |||||
B | 6 | 26 | 15 | 8 | 55 | ||
Start | 2 | 28 | 415 | 64 | 27 | 536 | |
Stub | 5 | 22 | 84 | 53 | 164 | ||
Unassessed | |||||||
Total | 11 | 60 | 452 | 156 | 80 | 759 |
This is what it looked like on December 31, 2007:
For those curious, these are the GAs & featured content we had at the end of 2007.
The Simpsons articles |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | None | Total | ||
Quality | |||||||
![]() |
2 | 9 | 7 | 1 | 19 | ||
![]() |
1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | |||
![]() |
2 | 6 | 59 | 67 | |||
B | 4 | 17 | 9 | 4 | 34 | ||
Start | 1 | 32 | 385 | 69 | 3 | 490 | |
Stub | 1 | 23 | 108 | 19 | 151 | ||
Assessed | 10 | 66 | 484 | 182 | 22 | 764 | |
Total | 10 | 66 | 484 | 182 | 22 | 764 |
And this is what it looks like right now:
The Simpsons articles |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | None | Total | ||
Quality | |||||||
![]() |
4 | 1 | 10 | 15 | |||
![]() |
1 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 14 | ||
![]() |
2 | 3 | 5 | ||||
![]() |
4 | 8 | 121 | 3 | 136 | ||
B | 15 | 8 | 5 | 28 | |||
C | 7 | 10 | 2 | 19 | |||
Start | 19 | 319 | 59 | 2 | 399 | ||
Stub | 1 | 25 | 119 | 22 | 167 | ||
List | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | |||
Assessed | 9 | 65 | 498 | 191 | 24 | 787 | |
Total | 9 | 65 | 498 | 191 | 24 | 787 |
Pretty good. In 2008, we doubled our GAs, added 6 FAs, 4 FLs, 1 FT and 3 GTs and reduced our number of start class pages by 91. Unfortunately, there was growth in the stub category (that should be a project goal in 2009: reducing the stubs).
I also set some (unofficial) goals:
I think we as a project should set some goals for 2009, and see what we can do about reaching them. -- Scorpion 0422 20:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
I believe we should try to set some project goals for 2009. Here are some of my ideas:
Any more ideas?
Main page | Articles |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Nergaal ( talk) 20:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Sounds like some good goals. I'm gonna try to get a cast member to GA status later this year. — TheLeft orium 10:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
Hi, I know it's a bit weird to give a barnstar to a WikiProject, but you people just deserve one. This project is really fantastic, example: I occasionally check the GAn list, and almost always there is at least one article nominated. When I look at this project I see what Wikipedia is all about, talking and editing together. To everybody here at the The Simpsons WikiProject: Keep up the good work. -- Music 26/ 11 10:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
If we take a look at the two FA's Pilot (House) and Pilot (Smallville) then we can see that a lot more is allowed to be mentioned than we do on Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire. There is a section on conception, filming and casting. Most of this information also works for the main article of the show. The question is: Could we do the same thing with Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire? -- Maitch ( talk) 15:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
So, an IP, 206.253.5.135 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS), has decided to start adding succession boxes to episode pages and so far has done just about every episode in seasons 1, 2, 3 and 13. I've asked the IP to explain his reasoning, but he has ignored me so far. I don't think they are necessary since there is already a template that links every episode in a season. The only advantage is that it does allow the finale of one season to link to the premiere of the next, but that's a minor benefit (especially since the seasons are also linked in the infobox). So far, I haven't bothered to remove them, but I probably will eventually. However, does anyone think that the boxes are necessary? -- Scorpion 0422 16:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Have you guys seen these? - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 23:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Both of these subpages contain outdated material that has been stale for a while now, and both have been commented-out of the main portal page at Portal:The Simpsons. Cirt ( talk) 07:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Keyser Söze has uploaded a new image of the Simpson family (thanks a lot by the way) and I just wanted to get opinions on whether we should use it as the new lead image on The Simpsons.
File:C-SimpFamily.png - Original. Just a standard portrait shot, I guess you could call it more encyclopedic. File:Simpsons FamilyPicture.png - New one. It's more interesting, and the house is included in the shot.
Personally, I like the new one. Maybe use it on the main page and the old one at Simpson family (or vice versa). Thoughts? -- Scorpion 0422 02:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I'm currently conducting the GA review of The PTA Disbands and would like to know definitively (with evidence if available on the web) if Edna Krabappel is a "Ms." or a "Mrs.", given that even divorced women can still be known as "Mrs." A Wikipedia search was inconclusive (if you have a definitive answer then you may want to organise a tidy up), while the nominator has said that her bio at thesimpsons.com (which refers to her as "Mrs. Krabappel" is incorrect). Thanks. -- Jameboy ( talk) 13:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I found a package of official images here and took the chance to upload some of them. Some of them need to be fair use reduced as well.
Also, there are new versions of images for:
But I felt the current versions work fine. If anyone would like to see them, let me know. -- Scorpion 0422 23:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
So, Nancy Cartwright is now using Bart's voice to promote scientology. And, very quickly, a section of this appearead at Bart Simpson. It was also very quickly removed, but I highly doubt that this will be the last IP to add this. I don't think this should be mentioned at Bart's article (unless there are huge public repercussions from this), it belongs more at Nancy Cartwright's page (BTW, everyone keep an eye on it). Thoughts? -- Scorpion 0422 20:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Interesting note, Nancy Cartwright had 13 times more views than normal on the day the story broke (In January it averaged 800-900 views per day, on the 28th it had 13800). [16] It still has abnormally high traffic. The Joy of Sect has also had more than double the traffic [17] and Bart Simpson had a small jump, but nothing huge. -- Scorpion 0422 05:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I have started a discussion related to the Simpsons episode articles at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_criteria#Comprehensive.3F_Special.3F if anyone is interested. -- Maitch ( talk) 21:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 22:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
This is one I've recently started thinking about, the definition would strictly be the six main voice actors. Gran2 took Hank Azaria's article to GA a while back I recently overhauled Cartwright's page and I hope to take it to FAC by the end of the month. The other four would likely be able to reach at least GA. I did a quick expansion of Julie Kavner's page and I think it will be the hardest because she hasn't done a full interview since 1994, so a lot of the details of her life - ie. her relationship - are that old. Anyway, anyone who would like to help pitch in on this one are more than welcome to help, as are any thoughts about the topic. -- Scorpion 0422 21:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Kavner's page is nearly done. All I need to do is add a few more cites (and some more personal life info would be nice too). I think I'm going to do Dan Castellaneta next. -- Scorpion 0422 18:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Any way someone could get better images for Missionary: Impossible ? The images currently in the article seem out of focus. Thanks, Cirt ( talk) 02:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey, in case no one else read the new Signpost, there's a new alertbot out for the WikiProjects... add the {{ ArticleAlertbotSubscription}} template to the projects main page, and the bot will automatically let us know about any changes in any articles that have the project banner on their talk page... more info here and here... I was going to add it, but I didn't know where to put it with our main projet page formatted the way it is... if someone else wants to add it, feel free... - Adolphus79 ( talk) 01:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. - Drilnoth ( talk) 00:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I messed up on Lost our Lisa. It's now fixed but you may want to check if any other Simpsons are misplaced. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 05:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm trying to clean up alt.tv.simpsons and one line is really bugging me. It is:
The reference for it is:
The line was there before I started to work on the article and I want to know what exactly Matt Groening was implying in that cartoon. It needs to be more specific. Does anyone have that cartoon and is able to help me? -- Maitch ( talk) 05:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)