Talk:The Simpsons/Archive8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Please exempt the Simpsons episode articles from the "Trivia/Pop Culture sections are discouraged..." Rule

I've looked through some of the articles on individual episodes and noticed that same ol' distracting "Trivia sections are discouraged..." tag on some of them. Folks, one of the things that made the Simpsons great was BECAUSE of their pop culture references and seeing as how there's soon to be 19 seasons worth under its belt, I propose that all the "Trivia Sections are Discouraged" labels be zapped from the episode articles. Now, I'll admit I do have a pro-trivia section bias, but you have to admit that a Pop Culture References section is absoultely ESSENTIAL to give the Simpsons episode articles justice.76.177.160.69 (talk) 00:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Trivia sections are discouraged, but sourced cultural reference and production sections are allowed. The key word though is sourced. -- Scorpion0422 00:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I'd say most of them are pretty obvious from the episode itself, as long as the viewer is at least aware of whatever person/place/thing the Simpsons are refering to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.160.69 (talk) 03:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Location of Springfield

In the episode "Behind the Laughter," the narrator says, and I quote, "The Simpsons past was forgotten and now the future looks brighter than ever for this "northern Kentucky family."

I've watched it multiple times, but this was the first time I caught "northern Kentucky family." I couldn't believe it, but it's true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.3.98 (talk) 04:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Behind The Laughter is non-canon. The northern Kentucky line was just put in by the writers to confuse viewers, since The Simpsons were meant to be real-life actors in this episode, so they were given a real-life location to come from. In reruns of the episode the line is sometimes changed to "Southern Missouri family". See the episode's article for more. DVD Smith 02:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opening sentence

I removed "Emmy and Peabody Award-winning" from the opening sentence. The opening sentence should simply state who or what the subject of the article is. Winning awards is something The Simpsons has done, but it's not what the show is. A common response to this is "but it's true that they've won awards". Well yes, but it's trying to cast the show in a "positive light" and this kind of phrasing is something you expect from a press release and not an encylopedia. The awards can of course be put later in the lead, but not the opening sentence. Slayer, a recent front page FA had a hidden message in the first sentence saying "Do not add Grammy winning here". Spellcast 12:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Why shouldn't the fact that it has won awards be included in the opening paragraph? It is a fact that I would expect to see in an encyclopedia. If we were talking about some music album, that would be one of the few things that the album is notable for; obviously The Simpsons is notable for many things. bmitchelf•T•F 16:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
If you look at the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Neutral_point_of_view#POV in first sentence?, consensus shows that it is bias to put awards in opening sentences (unless the award is very groundbreaking in some way). The subject of this article is The Simpsons, not their awards. Don't get me wrong, I love the show, but it's inherently POV to start off the subject with awards. It's usually a piece of verbal fluff that you find in things like magazine articles. Spellcast 04:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
The removal is very reasonable, and besides, the award stuff made the lead look a little wordy. However, I must say your basis for the removal of the awards from the lead sentence is based on a limited interpretation of NPOV and a small pool of user opinion (We would agree that "verbal fluff" is a POV, no?) I read into the aforementioned discussion and the "professional encyclopedia" defense is weak simply because Wikipedia is not your grandfather's index of the world, and is renowned for being different; we're not Britannica, we'll never be Britannica, and lets not waste time in trying to be Britannica. I must mention that the listing (or non-listing) of a notable award (components of style) is de facto in this project, not de jure, as the discussion implied. Several (i.e. tens of thousands) articles follow this practice and I see no rational reason to reverse this, withstanding the POV issue. I admit that in certain situations, the award being listed in the first sentence would be contentious, however, in this situation, the fact that The Simpsons has won an Emmy & Peabody has never been a cause for debate. --Jay(Talk) 05:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Production in China & Korea

"Tweening, coloring, and filming occurs at international studios." That's right, the work takes place in Korea, new opportunities in China are currently being checked....91.12.215.149 17:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] celebs

im supprised there is no mention of special appearances by the likes of michael jackson, elizabeth taylor etc. Realist2 23:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Guest stars can be found here. -FeralDruid 23:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Songs Played In Simpson Episodes

Is there a page which lists the the songs played or sung in each episode? I've looked but I cannot find one. This would be a good idea if it is not already created. Thank you Dani948 20:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

There used to be, but a deletion discussion led to the deletion of the page. --03:09, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA

I have a question. Why was this article's GA status delisted? I am not sure, but can anyone answer this question. It would be much appreciated. Thanks. Greg Jones II 15:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Springfield what?

Although Matt Groening has said that the Simpsons' Springfield has much in common with Portland, Oregon, will we ever know which state it really is in? In the episode "Behind the Laughter," it is said that the Simpsons are a "northern Kentucky family." The increasingly curious fans will never know if Kentucky is the state in which Springfield resides. It seems that with each episode, the location of Springfield is altered in some way. The newly released movie also provides some confusing "clues" to the position of the town the Simpsons call home. On a hike Bart and Flanders took up a mountain in Springfield, the four states that border Springfield are revealed: Ohio, Nevada, Maine, and Kentucky. This might be a sign from Groening that fans will never know the location of Springfield,________. Wisojo 02:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


DUH! 02:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's "D'oh". After all, I knew the real Homer, and, you sir, are no Homer. (I've wanted to say that for years. Actually, the real Homer as in Groening was as far from the show's Homer as a person could be.)

Springfield, Oregon, has one feature very like that in the Simpson's fictional home town: Teledyne Wa Chang, a nuclear materials handling plant that dumped used radio active materials into an open pond on its property. This pond became a huge issue in the seventies, with the company successfully resisting attempts by government and private groups to get them to clean up their act. The movie producers selection of a New England was a marketing device, so let them bask in their short glory. Those in the know. . . Jaymes ghoti 20:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC) Actually, a Springfield, Illinois man says in one of the Simpsons episodes' opening act, they showed a sattelite viewing of Springfield and it showed that Springfield was in the exact spot where Springfield, Illinois. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1bullsfan (talk • contribs) 01:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, But the Springfield from the Simpsons can't be Springfield, Illinois. In one episode, they travel from Springfield to "Capital City." As Springfield, Illinois is the capitol of Illinois, if the Simpsons lived in Springfield, Illinois they would not be able to travel to "Capital City" (which I'm assuming is the capital of the state they live in.) On a side note, I recently wrote a lot in this section about where the Simpsons home town can or can't be, and it looks like someone deleted it. Would someone care to tell me why? --AnticScarab3 (talk) 01:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

The "What State Springfield is in" question is a running gag in the series. Unofficially, Springfeild is in "New Takoma" according to SNPP. Doc Strange (talk) 00:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GAC review

Upon reviewing the article based on the criteria set forth at WP:WIAGA, I feel this article is very close to GA. I corrected minor mistakes myself as I read the article. Listed below are those things that need to be addressed before I list the aritcle at WP:GA.

  • The second paragraph under "Opening sequence" needs citation.
  • The first paragraph under "Influence on television" needs citation.
  • In the third paragraph under "Merchandise", "The best known single is "Do the Bartman", which was co-written by Michael Jackson[71] and became an international success." needs citation.

The nomination has been put on hold for no more than seven days while these issues are addressed. Let me know if you have any questions or disagree with any of my recommendations. Regards, Lara♥Love 07:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I added refs to all the things you said, but I'm still not sure exactly what you meant for the TV influence section, although I did ref the South Park point. Gran2 13:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The article has been listed at WP:GA under Media subcategory of the Social Sciences and Society category. Thank you for your hard work. In improving this article, you have improved Wikipedia. Regards, Lara♥Love 17:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Can someone tell me how to do this?

If you look at the page for ANY South Park episode, on the far right there is a list of all the episdoes in that season. This is in the simpsons too, but in the South Park version there are two arrows at the bottom of the list that link to the preivious seasons episodes and the next seasons episodes. I think this should be included in the simpsons pages because it makes navigation extremely easy. You can easily surf the seasons looking for a specific episode, where as in the simpsons you have to go to the "list of episodes" everytime. This is very annoying. I would do it but I don't know how. Can someone tell me exactly how to do it?

I gave it a try, and I couldn't figure out how to do it. It's not really THAT hard to surf seasons, afterall, there is a master list of episodes. -- Scorpion0422 23:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah but I just want to bring the simpsons up to speed with south park. it is a better show after all. My main question is wether the change in code to make the arrows has to be done for every single episode. I'm making an accont soon instead of just doing it at school and i want this to be one of my acheivments.--203.27.231.250 00:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
There really is no problem with the format as it is, and South Park uses an OLDER style of code. I really disagree with completely changing everything just for something as trivial as "next season". There is a link to the list of episodes, that ought to be enough. -- Scorpion0422 01:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah i suppose it is pretty trivial but it would still be handy. anyway can someone tell me how to do it?--User:203.27.231.250|203.27.231.250]] 04:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Swedish dub?

It is stated in the article that the show has been dubbed into Swedish. However, if that's true (no sources for that) it has never aired on Swedish TV. In the main article about the subject, a swedish dub isn't mentioned. Since the simpson article is protected, could someone please change this minor, yet annoying, error. 81.170.134.178 01:03, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

According to this, the show airs on ZTV. I don't known if it's dubbed in Swedish, though. Zagalejo 03:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
I just copied it from this [1], which is clearly cited. Gran2 06:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quayle or Bush?

I'm pretty sure it was Dan Quayle who made the comment about The Waltons (not George W. Bush). Laurel Papworth 22:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

You're wrong. There's video of Bush saying it, it's included as an extra in the season 4 DVD. It was also shown at the very beginning of Stark Raving Dad. -- Scorpion0422 22:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

What's the name of the episode in which Homer takes a journey through a desert? The desert has a fake Marge, a talking fox/coyote and I think a giant pyramid. Zeldabalooney2006 05:18, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

El Viaje Misterioso de Nuestro Jomer (The Mysterious Voyage of Homer). If you have any other general Simpsons questions, feel free to drop me a message at my talk page. These pages are mostly reserved for discussions about the Wikipedia articles themselves. Zagalejo 05:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Question

is the simpsons rated R+18, R+15, R, MA+18, MA+15, MA, M, PG, or G? i know that it wouldn't be rated R+18, R+15, R, MA+18, MA+15, MA, or M but i just put it there for fun. also it probably wouldn't be rated G because it has some drug referances, sexual referances, some course language E.T.C, E.T.C and yeah —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sylvan wu (talk • contribs) 07:18:56, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

its rated pg on some eps and tv14 on others--Olavid 06:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
On at least one Halloween episode the rating is listed as TV 666, but this is, of course, parody.ROG 19 13:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
The Simpsons at best borders between PG and PG-13, and has been going toward PG-13 in recent years. The show was never meant for children, but for an adult audience like any regular sitcom Doc Strange (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I just noticed something weird

I ust noticed something. I watched the old Treehouse of Horror episode "Homer Simpson and the Devil". The donut Flandevil (if you watched it, you understood) gives Homer is exactly like the one in the Simpsons Movie title. But I am not sure in which article trivia I should place it. In the Treehouse of Horror IV article, in the main Simpsons article, or the movie article? I can forget about the movie article because I can`t post anything. So I have two choices left. Where should I place this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gamesrcool (talk • contribs) 22:36, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

Preferable nowhere. It is most likely a coincidence, because how many possible designs for a Simpsonized doughnut are there? And the show has a tradition of using pink Doughnuts, like in Stark Raving Dad. If an article is published in which a member of the production staff admits that the similarity is intentional, then it should go into an article. -- Scorpion0422 22:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
that dounut is what most simpsons donuts look like, though you bring a good point, I think this episode where that donut design originated--Olavid 06:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Main page update

I think I'm going to request December 17, as it is the day that Simpsons Roasting first aired, although I won't be able to do so until November. I was going to request September 23, but I would like a Simpsons FA to hit the main page on a day that doesn't make it seem like advertising. -- Scorpion0422 01:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jack Kricfalusi

The creator of Ren and Stimpy doesn't think too much of The Simpsons, as well as South Park and Family Guy. Should that be included? --78.16.24.52 20:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a source? If so, then it probably could be included. -- Scorpion0422 00:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
The creator of Ren & Stimpy is JOHN Kricfalusi, and on his blog (johnkstuff.blogspot.com) he has criticized the Simpsons, South Park, and Family Guy primarily for having (in his opinion) mostly uninspired and unimaginative animation and a limited number of emotions expressed by the characters in these. However, he has praised the Tracey Ullman shorts. I suppose John K. has what might be called a love-hate relationship with the Simpsons. --JFP 19:56, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor edit needed - page appears locked

Can someone change the "Setting" section so that it does not read "the show has become intentionally deceptive in regard to Springfield's location". It shoud say intentionally evasive. It has never tried to deceive, but does evade the issue, for example having someone stand in front of a map just as someone points to Springfield, so we can't see where they're pointing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.161.52 (talk) 22:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Color quality

What's up with the relatively low color quality on Simpsons episodes from earlier and even not-much-earlier seasons? Is there any explanation? They seemed to be colored very cheaply even after the series had become wildly successful and presumably the budget was higher, as well as beyond the era in which cartoon quality in general was raised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 23:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

"This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Simpsons article.

This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject." The short answer to your question, though, is that it has nothing to do with money, but with what animation techniques were available at the time and how long they took. I believe the difference you are noticing is the difference between traditional cel animation and digital ink and paint. Natalie 23:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Flintstones

"The Simpsons was the first animated program in prime time since The Flintstones in the 1960s."

This statement is inaccurate. There were quite a few prime-time animated shows between the Flintstones and the Simpsons (such as the Jetsons, The Alvin Show, The Bullwinkle Show, Top Cat, Wait Until Your Father Gets Home, and I think Jonny Quest). However, these shows were nowhere as successful as the Flintstones (and the Simpsons, Family Guy, etc. would be in the future) and they generally only lasted a few seasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Pannozzi (talk • contribs) 20:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Most of those went off the air while the Flintstones was still running. "Wait Until Your Father Gets Home" is the exception, since it aired in the 70s, but I can't verify that it was a prime time cartoon. (I wasn't born yet.) Do you have a source saying that it was? Zagalejo^^^ 20:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, this site suggests that it was. We would probably need a better source than that, but it's something to look into. Thanks for bringing it up! Zagalejo^^^ 20:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, it's "Wait Till Your Father Gets Home". And we have an article on it which also says it was a prime-time cartoon. Zagalejo^^^ 20:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
OK, fixed. I found a book source. Zagalejo^^^ 20:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
  • But the Jetson's prime-time run ended three years before the Flintstones' did, and the 80s Jetsons cartoons were shown in late afternoon timeslots, according to my research. Zagalejo^^^ 00:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, it was still a prime time show. Reginmund 00:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Well so what? It was, yes, but what Zagalejo means was that it ended before The Flintstones and before Wait Till Your Father Gets Home, meaning that The Simpsons was the first sucessful prime time animation show since Wait Till Your Father Gets Home. Gran2 06:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Whati think it should say is that the simpsons are the most popular show since the Flinstones 1960. addy-gAddy-g-indahouse 22:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from Culturally significant words and phrases from The Simpsons

I'm beginning to wonder if the page is really necessary - the big one is d'oh, and it has its own page. Most of the words there really don't have true proof of cultural significance, they just have "in ____ it was used" with no sources. And for some reason, people seem to think that being mentioned in another Simpsons episode, in a book about The Simpsons or being the title of a little known book or song automatically makes a phrase significant. Recently many "lists of significant words" have been deleted, including a list of Family Guy words and a list of words from the Colbert Report. As such, I think it should be merged here because all of the really significant words are mentioned here, and have sources. -- Scorpion0422 18:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Gran2 18:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I also agree. Some of the words aren't that significant, like the Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys, but some are, like Kwyjibo (although it lacks any references...). Anyway, a merge would be nice. Xihix 20:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Same here, although Kwyjibo is important, even if it dose not have an article. Maybe the clown one can be mentioned on Coulrophobia? But the others can go. Rhino131 21:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, merging doesn't mean that the information disappears entirely - it just gets moved into a larger article. So the sourced, notable, relevant information in this article just moves to a paragraph in The Simpsons, with links to those words that happen to have their own article. Natalie 23:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I think merging might be necessary, but The Simpsons article is rather long; I agree, many don't have any references, and many aren't very well known. Heights 23:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, we already have two short paragraphs (The_Simpsons#Influences_on_language), so I'm guessing that not that much content actually needs to be added. Maybe one or two more sentences, which really won't affect the overall length of the article. Natalie 23:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Here's what I'm thinking:
D'oh and Cheese eating surrender monkeys are already mentioned in the article.
There are no sources for Can't sleep clown will eat me, Kwijibo, Meh or Okily dokily so they should not be mentioned here, at least not unless sources are found.
the Overlord meme doesn't seem that relevant, at least not according to the sources given. What are we supposed to say, "it was used in a magazine"? This is an FA, so better wording is needed
Cromulent should be added here, because it has been added to a dictionary, and it's sourced.
Yoink could be added, but I think we need something better than just being the name of a short lived file sharing program.
Again, this is just what I think, and if sources that prove a words notability can be found, then great, we should add them. However, I think a rule of thumb should be to only add words that have obtained widespread media use (ie. Cheese eating surrender monkeys) or have been added to a dictionary of some sort (other than wiktionary). -- Scorpion0422 00:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I've seen references to "Can't sleep clowns will eat me" on the net. I did a quick search on Google and found a song by Alice Coooper with that title. (Can't link to it because the site is blacklisted.) I put this here in case anyone feel encouraged to investigate these words and phreases further. /Jiiimbooh 13:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a section about "can't sleep, clown will eat me" in the page for Lisa's First Word, so I think it could be redirected there. -- Scorpion0422 16:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay, the merge is complete. What does everyone think? -- Scorpion0422 02:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, I don't care much for the Simpsons but I can't say that I'm thrilled. Words like "embiggen" now point to this article without being used, let alone explained. The article does not even contain a link to the entry in the wiktionary. The reason I checked? The word's use was noted in Nature. Rl 11:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Well add it in then if you have a source... The only reason it wasn;t included was because it had no source. Gran2 14:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm also in the process of redirecting most of the other words to the pages for the episodes that contain their first use. -- Scorpion0422 20:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Declining Quality

No doubt despite its steady popularity, the simpsons has somewhat decreased in the quality of episodes from the earlier seasons.Like the article says, now its basically too much emphasis on zany antics of characters, as opposed to deep character driven plots of ealy to mid 90s.

But even South Park, with its noteriety and longevity, has maintained its same level of crude, mature, contraversial style of comedy, even considering its 1992 short film origin.

Have the producers, or anyone on the show ever adressed this issue, or, not to be biased, could the writers simply have gotten lazy per se, in not maintaining the shows early style?. Rodrigue 23:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

This might provide some interesting leads. Zagalejo^^^ 02:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia mentioned on show

FYI: Wikipedia was mentioned in the 2007 season episdoe "I Don't Wanna Know Why the Caged Bird Sings". ZueJay (talk) 00:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

So? -- Scorpion0422 23:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meaning of Life

I'm not sure if I can edit the article because it's semi-protected, and I am probably not an authorized user. Maybe someone who is an authorized user could add some information about the Simpsons Mystery of Life board game that was released in 1991. Here is a link to a site with some basic information on the game: http://www.snpp.com/guides/games_mol.html. If you google around, you can also find out some more information about it. Chris Mo 05:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Generally, this article is just supposed to be a general summary about The Simpsons, and I'm not sure if it is necessary to list every board game based on the show. If it is an extremely notable game, then it might be worth noting. -- Scorpion0422 23:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I need approval

I would like to receive some sort of approval so I can post content that I need for my English homework. I plan on posting The Simpsons quotes. They are only selected kinds. I would like to post as soon as possible. Thanks in advance.

Wikieditor752 02:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Wikieditor752

This isn't the place for quotes. Try WikiQuote. And, I hate to burst your bubble, but most schools don't accept Wikipedia as a source. If you need quote sources, try [www.snpp.com this]. I can guarantee you that any quotes you post here will be immediately reverted due to the NONFREE policy. -- Scorpion0422 02:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bad source?

The use of the website Associated Content is somewhat controversial as many do not consider it a Reliable source. In fact, there has been a user removing it from all of the other Simpsons pages. I just discovered that we actually use it as a reference (#99) for board games and such. It links to this page. Perhaps we should try and find a better source? -- Scorpion0422 02:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Updating

Ok So I tried to update The Simpsons like relationships but they just keep getting deleted. May I ask why? Also by who? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petty773 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Your edits are reverting because addings things like "ex-boyfriend" and "ex-fiance" to the relative section of the infobox are not necessary because 1) They are not relatives and 2) The infobox is supposed to be a brief overview. -- Scorpion0422 03:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


--> But it is also very valueable information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petty773 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

No it's not, it's trivia and cruft and Wikipedia is not the place for that. Besides, if it really is important, then it's mentioned in the actual article. -- Scorpion0422 03:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


--> But I was told this is a place where we as people could add facts to a source if we see it lacks a fact. Now you tell me that certain facts aren't...well up to your standards? I don't mean to come off as cold or sarcastic this is just what I was told and how I feel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.133.107 (talk) 03:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


--> Once again I don't mean to come off as cold I would just appreciate a reply to my question. Please.

Wikipedia is a place for information, but the articles should just be overviews of the subject because Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscrimate information. -- Scorpion0422 03:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


--> I guess I can live with that for now it is still going to irk me when I go on a page and see... non-updated information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.133.107 (talk) 03:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm still not sure what your talking about. If the relationship is notable, it's mentioned in the page. Besides, boyfriends and girlfriends and fiancees are not relatives and don't belong in the infobox. -- Scorpion0422 03:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


--> What do I have to do to prove to you that they do?

[edit] Dubbing?

The Simpsons has never been dubbed into Swedish, I know because I live in Sweden.

That section seems to be based on the information cited here. I don't know if that's true or not... Zagalejo^^^ 19:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe one or two episodes has been dubbed, but it the article makes it sound like all episodes of The Simpsons are dubbed in Sweden, which is false. I have NEVER heard Homer speak Swedish and I watch the show everyday here in Sweden. :P Remove to improve.

So is the show normally aired in English? Zagalejo^^^ 01:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Simpsons always airs in English, like all other tv-shows. But with some translated text-lines.

I switched Swedish to Portugese, because a Portugese version has been included on the DVDs. However, it would be handy to try and find a source for that statement. -- Scorpion0422 01:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

According to an article in a newspaper once, the Simpsons were dubbed in Swedish once. Two or three episode aired, but the people revolted and the TV people scrapped the dub. -- FallenAngelII XX:XX, 2 December 2007 (GMT+1)

[edit] Snowball Info

I think it should be included/mentioned somewhere that technically Snowball II is Snowball III in one episode lisa was having some "Cat Trouble" snowball II ended up dying. she got two other cats and when they both died she got a third and it looked like the original, late, snowball II. She called it Snowball III but decided to say it was Snowball II to avoid confusion. I dont know the episodes name sadly. --JordanTuck (talk) 05:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)♫♫

No, that shouldn't be mentioned here. -- Scorpion0422 17:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Simpsons Themes

Some of the main recurring themes on the Simpsons include self-deprecation and plot drift, but other than what's in the episodes, I can't find any sources to back me up. Should I put it in the article? --Hydrokinetics12 (talk) 02:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

They're not really themes though, they're more along the lines of being recurring jokes. Either way, it shouldn't be added to the article without a source. -- Scorpion0422 02:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I think plot drift should be mentioned, but I can't find a source either. Plot drift is an orphan. --Maitch (talk) 14:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reception Section

Frankly, I don't feel like a description of what one internet journalist thinks of each Simpsons episode of this, the 19th season, is interesting, informative or encyclopedic. The "Reception" section should be axed, in my opinion.

The reception section adds notability to the articles, even if the reviews are from one idiot internet reporter. -- Scorpion0422 21:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough I suppose, although it still seems silly to me. Ah well, best to leave these matters to you experienced types. --66.31.169.12 04:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The new gag in the opening sequence

For the 19th season, a new gag started where some of the people Bart passes on the street on his skateboard (Mrs. Lovejoy and Chief Wiggum) say different things from episode to episode. First, my adding it to the article as undone as "unsourced". Then, someone claimed it's not notable enough. How is it notable enough? It's a gag that's probably gonna be recurring for every single time that segment is included in the opening sequence. It's also an extremely late addition, it took 19 years for them to add it. And it only takes up two lines to mention it. -- FallenAngelII XX:XX, 2 December 2007 (GMT+1)

First off, it needs a reliable source, second off, there are tonnes of recurring gags that are not mentioned. Third, it's only been in two episodes. For all we know, its just a late JABF thing. Fourth, it has not (and likely never will) gain the same amount of fame as the chalkboard and couch gags. -- Scorpion0422 14:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)