Talk:The Simpsons/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Board Games

The Simpsons are very popular and as a result they have many board games and video games (though some not as popular as others). Their resume' of board games include Simpsons Monopoly, Clue, and Jeopardy(as far as i can remember). Their video games is more extensive three that I remember are Simpsons Hit and Run, Road Rage and Krusty's fun house. If you remember any more feel free to add anything on thx.--69.1.20.34 17:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

um... if you look at the category, they're all there... - Adolphus79 21:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Why it became a hit

I think someone should add information about why the show became such a hit. There were many news stories on the subject. I may be able to do it myself, if I have time. If someone else would do it, that would be cool. I'm not sure where in the article it would go; maybe a separate section. Joey Q. McCartney 08:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It's already implied, if not explained in the controversy section. But there is no definitive factual way of explaining why the show became popular. TheHYPO 10:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Then why dont they sell it on iTunes anymore? --Haha169 16:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

What does it being not sold on iTunes anymore have to do with why it became popular? TheHYPO 21:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

What kind of an argument is that, including information such as it appealing to a wider range of ages is a far better argument than the amount of Itunes it sells(Neostinker 21:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC))

Ther reason they became a hit is simple they were the first of their kind creating an adult show that was animated and it also helps that they were a spinoff of an already popular tv show> for another reason look at the second entry in the next article.-Jopo2-69.1.20.100 02:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Critical quotes?

I noted that a quote from the TV critic of the Calgary times from season 2 was added to the article. I'm just wondering if this is necessary. In 17 years, I'm sure some critic from some publication has both confirmed and denied almost every opinion-based fact about the show ever... TheHYPO 21:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I've now revised it so that now all it says is that the show quickly became a darling of critics, who loved its realism and intelligence. I wasn't trying to focus on one news story. The Canada story is now just a cite, not quoted directly. Joey Q. McCartney 22:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that works better :) TheHYPO 00:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Al Shamshoon and other translations?

I'd like to see a bit on the 'Al Shamshoon' translation made for Arabic-speaking audiences. While the character name changes are at best trivia the changes made for cultural reasons seem more interesting. It seems that with translated versions a lot of the jokes fare much worse than happens with other commedies. Dgies 05:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

It may be intersting, but it's far from critical information on the show; perhaps an aritcle could be started for The Simpsons in other countries. or something. But I don't think adding such info to this article would be consistant with the goal of keeping only vital info about the show in this article. (IE: if someone were looking up The Simpsons, I don't think 'the changes made to the show for arabic countries' is one of the main things they are going to be looking for while reading this article. That is a more specific area of interest. TheHYPO 06:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

It is in the Broadcasting of The Simpsons article. --Maitch 08:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Hollywood Walk of Fame image

The image Image:Simpsons Hollywood Walk of Fame.jpg is copyrighted and it might cause us problems, because we can't possibly claim that there is now way the image could be reproduced as a free alternative. I was wondering if somebody who lives nearby or who is on vacation might be able to take a picture of the star and upload it to Wikipedia with a free license. --Maitch 12:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Try posting a request at Wikipedia:Requested pictures, too. Nuge talk 13:00, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure which category it belongs to. --Maitch 13:47, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Cut down headings?

I was just noticing how extra-long the Table of Contents has gotten. I was wondering if we should trim down sub-headings perhaps? Like in the 'Hallmarks' section, we have 4 subheadings and each has its own main article. Since we redirect to 4 articles, perhaps all we need is the 'halmarks' heading, and the subheadings could just be bolded, but not actual subheadings in the TOC. In addition, I'm going to trim that seciton down and get rid of things I think are 'trivial' in a main "The Simpsons" article, and are quite sufficiently left to the subarticles. TheHYPO 00:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

If you want to cut down on TOC clutter, then start with the ones in "Characters" and "Publications". --Maitch 04:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

First wiki; only wiki?

This is a general wiki question - I know the policy (in general) is only to wikify the first instance of something, but what is the policy on images? 'Homer Simpson' is wikified twice in images while also wikified the first time it appears in the text. But my main question is, shouldn't the policy of first-wiki-only-wiki be lifted for lists? IE: in the 'title family' section, I would think that would be the most important place to have the title family members wikified, so people reading about the characters would be able to click and read more... Is there any policy around wikifying list items even if wikied earlier in the same article?

Another image request

Here is another image request. Can anyone provide an image of the Bart Simpson t-shirt with the legend "Underachiever ('And proud of it, man!')"? The license needs to be free. --Maitch 20:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it "legal" to photograph someone's work of art and use it? Either way, I don't have that shirt, sorry. TheHYPO 14:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm no lawyer, but I can't see why it should be illegal to take a picture of your own t-shirt. If there are problems we can always use it as fair use. --Maitch 07:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Plot points

In reading the plot section, I'm finding that it's kind of over simplified and very specific about things. like 'when the entire family is involved, they often go on vacation'. I'm SURE that there are lots of other episodes where the entire family is involved and they don't go on vacation. And there are also vacation episodes where the plot is based on one or two family members. Like Bart's girlfriend troubles being the plot basis for them vacating to Toronto. Either way. I think that isolating episode plots to one character is very oversimplifying. Some episodes focus on one character, but at least 2 or 3 in the family are usually involved in the primary plot.

A mention of A-story/B-story plots might be valid too. I'd have to review episodes from the first season on, but I feel that this is a newer development. I remember the Superbowl/Vincent Price Egg-painting episode was a notable A/B-story episode. These (seem to me to) have been more prominent recently. They also seem to often try to tie the two plots together at the end (a la Seinfeld, though usually not as conveniently and not as amusingly, but that's just my opinion).

Long story short, I think the plot section is breaking the plots down in a way that isn't very informative or thorough. I'm just not sure how to rewrite it... TheHYPO 03:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I was planning to rewrite that section, because there are numerous omissions. Another thing I have noticed is the fact that they were "realistic" in the beginning and now is "cartoony", are written three times in the sections "Writing", "Plots", and "Criticism..." I'm going to move it all to the criticism section so the article can stay focused. --Maitch 07:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

This is a symptom of a problem I brought up before. "Writing" should not contain information about WHAT is written, it should contain information only on the process of writing. How the show is written, and by whom. (info on the writers and their process, not the writing itself). I do think the "Plot" section needs to elaborate a little on the evolution from realistic to faux. Not necesarily cartoony or 'bad', but it should reflect the change of plots from "The Simpsons dog needs an operation so they give up book subscriptions, lottery, beer" to "The Simpsons car needs fixing (thanks to a fish dropped from the int'l space station) so Homer and Bart become con artists, quickly earning a fortune." (just one of many examples). There's a few elements there.

• The realism of plot itself, which isn't anything special "The family needs money, so Bart and Homer form a get rich quick scheme"
• The realism of plot points which is the first problem "The family needs money because a fish fell on their car", the get rich quick scheme is becoming con artists"
• the realism of plot development which is the the second problem. Like, they become con artists, but then almost instantly they have gold chains, a pimped out car, etc.

Either way, I think it warrents Plot section mention about at least something like that; rather than just critique section. Cartoony is definately too vague tho. TheHYPO 08:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, we could probably write a very long section about the different plots, but I don't really think it is all that interesting and therefore it should be kept short. My plan is now to add information to the current section and move it to a sub article. I think that when we got a somewhat comprehensive main article it is easier to determine what should stay in this article. --Maitch 14:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

That's fair enough. Link to the item when it's underway and I'll do my best to help. TheHYPO 05:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Lost Episode & etc

• Years ago I saw a half hour Simpson special in which the Simpsons were in a rock & roll cartoon video. Haven't seen it since.

Comment on Cartoon & Live action shows on TV:

• 1) Some are good-if predictable plots-but last only 1 or 2 seasons-but fail-possibly because of poor ratings and/or because of poor scheduleding-prehaps that was the reason for cancelation of shows such as Starman; Dungeons & Dragons(TV Series), Ohara; Star Trek(TOS).
• 2) Others are just canceled with Cliffhanger endings-such as Darkwing Duck.
• 3) Still others-such as Scooby-Doo Where are You & TMNT-have orginal series that are either canceled-then come back as totaly new series in which the names of the characthers are the same-or have spinoffs-but its obvious that its just not quite the same as the orginals.
• 4) Yet The Simpsons just keep going on forever-who remembers the first season classic when Homer buys a RV and losses it over a cliff?? {BART HAS A RED HAT IN THIS EPSIODE}. For a time there were so many reruns of the first few seasons that the only new ones were the Halloween specials!!

Recurring Jokes slaughter.

I'm looking to slice the recurring joke section down. It will just continue to bloat itself to death unless it gets clearly defined; I'm not sure if wiki allows self-referential comments, but you can decide if you like this (probably aimed at Maitch, since you lord over the article):

basically the third paragraph would become the following and everything after it would be deleted or moved to the recurring joke article if it's not already in there.

Recurring jokes on the series have existed since the series began, and are far too numerous to list here. One of the earliest and most well known recurring jokes in the series were Bart's prank calls to Moe's Tavern asking for someone with a suggestive name such as "Amanda Huggankiss", "Al Coholic", or "Mike Rotch".

TheHYPO 05:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The policy on Wikikpedia is to avoid self-references, so our best option is to revert whatever bloats the section. --Maitch 07:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

We should make List of recurring joke on the Simpsons article then.--Greasysteve13 09:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Recurring jokes in The Simpsons. There seems to be a couple of people that make comments without actually reading the article. --Maitch 11:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

How about:

Recurring jokes on the series have existed since it began, and are too numerous to list. One of the earliest and most well known examples in the series were Bart's prank calls to Moe's Tavern asking for someone with a suggestive name such as "Amanda Huggankiss", "Al Coholic", or "Mike Rotch".

We really don't need to list Krusty Brand, VCR jokes, jabs at fox or the grammys in the main article; as none of those are defining aspects of the show (noone can say that the show wouldn't be the same without _____ (its making fun of the grammies; its Krusty brand jokes; its jabs at fox). The prank calls merely fit in as one of the best known and earliest examples of a recurring joke (and not a recurring theme like jabbing fox - it's an actual recurring joke where each occurance follows a template). And I say this having been the one to at at least one of the sections I intend to delete. Thoughts? Having more than one example of recurring jokes pretty much licences (or makes people think they have licence) to add anything they think is a prominent recurring joke. The subarticle exists for a reason... TheHYPO 20:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it might be okay, but I'm not sure that it would actually help. We already got a warning saying that you shouldn't add things to the section and people just don't care. On another note I do want VCR gags or sight gags to be mentioned, since they have been in the show since the beginning. --Maitch 20:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

While I agree, to the point that I was the one who actually put them into the article in the first place, there's a lot of running gags that have been in the show. You could ammend the above to add afterward 'one type of gag that has featured prominently throughout the show's run is the VCR gag' and cut the VCR gag paragraph down a bit. We'd still be saving space. But I'll be honest. There's a lot of gags that have lived long - that's why gags has its own article. I don't think VCR gags is so integral to the show that if someone came to this article to read about the simpsons they'd be missing out on a major part of history by not reading that particular paragraph. That's my two cents. I think it could still kill a notable ammount from that section though. I'll leave it up to you. TheHYPO 02:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit: BTW, if you read the wikipedia self-reference article, it is referring to 'don't say "wikipedia" in articles'. The first subheading, think about print actual advises using the phrase "this article" vs. "this site" so I think if you said the list is too long to go into in this article, that would be acceptable usage. TheHYPO 03:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead and rewrite the section. I still don't think it will help to write what you suggest, but I wouldn't mind your second phrasing. I recently added a warning against specifically writing that The Simpsons is set in Kentucky based on "Behind the Laughter", but it didn't take long before someone did it anyway. The section could be balanced better. We should avoid paragraphs with fewer than three sentences. If we just mention the catch phrases, prank calls, and sight gags I would be satisfied. I believe that the sight gags are important, because I'm pretty sure The Simpsons was the first show to do this. --Maitch 21:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll go do it on my own soon, but I don't know about 'sight gag's. As far as I know, any visual humour on its own is considered a 'sight gag' while VCR or freeze frame gags (which title do you prefer) are a little more Simpson-y. I know shows have been doing sight gags for a long time, but not necessarily sign gags, and at least not as a regular bit. TheHYPO 00:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, to be clearer, I want sign gags included in the section. It could be interesting to hear what a third person thinks should be included. --Maitch 21:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Music?

I was thinking that there should be a hallmark (or production?) section on the show's music; the elfman-theme part of the 'openning' section would be moved there as well as a brief mention of the shows notable feature of having a full orchestra (something somewhat common in cartoons now, but that was fairly unusual when the show debuted) as well a mention of the common use of parodies and original comedy lyriced songs (and the associated CDs). Finally a mention of the re-arrangment of the end theme for some episodes that have themes or homages. Thoughts? TheHYPO 05:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

There should be a short section about the music, but I think we should split the information between "Hallmarks" and "Publications". The show has released four CDs. Two of them contain original material/cover versions, which haven't been featured on the show. This is better suited for the publications section. --Maitch 21:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd still mention in the music section that there have been several releases related to simpsons music (including a songbook), and 'see the publications section' with a section link. TheHYPO 00:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Simpsons as Live action a hoax?

Why is the rumor of live action simpsons a hoax. The following articles don't share this view: article about Simpsons Live Action and the trailer. --84.134.24.63 19:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The Sun is a tabloid. Its use as a source is pretty much junk. Either way, I just read the article, and nowhere does it say that the there will be a live action show or movie. Your second link is dead, but I assume it's the live-action opening sequence. It was merely a promotional scene shot by SkyOne. It has nothing to do with any further planned live action entity. Also, I moved your comment to the bottom of this page; new comments on talk pages go at the bottom, thanks. TheHYPO 19:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The full details on the live action intro - The short clip is a live action introduction recorded for a tv advert on the uk cable tv channel sky one, which currently holds the rights to the new simpsons episodes in the uk. as the article on the sun.co.uk page says, it is only the opening titles, and that is all that will be made.

Name of town?

Was there a name for the city in Kill the Alligator and Run. I remember the town flag but I can't remember if they ever said a name....70.134.133.165 00:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Vacations

I think there should be a section on vacations that the Simpsons have taken over the years. --KChuck27 04:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Seems unnecessary. It would be mostly spoiler, and all of such trips are outlined in episodes' articles. I don't think that it's a fundamental aspect of the show, simply one of many plot devices. TheHYPO 06:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I concur, probably too trivial for the encyclopedic entry for The Simpsons. --WillMak050389 17:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Religion

I think that religion is a major part of the simpsons and it should be added to the character template. I would do it, but I am not that experienced with those. Rubedeau 17:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

This should probably be mentioned in the wikiproject talk page, not here. That said, Since the religion of MOST characters is not explicitly stated. Some can probably be inferred from people appearing in church scenes, but with the Simpsons, I wouldn't necessarily hold that as fact - writers could easily state otherwise in a future episode. Either way, For those that is explicitly stated, I think a mention in the article is fine. Almost every character is implied to be whatever Christian sect that the Simpsons themselves are, besides the few Jewish, Buddist and Hindu characters that have been explicitly stated... TheHYPO 19:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I started a discussion about this on the talk page about the Simpsons Character Template.Rubedeau 22:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Springfield and Shelbyville

An odd coincidence - near the end of "The Birdman of Alcatraz", Stroud (Burt Lancaster) says to his girlfireind that they are moving him to the prison in Springfield, Missouri. She responds that it will be close to her home in Shelbyville. This is the only reference I've seen to both towns in the same program, outside of The Simpsons itself.

Google Maps says the driving distance from Springfield, MO to Shelbyville, MO is 287mi, to Shelbyville, TN, is 580 miles, to Shelbyville, IL is 329 miles, to Shelbyville, KY is 508 miles, and to Shelbyville, IN is 483 miles. So obviously they aren't next door to each other. --bill 16:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

An interseting coincidence. The only non-coincidental explaination I can think of is that someone saw this film and it was in their minds when they wrote the neighbouring city into the episode it first appeared in. The fact that your second paragraph indicates there are a good number of Shelbyvilles also might indicate that it was chosen for similar reasons to Springfield in that both are common city names. There is also one in IL, as you mentioned that is not too far from Springfield, IL; though there are a good several dozen towns also in the same distance area. Who knows :) TheHYPO 23:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

If you look at Springfield, KY and and Shelbyville, KY, the distance is about 46 miles, closer than any Springfield/Shelbyville pair given above. Frasor 09:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

• In joke for "Springfield" geology?

On one episode when the King of the Hill family comes from Texas to Springfield Mr hill Complains they've come 2,000 miles to see the Texas football team loose. Anyone trying to figure out the State "Springfield" is in will end up either in the Oceans; the Canada/North Pole/; or Central AMerica!! It is an obvious in=joke on persons who take "The Simpsons" too seriously to find out where "Springfield" is!!

In the episode "Behind The Laughter" they say it's in Northern Kentucky

Ok you must understand, the simpsons don't live in any real state. The joke that the simpsons live in any united states is a recurring joke. There are many "hints" that say that the simpsons live in pretty much every state. Like the deposit of a bottle in springifeld is ten cents, which could only be michigan. Kentucky is probably the most mentioned place where the simpsons live. Like in "Behind The Laughter" and when Homer gives the Italian woman a coffee mug that reads "Kentucky". This is obviously a joke. --67.142.130.14 01:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Who cares? The glovebox is full of rotting ants at the moment, the line must be traversed. A crow 'pon my shoulder. Give it up, there is no exit. R.A Huston 08:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Episode update

I just added a link to the episode guide. I had spent ages trying to find one and it turned out the only one was in the intro under the text of the number of episodes. This is a lot easier for people. DarkSideOfTheSpoon 08:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

"List of vehicles in The Simpsons" currently up for deletion

List of vehicles in The Simpsons is currently an AfD candidate. You are invited to partake in this discussion. --Czj 04:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

No it isn't. The notice that's been sitting on the page is from November, 2005, and was removed two seconds before I got a chance to.--Anchoress 04:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

It was actually re-listed tonight by Hetar. Click this link - the new AfD is very much active. Czj 04:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

That's a bad-faith listing and should be closed. The most recent AFD was just closed a few hours ago. [1] Anchoress 04:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Czj 04:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Jump the shark information.

There is little if any informative value in the link to jumptheshark.com. There's three problems with the site.

First the site was created in 1997. In fact the first votes on the site refer to early 1998 moments. These votes are still counted in the final tally. Second voting here is annonymous so it's easy to overinflate the numbers in any direction desired. Third the fact there's no way to recind the votes, or change your mind, the only option you have is voting again.

What this boils down to is there can be X votes by a single person to any one field. Three or four differing votes from one person over a variety of fields. This can be seen on any tvshow that was not finished by 1997, There's multiple votes for "never jumped" that predate the major events that most fans considered jumping.

Considering there's no scientific or statistical data that can actually be garnered from the site, there's little reason Wikipedia should rely on it for a citation. This would be akin to a single person polling people for data. It wouldn't be considered Citable until it was possible to reproduce the data through other sources. I have not removed it but I think it's a serious enough problem that it needs to be removed.--Kinglink 18:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Well stated. Removed. -- Viewdrix 19:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Lengthened the intro

Okay, I've lengthened the intro to three paragraphs. Can I remove lengthen the intro to three paragraphs from the To-do list now? -- Spongesquid 22:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

If it is no longer something that needs to be done, then yes you should. The To-do list (and the wikiproject one) needs to be updated regularly.---Superman- 00:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Character image?

My personal opinion is that the new all-cast poster being used in the character section is even more intrusive than the old one (which itself was rather wide, but not that tall... now it's both). anyone think about reverting it? It is pretty unintelligable at its current size now. TheHYPO 03:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, I also find it visually distracting from the article. --WillMak050389 03:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The image is distracting and you can hardly see the characters because of the low resolution. I reverted to the old image. --Maitch 07:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Serial Storylines and Key Changes

Perhaps something should be said about big changes in storylines that have prevented the show from 'jumping the shark'. In particular, i'm talking about Maude Flanders death and Milhouses parents getting divorced: both I believe have provided plenty of comic storylines to fuel the show. Characters like Disco Stu, Duff man and the texan oil owner are new characters (who in my opinion are negative new changes to the show) who provide more jokes. In the last few years, it's argued the show has lost some of it's original charm, in some episodes seemingly parodying itself in trying to cram as many side-characters as possible to give their two cents. The makers have arrested this decline in quality. I think there is definitley something that should be said how the show has re-ignited it's success by, crucially, having serial storylines which as a rule, had always been avoided before. Bobbyfletch85 19:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so. Infact killing off a character is usually seen as the shark being jumped. DarkSideOfTheSpoon 08:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

There is a cat, but where is the dog?

Look at the picture in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Simpsons_cast.png Is there any special reason why this Panorama-picture includes so many characters and even the cat sitting on Marge's blue hair-tower, but not the dog of the family? Hans Rosenthal (ROHA) (hans.rosenthal AT t-online.de -- replace AT by @ ) (30082006)

The dog is climbing up Marge's left side to get to the cat TheHYPO 07:17, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, TheHYPO. I seem to have been blind not to see that the dog is climbing up Marge's right side (left side from the watchers standpoint) to get away from Homer's left side (right side ditto). So the picture is now comlete for me. Hans Rosenthal (ROHA) (hans.rosenthal AT t-online.de -- replace AT by @ ) (12092006)

Actually, I think I'm more curious where Maude Flanders is. Or is this picture supposed to include only "living" characters? Quixoto 01:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

There are several major characters who are not included, and several less major characters (ie. The Octuplets) who are in the image. It's a promotional image, so I'm guessing that she isn't on there because she died. Same with Lionel Hutz, Troy McClure and Lunchlady Doris. -- Scorpion0422 02:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy of production timetable

In the section "production" it states that it takes 6 to 8 months to produce and episode of The Simpsons. I have briefly done work in TV and film production and it definitley wouldn't take 6 to 8 months to produce one episode of a half-hour animated series. Either this is a typo or the information is correct. Please find out the correct production timetable and fix it. Thanks.

Raja 05:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, there is actually a reference for this statement. So if you care enough to actually read it, you will see where the information came from. --Maitch 07:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, first off you didn't have to be a douche about it. Second off just because something is cited, doesn't mean its true; a citation should be checked out and if you have ever done research on something, you should know that in order to state a fact that you have not concluded through your own studies and research, you have to cite multiple sources. Even though this is not the case, I think it should be removed pending further research and/or investigation.

Raja Abbasi 07:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

First off, he wasn't a douche. I thought he was perfectly clear without being insulting. I think you were the douche to say that his sourced statement was wrong and basically demand "please fix it because I briefly worked in TV, so I know the schedule of all TV shows."

Secondly, just because you think his source is wrong, is not a reason to demand another source. He has sourced the correct facts. If you have ANOTHER source that states that The Simpsons (not "I work in TV and so I know that a cartoon in general can't take that long") really does take fewer, then you'll have a dispute. But you can't just come here and say "I don't think it's possible. I demand you take the cited fact down until you can show me MORE sources. If it's unsoured, you might have a point (I stress might), but it's sourced.

THIRDLY, having just watched Season eight's commentaries through, I can tell you that someone in the commentary room states that it now takes around TEN months to complete an episode. Noone says this is typical in TV and film production, but the Simpsons does it. Contrastingly, South Park has a turnaround time of something like 4 days. Simpsons take a few months just to get from writing to rewrites to table reads to rewrites, to animatics and finally the stuff is sent over to Asia (is it still Korea?) to be animated. Then it comes back, re-takes have to be ordered and sent off, etc. It takes that long to get everything done. All the animation (as I understand it) is still done by hand, while colouring is now done by computers - though this is only a recent change).

And fourthly, yes, I very much admit that I am being a douche back to you, because I think your ignorant statement deserved such a response. If you don't have a source to back up your complaining about a source, the least you can do is ask if it's possible that the source is wrong. But you post that you have no source to back you up, but the sourced statement just feels wrong to you and think that's grounds for changing it? Quite silly. TheHYPO 08:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, well, it seems it was a misunderstanding. I misread the article and did not encounter in the entire part of writing, animation and actual studio time with the voice actors. However, I do stand by my statement of he or she being a douche, but I think we can all be friends, for the sake of Wikipedia. Anyway, thanks for the clarification.Raja Abbasi 19:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I know the guy (not personally) and he's not a douche. You said "This statement can't be right. I know TV". He replied "There's actually an article that shows that it is right that you can read to see where the statement came from", thus providing a source. I don't think he was being in anyway rude by doing so, particularly since you weren't providing a fact to the contrary, but just an opinion. TheHYPO 22:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Where is Springfield

I tried to edit the section of Springfield to add a possibility of where Springfield might be located, suggesting Kentucky. But a message appears several times in the editing section saying not to state Kentucky. I want to know why.

Although many people have devoted hours of their lives to try and dtermine the location of Springfield, people ahve failed to realized it DOES NOT EXIST in our reality. Matt Groening has stated himself that Springfield is a model to his hometown of Portland, Oregon (?). Sorry guys, I know it's a dissapointment, but hey, we all gotta live with it. --Raabbasi (Unsigned) 04:06, 4 September 2006

The same episode that claims it's in Kentucky is altered to say it's in another state when the episode reaired. Either way, the episode was called Behind the Laughter, and portrayed the Simpsons merely as actors playing a family. If you believe that Springfield is in Kentucky in that episode, it still doesn't mean that in the "real Simpsons universe", Springfield is in Kentucky. Either way, The discussion of such fake clues are left for the article which actually covers Springfield... Springfield (The Simpsons). I'm sure most of your questions about the location are answered there. TheHYPO 11:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember the title of the episode but it's the episode where Homer changes his name to Max Power. In the second scene co-works crowd around Homer. Then Lenny says,"Okay, he's about to do something stupid." Homer then spills fondu on his consel and the map with locations of powerplants about begins flickering. The light is in New York State far to the north. Then the state flashes, so I conclude that the Simpson's universe is in New York.

Shelbyvillle, the neighbour town, is in Kentucky aswell and there is a Spingfield in Kentucky, that may suggest that Springfield on the Simpsons is in Kentucky

Anyone who thinks its in Kentucky is wrong. See this website: http://animatedtv.about.com/od/springfield/i/whrsprngfld.htm208.254.193.190 18:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Tried to add the following as examples of writer creativity:

This has provided the writers with a running gag/mystery of concealing the state where Springfield is:

In one episode featuring Rodney Dangerfield, the conductor yells at Rodney’s character that the train is heading to Springfield. Rodney asks "Yeah, great, what state?" The train whistle blows loudly at that moment muffling the response.

Another episode shows Marge calling to complain about missing feet from Vincent Price's egg kit. She leaves a message and gives the full address--"... Evergreen Terrace, Springfield, OH-HI-O Maude!!!" (Marge waves to Maude as she walks in just at that moment).

Another episode featured Superintendent Chalmers telling Principal Skinner that Springfield Elementary was the worst ranked school in Michigan. But then added that that’s why it was moved to a different state.

In the episode where the family went to Brazil to find Lisa’s penpal, the young boy said that he wanted to write but didn’t know what state she lived in. Lisa replied that if he “followed the clues, you can figure it out.”

A nice picture

Hi there. I got this screenshot I made from the show a while ago. I don't know where I could use it here and if I even should, but I like it, so I thought I upload it and let you guys decide if you want to use it: Image:Simpsons_Pull_Homer.jpg
# Ido50 (talk to me), at 15:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

The guidelines on screenshots is that they are generally only to be used as an illustration of a point or in discussion of the screenshot itself, and their use should be limited within articles. I don't think the screenshot adds anything to the article that merits adding a copyrighted screenshot. Posting is appreciated though. TheHYPO 20:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I kinda figured that. That's why I asked instead of just adding it to the article, though I do think it could be used to describe Homer's personality. Anyway, nevermind... # Ido50 (talk to me), at 20:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Timeline?

I was wondering why no one has even mentioned the fact that show has been in the same time (year) since the show began judging by bart and lisas age. Im not sure what to write but I would imagine it would mention the stange/funny nature of this means there has been multiple bithdays, christmasses and that the simpsons have lived though many of todays world events while remaining the same age. I think it deserves a mention at least

If you read the article it says the following in "The title family" section:

"Despite the fact that numerous yearly milestones, such as holidays and birthdays, clearly pass, the Simpsons do not physically age, indicating some form of a floating timeline. Nevertheless, their rich body of experiences has formed significant character growth."

--Maitch 21:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, they haven't actually been in the same year, they've been the same age in different years. Anchoress 00:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Were you writing it up, I wouldn't use that phrasing. The show rarely if ever explicitly states its year. More aptly, they have been the same age dispite the timeline of the series progressing. I'm pretty sure that y2k was represented, but other events have been represented in other times which are accurate to when they occur in real life.

No that's not true. They don't often mention years, but they do it on occasion. And I don't understand your last sentence, sorry. Anchoress 15:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I said rarely. I don't often see the actual year stated in the dialogue or onscreen, even if it may be implied by events or action, it's not explicitly stated that it's "2003" in the dialogue. Even if there is a time-sensitive event going on (I could be wrong but I think they do mention the olympics for example once or twice in an olympic year, but they dont' say "The 2006 olympics". In flashback episodes they often say years, but the characters are also younger in those scenes so the no-aging but years pass statement wouldn't apply to flashbacks anyway. Long story short, I was just pointing out that the word "year" shouldn't really apply, since the person isn't suggesting one year is looping over and over again but rather than time doesn't pass from week to week, which isn't necessarily an apt assessment. It's very difficult to tell really. Are the creators having 17 years elapse but simply not aging the characters, or are they saying that time really hasn't passed (I mean, I know all episodes aren't happening simultaneously, but is it all in the same "timeframe") and are simply modernizing and updating that same timeframe to be more current. Frankly, I dont' think it's an issue that has to be addressed, but it would make for an interesting debate. That's why it's a floating timeline. Because in the Season 18 openner, it is presumed that all events from the first 17 years have occurred, and maybe even occured in order, but there is no assignement that the first episode happened x years or months or days ago. In fact, I am pretty sure the creators could get away with saying that any event happened any time ago "remember when I went into space?" "That was 2 months ago." If they wanted to, and probably completely alter that timeline in a future episode. There's obviously no way to argue it as most cartoons don't follow a timeline that could be construed as real life. TheHYPO 21:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Bart Simpson the Religious Fundamentalist

"Also, serious character changes are viewed by many as a bit too much of a change, such as Barney becoming sober, Homer seemingly clinically retarded, and Bart becoming fanatically religious."

Does the "fanatically religious Bart" mention refer to anything? --Liberlogos 00:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Brunet "Bart" Simpson?

Bart's full name is Bartholomew Jo-jo Simpson, but in the link list at the bottom of the page he is listed as Brunet "Bart" Simpson. Shouldn't he be listed as Bartholomew "Bart" Simpson instead? I just thought i'd let you know :-) -- Zestos 19:47, 16 September 2006 (BST)

It was a vandal who changed it. It has now been reverted. --Maitch 19:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Another recurring joke/theme concern's Homer's sexuality. A very thorough case could be made that he has his flamboyant, possibly even curious, side.

Antonio Meucci

This was recently added to the article on Antonio Meucci.

In the television series The Simpsons, the family visits a museum of inventors and a picture of Alexander Graham Bell is placed on top of a plaque reading "Inventor of the telephone" with a small picture of Antonio Meucci beside him with a plaque saying "You stole it from me." Graham Bell then replies "Read the patent, bitch."

I'm skeptical. Can any of you Simpson experts confirm or deny the existence of such an incident? Dpbsmith (talk) 01:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

This has a reference for the quote in the episode where the cemetary moves next door (don't know the name off the top of my head), but says it is Elisha Gray, not Meucci. – AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 13:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Almost 18!

The Simpsons have been here about one generation, and is STILL running. Is there any shows still running for this long? --66.218.11.241 03:32, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

To quote the article, "The Simpsons is the longest-running American sitcom, and the longest-running American animated program, to date", let alone currently running. However, other shows, say, game shows like Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, Price is Right have been on for longer (and with many more episodes), as have some news shows. Law & Order premiered in 1990, about a year behind Simpsons, and is still going with only 10-fewer episodes. Also, the show is not almost 18. 1989-2006 is 17 years. The show is just beginning it's 18th season. TheHYPO 13:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Simpsons isn't funny anymore as far as the current season goes. I am just not laughing as I watch the show. It's more of serious family situations than anything that's very funny. The jokes aren't funny or anything. I think they should have ended by now. THat's not to say that I don't love them. I just haven't loved them as of late. There is no humor. I remember loving the DVDs but not anything current really sort of how Friends got stale toward the end. But I think I realized why I'm not laughing as much at the Simpsons. In May, I started watching South Park on Comedy Central and a local station that started airing it. I probably laughed through every episode I watched of this summer, at least 40 times for each episode. South Park is by far much funnier than the Simpsons and Family Guy. However, Family Guy is definitely in 2nd place. Twentyboy 06:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Great for you, but what does that have to do with the article? --Maitch 17:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Simpsons not being funny anymore is great for me? 65.31.99.71 20:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

The point is. We don't care what show you like or don't like. Go to IMDb or anywhere else for that. This discussion is only for discussing the quality of the article. --Maitch 20:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Um.. in the article, it states that the show used to be based on real life situations, but has moved away from that. Derek♥ 23:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Good article?

Isn't this a good article? NorwegianMarcus 12:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

If you're referring to whether it's listed as a 'good article' by Wikipedia then yes. It's the second boiler plate from the top of this discussion page. ~~ Peteb16 12:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

It won't let me edit the article because of a "spam protection filter"

I'm trying to fix the word "gratist" but when I remove the word the spam protection filter comes up. What's going on? --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 06:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Problem fixed. One of the external links was setting off the spam blocker. Its erased now. Gdo01 06:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I think TVRAGE.com was just added to the spam filter as I had issues with several tv relateed articles with that link last night. L0b0t 11:34, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

What Happened To The Simpsons?

There were new episodes a few weeks ago but now all there is at 8:00 is Americas Funniest Home Videos. AFV sucks and I dont understand why it took the Simpsons time slot. Did they move the Simpsons?

Before answering, may I give you some advice? In future I would avoid discussing this here as it is against the rules. Discussion in these pages are supposed to be directly relevant to the article they're linked with. Secondly you should always sign your comments with four tidles like this ~~~, this changes when saving to show your user name (or IP) and the date and time you left the message. That way people can easily identify who is leaving a message and of course when. Advice aside, I'll try and be helpful here and inform you that the next episode (according to TV.com) will be broadcast on November 5th. ~~ Peteb16 17:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Song from Marge vs SSCCATAGAPP

I cannot figure out what the name of this song is or who sang it. If you can't remember the episode, the song sounds like Hendrix's Along the Watchtower, only with a female singer, who sounds kind of like Janis Joplin or Heart (who sang Barracuda).

It's on the episode where Marge takes Maggie to the Roofie concert for babies, and then ends up fighting singles and starting a voter initiative, and the song is played at the beginning of the concert after Marge says, "It's as if a concert promoter acted unscrupulously!" It's not listed anywhere as having ever been played on the episode. I've checked imdb. 64.119.53.133 02:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

It's the Rolling Stones, no? L0b0t 02:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Gimmie Shelter maybe? L0b0t 02:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Danke! 64.119.53.133 04:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The "I'll Mace You" Quote

Has that clip ever been used in a real episode. I'm not talking about clip shows or anything. I mean has it been part of the storyline for any episode. I'm confused as to why it is shown in the clip shows without having been in an episode, as I feel is the case. Kaiser matias 18:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Scene from movies

I didn't notice anything about scenes from movies. I think that this is also big part of the show. In many part there are small scenes that are taken from other movies. Good example is reference to Pulp Fiction. I'm not sure in which part (21 short tales about Springfield?) it appears but cops are sitting in Krusty burgers and talkgin about small difernces between McDonald and Krusty burger. This is taken from Pulp fiction where they talk about diferences between mac in europe and us. There's many of scenes like this one but you need to be very carefull to notice them

Yes, I agree, I'm often fascinated when I see that a scene is clearly alluding to a film and often keen to find out what it is (took me a while to work out that the Ribwich scene was from Requiem for a Dream - ah I notice that's an update needed to I'm Spelling as Fast as I Can). I guess it would be good to create a page like List of songs featured in The Simpsons, or any other suggestions for a format? --Mortice 20:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Deleted paragraph

I deleted a paragraph of character changes - I felt that the changes to Homer and Bart were subjective and ammounted to original research, and the change to Patty wasn't so significantly a character shift as to be notable. (She was never constantly dating or interested in men at all turns before coming out - even when dating Skinner she wasn't thrilled about the idea of dating in the first place. Besides all this, it felt like unnecessary addition of spoiler info that didn't need to be there. The Patty thing didn't ammount to any more of a character shift than Lisa's vegitarianism or Buddhism, neither of which is generally brought up as a major change that ruined the show.

For what it's worth (and it's just my opinion), I think the only reason the show is crap now is because the dialogue has entirely shifted from believable to totally stilted. There was a rerun from last season on tonight in which the family goes to a baseball game, and meet a player who's having problems with his marriage to a singer, and asks Homer and Marge to act as marriage counsellors. I personally don't think this is more farfetched than some of the mid-season episodes (say, seasons 5-8). The difference was more in a) how the lines are just delivered unrealistically and (to a lesser extent than I think is generally claimed) b) the jokes aren't as funny. But I think they would be if the dialogue were more realistic and it was delivered better. Specifcally I think Julie Kavner isn't delivering lines half as believably as she used to, but everyone is guilty. The believability is also hurt by overuse of the 3 male voice actors for every minor character while they are running out of original voices. (the 'skinner-esque' voice shows up way too often as a one-shot character.)

I think the writing and directing problems are secondary, though they are present. For example, I think they milk jokes too long (there were a few good jokes in the aforementioned episode that I laughed at but then they keep the joke going to a disbelievable extreme of in your face obviousity. I think some of the other jokes aren't as funny because they don't stem from the plot itself but a bit more from outside randomness (yet, this is why Family Guy is funny. I'm not sure why Simpsons fails with it other than the fact that it's not that funny when they do it, and because it's not what is expected of the Simpsons) TheHYPO 07:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Good call on the removal. I think an even bigger problem is that we can not include things like that unless they have been said by a verifiable 3rd party source, preferably a professional media writer or critic. As editors we may only add info to an article if a secondary source has already thought of it and published it somewhere notable. As an aside, I plead with everyone who contributes to articles about television show to PLEASE familiarize yourselves with WP:EPISODE, the calibre of writing on Simpsons, South Park, Pokemon, and most other cartoon show articles is just atrocious, barely high school or secondary school level. Not only does that make for poor articles but it makes Wikipedia look bad. This is a serious encyclopedia, not a fansite. There is no room for quotes (they belong at Wikiquote), or scene by scene breakdowns, or bulleted lists of jokes from the show. L0b0t 12:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Why they are called "The Simpsons"?!

I recently read an article on Ulysses S. Grant (the 18th US President) to discover his middle name was in fact Simpson. Considering (the ancient greek) Homer wrote about Ulysses, there seems to be a very strong connection between Ulysses Simpson and Homer Simpson. Is this why they are called the Simpsons?

Has anyone seen an interview with Groening where he speaks about this? --Ethikos 17:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't have anything to cite for you, but I've read that Groening picked the name Simpson because (a) of its commonness (sp?) and (b) the etymology of the name Simpson means "son of a simpleton," which is of course apropos to what Groening wanted to convey with the family. Vbdrummer0 21:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

ACID

I'm just wondering, how about nominating this for ACID? Go Futurama! Sp3000 09:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposal for managing song lists on Simpons episodes

I'm proposing changing the way we manage lists of songs in episodes. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/Proposal for managing song lists on Simpons episodes which has a full explanation of the proposal. Please leave comments there --Mortice 22:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Voice Actors

I'd just like to say that the article is MUCH better than it used to be, kudos to User:Maitch and everyone else and I'll certainly vote for it next time it's up for featured article nomination.

But, there are a few sections that are good, but are cluttered, most notable the voice actors section. The easy way would be bullets, but you are right that it wouldn't look very encyclopedic. I tried giving each voice actor a paragraph and it doesn't look any better. So, I'm curious if anyone has any suggestions for how to unclutter the section. -- Scorpion0422 14:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I still have to do some copyediting and some other things, but I think FA is reachable. Although the process would be faster if people didn't vandalize the page 5-10 times a day. Everybody is invited to help.

I don't think the voice actors section is that bad, but I believe some of the problems could be reduced by removing all the character links. The section is generally overlinked, but then we won't have links to these characters. One thing I know about the FA process is that they don't like bullets, but they can accept *small* tables. Maybe that's a solution. --Maitch 22:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

How about this, yes I know it isn't small, but its as brief as I could make it...

Name	Character(s)
Main Actors
Dan Castellaneta	Homer Simpson, Abraham Simpson, Krusty, Barney Mayor Quimby, Willie, among others
Julie Kavner	Marge Simpson, Patty, Selma and Jacqueline Bouvier
Nancy Cartwright	Bart Simpson, Ralph Wiggum, Nelson Muntz, Todd Flanders and Kearney
Yeardley Smith	Lisa Simpson
Harry Shearer	Mr. Burns, Smithers, Principal Skinner, Ned Flanders, Lenny, Reverend Lovejoy, Dr. Hibbert, and many others
Hank Azaria	Moe, Chief Wiggum, Professor Frink, Comic Book Guy, Snake, Carl and Apu and many others
Other Voice Actors
Pamela Hayden	Milhouse, Rod Flanders and Jimbo Jones
Tress MacNeille	Agnes Skinner, Lindsey Naegle, many minor characters
Russi Taylor	Martin Prince, Sherri and Terri and Üter
Marcia Wallace	Edna Krabappel
Doris Grau	Lunchlady Doris, other minor characters
Maggie Roswell	Helen Lovejoy, Miss Hoover, Luann Van Houten, Maude Flanders
Marcia Mitzman Gaven	Took over Maggie Roswells roles from 1999 until 2002
Karl Wiedergott	Bill Clinton, many minor characters
Regular Guest Stars
Phil Hartman	Troy McClure, Lionel Hutz, many other minor characters
Albert Brooks	Hank Scorpio, among others
Joe Mantegna	Fat Tony
Jon Lovitz	Artie Ziff, Jay Sherman, among others
Jan Kaczmarek	Constance Harm
Jan Hooks	Manjula Nahasapeemapetilon
Kelsey Grammer	Sideshow Bob

Waddaya think? -- Scorpion0422 16:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

That's why I said *small*. This won't cut it. Besides that we don't need a big list of cast members. It is already in a sub article. See List of cast members of The Simpsons. --Maitch 16:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Worth a try. I don't think it could be made a lot smaller and still remain informative. So, I guess the section in its present form is the best option.

Well, you can always use the table on the [list of cast members of The Simpsons]]. I'll try and have a look on the voice actor section tomorrow. We have to accept that we can't have everything in the main article. That's what sub articles are for. This article is a bit long anyway. --Maitch 17:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I have shortened the section now. What do you think about it? --Maitch 20:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Much better. -- Scorpion0422 01:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Small Problem with the music section

Several bands have names referencing themes, characters, or places from The Simpsons. Some examples are Noiseland Arcade, I Voted For Kodos, Rex Banner, Evergreen Terrace, Daddy's Soul Donut, Jebediah, The Canyoneros, Pinmonkey, Fall Out Boy, Vote Quimby, Stupid Sexy Flanders, Hot Rod Circuit, Poindexter, Maggie Speaks, Malibu Stacy, Worker & Parasite, Laszlo Panaflex, Mr. Sparkle, and the Rory Calhouns. The Bloodhound Gang made an entire song using only Ralph Wiggum quotes. On the album Bite Back: Live At The Crocodile Cafe the Built to Spill song Big Dipper is credited as Allen the Cowboy.

I think this is a good and necessary section as it shows the shows impact on all different forms of media, but it may create problems when this article is up to become featured again. Specifically, its lack of sources. I know a lot of the pages which are linked to say they are named after Simpsons quotes, but some members are real anal about sourcing. It certainly wouldn't hurt to get some sources because you would hate for the article to be rejected from making Featured status because of a lack of sources. -- Scorpion0422 01:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that the section is absolutely necessary, but if people can come up with sources within reasonable time, I would keep the section. I know that Fall Out Boy denies being inspired by The Simpsons. --Maitch 20:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I think I Voted for Kodos also denies being based on The Simpsons. I added a link to the lyrics of Ralph Wiggum. Perhaps if we can't find links for the other groups we should just include Ralph Wiggum in another part of the impact section. -- Scorpion0422 21:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, if we can't verify this information by the end of this week, I would like to delete the entire section. That The Bloodhound Gang has made a song entirely of Ralph Wiggum quotes is purely trivial and unneeded. --Maitch 15:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I was going to say that we should at least delete all of the bands without there own articles. But I'm now in favour of deleting the whole section. Especially the Rory Caulhoun thing. Gran2 17:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I've lost my fondness for it. If nobody gets any sources, just delete the entire thing. A song based on Ralph isn't that big because there have been many SImpsons references that aren't mentioned. I wouldn't object to the South Park episode The Simpsons Already did it getting some mention... -- Scorpion0422 18:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted the section. It helps with the article, but it still needs to be shorter. --Maitch

Comics with the magazine Geniuses

The magazine Geniuses (of Argentina) is relaunching comics of the Simpson. The first one I number wine with the magazine, and as of the second, they are bought separately. The price of the first one I number and magazine is of $5.90, whereas the one of the second is $4,90. Comics the newspapers positions of and magazine can be acquired in.

Large removing

Why removed the "Merchandise" heading. I mean "DVDs" "posters" all that... I don't like that, at least mention it, now you've removed a whole lot of useful information. NorwegianMarcus 13:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Run length question

What are the criteria being used in this article to determine run length? What's My Line and Monday Night Baseball both ran for 18 seasons, Cops has 19 seasons. Gunsmoke is mentioned as setting a record for 20 seasons. However, that is matched by both 48 Hours-20 seasons and The Red Skelton Show- 20 seasons, and exceeded by Late Night/Show with David Letterman- 26 seasons, 20/20- 30 seasons, Saturday Night Live- 32 seasons, Monday Night Football- 34 seasons, Walt Disney- 34 seasons, 60 Minutes- 39 seasons, and The Tonight Show- 53 seasons. All of these are also exceeded by Meet The Press which has been on the air every week since 1947 (although only 18 seasons of that were prime time). Cheers. L0b0t 16:34, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

More proof that you know nothing. With the exception of Gunsmoke, none of those are scripted prime time shows. It's the longest running American comedy program and American animated series and the article never once claims to be the longest running show ever. You really should try reading this stuff... -- Scorpion0422 16:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

What is your problem? I just asked a question. For the record, 48 Hours, 60 Minutes, Walt Disney, 20/20, and The Red Skelton Show are scripted prime time shows. I know the article does not claim longest run ever, what I did not know (and still don't because you decided to attack rather than answer) are the criteria the article is using to determine run length. L0b0t 16:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

If your asking what I think your asking, then the criteria is by seasons. Hence the title run length.

And my problem is that you clearly never watch The Simpsons and yet you continually revert and delete the work of the Wikipedia users who do. I stay out of subjects I don't know about, so should you. -- Scorpion0422 16:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

What episode that they parodied South Park? And also how come a TV-PG show make fun of a TV-MA show?!

There was a very brief South Park parody at the beginnging of Bart of War in which Bart and Milhouse are watching an episode of the show. -- Scorpion0422 01:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Can someone PLEASE protect the page?

I have read numerous versions of this article and it looks like its being vandalised enough to be at least semiprotected.Hondasaregood 07:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't look to me like it's getting nearly enough vandalism to warrant protection, but at any rate you should ask here rather than on this page. Anchoress 07:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I just don't understand what your standard for being vandalised sufficiently enough to be protected is.Hondasaregood 08:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's not my standard, it's Wikipedia's. Even pages being vandalised once a minute are often refused protection. I'm not telling you no; I don't have any authority to do so. I'm just offering my opinion, and a SUGGESTION of where you can go to get more help with this. If this page does warrant protection, you'll get it protected a lot quicker posting on the AN/I (which I linked to) than just the post here. Anchoress 09:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Protected

I've successfully succeded in getting this page protected by requesting protection!Hondasaregood 20:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Well done you, but please don't make section headers like that, ironically it may be considered vandalism. I've changed the header to something more appropriate. ~~ Peteb16 21:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think that the page needed protection. I mean it certainly wasn't constant vandilism. It really wasn't that bad. But as it is protected now there won't be a problem at all. So, good job. Gran2 22:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Edits by User:Lenzar violating WP:MS

The Wikipedia Manual of Style states that articles about American television shows should use American spellings. User:Lenzar is inserting British spellings into many articles including this one in violation of this and other rules in the Manual of Style and hiding behind a "minor edit" flag. See diff. Can someone with an account please revert the change and keep an eye on his account for further abuse? 4.227.107.146 22:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I reverted his edits. -- Scorpion0422 23:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Request for assistance - adding tags to episode pages

There's a project afoot to make some (invisible) updates to episode pages which will assist in generating lists of information for other pages, using ListGenBot.

If you would like to help out, there's details of what to do at Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/Addling ListGenBot tags to episode pages, and a table there where you can claim interest in editing a particular season. Thanks --Mortice 21:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Lead

I went through the lead, and made a few small changes. I felt it was important to mention who the family members were, so I added them and I rearranged things a tad.

Here's what I'm thinking:

• 1. The Simpsons is an Emmy and Peabody Award-winning American animated sitcom created by Matt Groening for the Fox Network. It became one of the first hits for the network, and is one of the most successful and critically acclaimed television shows in the history of the medium. The television series is a spin-off of a series of animated shorts originally aired on The Tracey Ullman Show.
  • The Tracey Ullman part seems tacked on, so it should be amelgamated into the paragraph better.
• 2. The series is a satirical parody of the "Middle American" lifestyle epitomized by its title family: father Homer, mother Marge, and kids Bart, Lisa and Maggie.
  • I thought it was important to mention the family, and this seemed the best place.
• 3. It lampoons many aspects of the human condition, as well as American culture, society as a whole and even television itself, being famous for its frequent use of self-referential humor, and meta-references.
  • I almost cleared the part about self referential and meta references, but I don't think it's mentioned anywhere else in the article. Is it important enough?
• 4. The Simpsons itself has had an impact on popular culture. Catchphrases have been used in real life and the annoyed grunt d'oh has been accepted into the English dictionary. The show has been cited as an influence on many adult-oriented animated sitcoms in the late 1990s, such as King of the Hill, South Park and Family Guy.[1][2] The Simpsons is also the longest-running American sitcom, as well as the longest-running American animated program, to date.
  • This sentence needs cleaning
• 5. Since it debuted on December 17, 1989, the show has aired 386 episodes (see list of episodes) in eighteen seasons. As of March 20, 2006, the show has been renewed through its nineteenth season, which would air in 2007–2008.[3] The eighteenth-season finale will be the 400th episode, and the 20th anniversary of The Simpsons franchise will be celebrated in 2007. A feature-length movie is currently being produced, to be released on July 27, 2007.[4]
  • This part seems fine to me.

Thoughts? -- Scorpion 22:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, first of all the lead should be three to four paragraphs according to WP:LEAD#Length. --Maitch 11:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Here's my reply to your comments:

1. We should mention The Tracy Ullman show in the lead.

2. Fine

3. It's not that important and we have a subarticle for that.

4. I've done a rewrite of that.

5. Fine

I've also merged the lead to four paragraphs. I think the lead is fine now. --Maitch 15:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The lead also mentions the awards twice. Once in the intro sentence, and later in a paragraph. This should be tightened up. Bytebear 08:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Question

Is this the most linked to page on wikipedia? I'm just asking because an insane amount of articles mentions it in their pop culture references. ex. "simpsons did it" on South Park. 69.139.0.62 03:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

No, but you can look at Special:Mostlinked, to see the top linked to pages. --WillMak050389 03:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The Simpsons is number 766 right now. Anchoress 03:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

20th Anniversary

Why is 2007 their 20th anniversary? 1989+20=2009, 2008 if you're counting 1989. 67.188.172.165 04:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The show began in 1987 on the "The Tracey Ullman Show." Go Futurama! User:Sp3000 04:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Need a reliable source

For some reason people don't count IMDb as a reliable source for information, so I need a new source which says that The Simpsons debuted on The Tracey Ullman Show on the exact date of 19 April 1987. Reliable sources include news paper article, books, documentaries, and DVD commentaries. I will appreciate if people can find this for me. It is important for the article to become a featured article. --Maitch 11:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

How about...

Ray Richmond and Antonia Coffman (1997) The Simpsons: A Complete Guide to our Favorite Family Harper Collins Publishers. ISBN 0-00063-8898-1

It's definately in there in the list of shorts on page 14. Any use to you? ~~ Peteb16 11:25, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Great, a paper source is the best thing we can get. Thanks a lot. I will include it in the article. --Maitch 12:44, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

You're very welcome and Merry Christmas. ~~ Peteb16 13:07, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you too. --Maitch 13:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Nelson's cat's name

(copied from The Haw-Hawed Couple)

Nelson had a cat in this episode what was his name.67.175.138.202 01:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Mooch 68.106.68.69 19:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Daniel

Fourth Anonymous E.P.

In the Production section is an uncited claim of a fourth, anonymous executive producer who wishes to avoid the press. Sounds bogus; I've neither heard nor read mention of this by anyone involved with the show, nor from any fans of the show. - JoshG

News to me. I reverted it. -- Scorpion 20:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Question from a Brit

In a few episodes, when faced with a difficult situation, a character, or characters will cringe and go something like 'Na-hur-hurgh!' Where does that come from? Martyn Smith 19:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

As a fellow Brit, I'm not entirely sure, but I always just thought it was an expression of something like fear, but less scary, as something bad has just happened. Or it's just something just made up, like "Doh" or "Woo Hoo!".Gran2 19:47, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a reference to the Three Stooges, they're referenced a lot. Cєlαя∂σяє^Talk 18:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's it. Specifically, Curly. --Jnelson09 19:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Though I'm pleasantly surprised to see that this has become a featured article, I think it could still use a lot of work. I've done a (very quick) copy-edit and corrected a few minor things, but here are some issues that might require input from more people:

• I like this quote and thought it might be appropriate in the criticisms category: "Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, once said The Simpsons was “one of the most subtle pieces of propaganda around in the cause of sense, humility and virtue," written in a recent profile of Homer Simpson in the Sunday Times (7/8/07).

• From the subsection Animation: The last episode to be animated by Klasky Csupo was "Kamp Krusty", in production order. What exactly does "in production order" mean in this sentence? It's just dangling at the end.
  • It means that "A Streetcar Named Marge" was aired later than "Kamp Krusty", but produced before the episode. --Maitch 10:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• From Setting: As a response, in more recent episodes, the show has been intentionally deceptive about the state, and nearly every state and region in the U.S. has been both suggested and ruled out by conflicting evidence. Hasn't the show been making jokes about Springfield's state since, like, the third season? (I'm thinking of Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington.) I don't think this can be considered a recent trend in the series.
  • I think that in the beginning the writers would just do whatever the joke required them to, but as soon as people started to "figure out the clues" they truly becan being deception. However, I do agree that we don't need "in more recent episodes", because it is very vague. What exactly is a recent episode? I would probably say seasen 16 to 18 and we know they did it before then. --Maitch 13:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• From Plots: The show has been rife with political satire over the years, often lampooning current and former U.S. presidents as well as other world leaders. Some examples include: Richard Nixon shown as a friend of the devil in "Treehouse of Horror IV", George H. W. Bush was portrayed as a cantankerous nemesis to Homer in "Two Bad Neighbors", Al Gore's seemingly banal personality being ridiculed, Bill Clinton claiming to have engaged in bestiality in Homer to the Max, and the United Nations frequently shown to be an incompetent and bickering organization. This passage is sloppily-written, and perhaps it could be more specific about Al Gore and the United Nations' appearances on the show. Has the UN really been a "frequent" target of the show, anyway? I can only think of one example off the top of my head (You Only Move Twice), but perhaps they've been lampooned in some of the more recent episodes that I haven't seen. Any help? Zagalejo 00:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• From the same section: There are many episodes of The Simpsons which are less pleasing to social conservatives; for example, in "Homer's Phobia", Homer overcomes homophobia and befriends a gay man, and the episode "There's Something About Marrying" promotes acceptance of gay marriage. Lisa Simpson, the most intelligent member of the Simpson family, is portrayed as an unabashed liberal. Someone should find a source (or sources) to back up the claim that social conservatives were displeased with these episodes. (I'm sure they were, but we do need some sources here.)
• From Recurring jokes and catchphrases: There are many running gags and catchphrases on The Simpsons, several of which have been retired during the series. Have any gags/catchphrases been intentionally "retired", or do most simply fall out of use after a while? I'm not sure about the wording in this passage.
  • Usually the retire a running joke when they can't come up with any more material. This was the case for the prank call joke. --Maitch 09:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
    • So, at some point, the writers agreed that they wouldn't do any more prank call jokes? Zagalejo 19:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• From the same section, second paragraph: Recurring jokes are also used. The way this is worded suggests that there is a difference between recurring jokes and the "running gags" introduced in the preceding paragraph. I don't think that's the intention here.
  • The article now uses "running gags" instead of "recurring jokes". --Maitch 09:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• From Guest stars: Many episodes feature celebrity guests contributing their voices to the show, as either themselves or as fictional characters. In the early seasons, it was common for guests to play a character, but during seasons 7-13, guests playing themselves were common, often as a cameo without a significant plot connection. Just during seasons 7-13? I don't know; I think this whole section could use a rewrite. There was no specific moment when celebrities started playing themselves. Tony Bennett appeared as himself, in a mostly insignificant cameo role, way back in season 2.
  • I decided to removed the section and added instead a link and a sentence to the "Voice actors" section. --Maitch 09:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• From Impact on television: It features some of the same editing, the use of sight gags, and does not use a laugh track like most sitcoms. We should be more specific about how the editing of The Simpsons is similar to Malcolm in the Middle, because I'm not sure myself what the similarities are.
• From Merchandise: Music is featured in The Simpsons, with characters breaking into song during the course of the series. The best known song is "Do The Bartman," which was written by Michael Jackson and released as a single, became an international success. The Simpsons Sing the Blues and The Yellow Album contained cover versions of songs, as well as some originals. Songs in the Key of Springfield and Go Simpsonic with The Simpsons are CD collections of original music featured in the TV series. In the United Kingdom, "Deep, Deep Trouble" was released as a follow up to "Do The Bartman". Is "Do the Bartman" still the "best-known song"? I'm not sure how you prove that something is "best-known," but a good number of younger fans have probably never heard of this song. I don't think it's been aired on TV since the early 90s, since it wasn't actually included in an episode.
  • Actually a short part of it was in the episode Simpson Tide. I would call it the most popular song because I did not even hear about the album until I listened to the commentary on that episode, however I did know about that song. I would call my self an avid, but young (18 years old) fan of the Simpsons so you are right about young fans not knowing much about the other songs on the album. Drunkcowofdeath 05:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

That's all I have for now, but I might come back with more suggestions later. I hope I don't come across as some sort of a Comic Book Guy. I just want to see this article succeed. Thanks, Zagalejo 00:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

For guest stars, yes Tony Bennett was the first person to appear as himself. I was always of the opinion that in recnt season guest star have been brought in for ratings, and do nothing for the story. As they say in Behind the Laughter "trendy guest stars". I mean, when a character is voiced by a celebrity, like Hank Scorpio, they are often considered to be one of the best characters of all time. But when they appear as themselves it doesn't always work. I mean in early seasons, Leonard Nimmoy as himself, both times it made sence, it greatly added to the episode and it was good. But then people like Tony Blair, where it was just weird, and added nothing to the plot. So pbviously you couldn't use what I have just said, as it doesn't make much and couldn't be cited, but I agree the section, and others, need re-writes. So that was a slight rant/point. Gran2 08:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The article still needs some work if we want perfection. I will continue to work on it. Thanks for the copyedits by the way. --Maitch 10:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm curious, how do we get the page on the Wikipedia main page? I actually know very little about Wikipedia outside of editing and I was wondering how we do it. -- Scorpion 15:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests is the answer, I was thinking, although it is a long time away, we coul ask for it on July 27, so it can coincide with the filmns release. But that's only if you would want its featureing to have some meaning. Gran2 16:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I think there are even better dates. 19 April 2007 is date of the Simpsons 20th anniversary and 20 May 2007 is the air date of the 400th episode. --Maitch 18:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Nerds

For editing and contributing these pages are best avoided due to the excessive amount of saddos and nerds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul210 (talk • contribs)

Why thank you for taking time out of your busy life to enlighten us with this world changing prophecy. Gran2 08:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The days are over where anybody can insert anything to the article. We want the article to maintain its FA status. If you want to have fun editing then go to another article, which has a lower standard. --Maitch 13:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You mean I can't insert a picture of Homer in a speedo? There's no reason to live! (Runs up stairs and rides a kayak off a mountain) -- Scorpion 15:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Well this debate mixes both Nazi-like oppression and 'idiotic-style' humour. Atlantis Hawk 12:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

FA

I've been off Wikipedia for a while so could somebody please give me a date of when this article was featured? 220.101.41.184 12:50, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

30 December. Gran2 17:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

It hasn't appeared on the front page yet, if that's what you're asking. It passed the FA process on December 30. (Honestly, though, I still think it needs a lot of work.) Zagalejo 20:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay good, I haven't missed it! Atlantis Hawk 05:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Quotes in the episode summaries

Is it really necessary to add a page and a half of quotes to each episode summary? They could both be considered spoilers, as on most pages, you can find all the jokes in the episode, and they certainly don't add any useful information. How about limiting them to the really famous ones (like the one about cheese eating surrender monkeys)? Sorry for not posting on the appropriate page, but I figured it'd be better to raise the issue here than on 390 separate pages. 217.211.102.6 23:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia frowns upon quote sections and we're actually in the process of removing the quotes from many pages, but it's not a priority, so nobody is devoting a lot of time to it. I remove the quotes from every page I edit, and I think others do too. -- Scorpion 23:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Mooch

Is Mr. Mooch Nelson's only pet?67.175.138.202 00:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Probably, considering his violent nature, and i can't find any other pets --Kzrulzuall 09:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Did Mr. Mooch have something in his eye in The Haw-Hawed Couple?67.175.138.202 01:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

You might have better luck posting your questions at the NoHomers.net Q&A thread. Zagalejo 02:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, why exactly is this essential to the main Simpsons page? Discuss it at the Nelson page at the very least. -- Scorpion 03:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Be nice. This User can talk on The main talk page if wants to. The Educational films should be on the Troy McClure page, but he or she they want to talk about it on this page they can if they want to.Kongsaurus12 21:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Bart - Matt or Mark?

In the introduction to the article, it is said that Bart is named after Matt Groening himself, but in the origins section, it is said that he is named after Groening's older brother. I'm not sure which is accurate, but I thought I'd point it out --24.62.34.122 00:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I thought he was named 'Bart' because it is an anagram of 'brat'. Trixovator 12:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

You read it wrong. Bart's character is based on Mark Groening, but his name IS an anagram of Brat. -- Scorpion 15:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The Bart Simpson article itself says that no-one really knows who he is named after, but points more in Matt's direction. Surely the articles shouldn't conflict? Trixovator 10:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, here's a second opininion, Bart got his name because it's an anagram of brat. Capisce?Atomic45 08:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

that makes sense, but the sections still conflict- based on Matt or his brother?

I believe I heard in an audio commentary or in an interview on one of the DVDs that Matt Groening said that Bart's name was originally going to be "Matt", but thought it would be too obvious (making the parallels from his family's names). In this case, he would be based off of Matt, himself. But without an exact source, this couldn't be added. So if anyone knows where that clip came from, we could use it to back up Bart's origin. --WillMak050389 04:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Archive

How come Archive 6 still has the edit sign? It's an Archive and it shouldn't have the edit sign?67.175.138.202 02:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I will do it, but I don't know how to do it.Kongsaurus12 01:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

If anyone knows how to do it, please fix it.Kongsaurus12 01:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Is any one listening. An Archive should not have an edit sign and please fix it.Kongsaurus12 21:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

It can not be fixed. It is just a page like everything else. --Maitch 21:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the user means that Archive don't have the edit sign and Archive 6 has the edit sign and it shouldn't be there like the other Archives.67.175.138.202 02:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Someone got got rid of the edit sign. Whoever did that...Thank You.Kongsaurus12 22:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Educational films

The Simpsons series is full of mock educational films, yet there is not a single mention about it in the article(?). Svetovid 23:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, there's only so much we can include in a hub page like this before the article starts getting incredibly long. FYI, though, there's a list of most of the educational films at Troy McClure's page. Zagalejo 00:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps said films could be mentioned at the Education in The Simpsons page. -- Scorpion 14:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I've had a change of heart. I think we could briefly mention the filmstrips in this article while describing how the show satirizes the American education system. At present, this article says nothing at all about Springfield Elementary, which seems like a significant omission. Zagalejo 15:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I want to do a complete rewrite of the "Plots" section, but I'm waiting for a book I've ordered in order to source it properly. The section should mention Springfield Elementary, but I'm not sure if it is really necessary to include mock educational films. It should however definately be in the Education in The Simpsons article. --Maitch 16:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Which book? I've got Planet Simpson and a couple others, Planet Simpson is an excellent book by the way - I'm considering making a page for it. -- Scorpion 16:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

"Leaving Springfield". It has been delayed until mid February. I would also like to read the philosophy book and Planet Simpson, but lets see what I got time for. --Maitch 16:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Anime Counch Gag

Which episode of Simpsons had the anime heroes and which family member was which anime hero67.175.138.202 02:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Again, you'd be better off posting this question at a Simpsons message board. This talk page is reserved for discussions about the Wikipedia article's content; it's not meant for general discussion about the TV show. But since I'm feeling generous, the gag is from 'Tis the Fifteenth Season. Here's a picture. Homer is Ultraman, Marge is Jun, Maggie is Pikachu, Lisa is Sailor Moon and Bart is Astro Boy. Zagalejo 04:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a message board. I realize that by writing this I am going against my own axiom, so don't bother pointing out the irony. Dflav1138 01:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Setting / Location of Springfield

Although this is a contentious subject, I'd like to offer something:

In the episode "On a Clear Day I Can't See My Sister" (346, GABF05), the couch gag is a zoom out from the couch, out from Springfield, out from the US and so on. When zooming out from the US, although the cartoonist's impression is not perfect, it is an approximate impression of the US landmass and seems to suggest Illinois as the home state. The location of the town of Springfield, IL agrees with the the couch gag location. Further evidence to this is the existence of a town called Shelbyville close to Springfield, IL. What say you? Should this brief hypothesis be added to the main page? Icezebra 14:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

No, this page is for general information and not speculation. discuss it in the Springfield talk page. -- Scorpion 14:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Repeats of the famous episode to have mentioned "Kentucky" have been revised to say "Missouri": http://animatedtv.about.com/od/springfield/i/whrsprngfld.h

i heard once that springfield borders kentucky, nevada, and maine. So ,with this said, perhaps we should wait for the upcoming movie we'll find out.--69.1.20.100 00:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The first two images

Are there for any reasons? I mean, a pig and a big key? What's the connection with The Simpsons? Gspinoza, 17:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

That was vandalism from last night. You should reload the site or purge your cache. Gdo01 17:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Revert

Why does someone keep reverting my action figure link? Instead of it looking like this> action figures, I made it look like this> action figures. Someone keeps reverting back! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supergeeky1 (talk • contribs)

Because it is against policy to make hidden links like that. --Maitch 11:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that. Supergeeky1 06:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Guiness World Record

The Simpsons won the Guinness World Record for Longest Running Animated TV Series, does any-one else think it's good for the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Atomic45 (talk • contribs) 08:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

The articles already stated that The Simpsons is the longest running animated TV series. People would assume that if they broke the record, it would be on the Guinness book of records. A small footnote towards the book will do, and its already on there. There will probably be no more reason to add any more information. --[|.K.Z|][|.Z.K|] 09:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Typo

Please correct "controvery" to "controversy" 13:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I have completed this for you [2]. Thank you for pointing it out. --WillMak050389 14:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Main page

I have a made a request for this article to featured on the main page of Wikipedia and requested April 19, because it is the 20th annoversary of the first Ullman short. The text I used is basically the current article lead, except with the cites gone and the last paragraph cut out. Any revisions or suggestions are more than welcome. You can find it here-- Scorpion 06:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Contradiction

In the introduction, it says that Groening chose the name Bart for himself, but in the next section, says Bart was Groening's brother's substitute name. Naysie 01:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

It is explained better in the Bart Simpson article. I have removed it from this article, because it is not that important and people keep asking about it. --Maitch 19:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Bart's character is a composite of Matt Groening and his older brother, Mark. However, the name came from an anagram of "brat." --Jnelson09 19:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

D'oh

I just looked up this word in the Oxford English Dictionary, and apparently it has been in the language since the 50's. This is problematic for the intro section, although a simple fix is possible. If we could find a specific date at which it was added to an American Dictionary, that would satisfy me, as the argument is that it entered the popular American lexicon through the Simpsons, not that it entered the language this way. Wrad 06:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the article could say that the show popularised the word? It certainly did that. --Mike 09:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Spoken version of article

I would like to record a spoken version of this article. Any suggestions or objections? (besides those included in the reading guidelines) Notbot 02:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why not. Good idea. Gran² 05:51, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead. Even if anyone objects to your version in any way, it could always be removed or deleted. Practice your "annoyed grunt" though so you get it right. D'oh! Quadzilla99 05:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Season 20?

Does anyone know whether or not there will be a 20th Season of The Simpsons? Any news from Fox?-mattawa

Not yet, but even if they do decide to stop the production of The Simpsons now, it is very likely that there will at least be a short season 20. They are about 8 episodes ahead of the aired seasons, so unless they decide to air 30 episodes during season 19, there will be some left for season 20. --Maitch 15:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Besides, if Fox drop the Simpsons then someone else will just pick it up, so the show would probably continue anyway JayKeaton 04:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Required or not?

I've done a big copyedit of the article [3] (the first half at lease) and I'd like opinions as to whether these sentences are needed in the article.

• (On Julie Kavner) She has been known to refuse to perform Marge's voice in public, to maintain the mystique of the character.

JameiLei 12:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't care that much whether it stays or goes, but since it is unsourced, I'm leaning towards removing it. --Maitch 20:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Unprotect

{{editprotected}}

Free the edit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nate Speed (talk • contribs)

There's a reason why the page has been protected. If you have recently created an account, please wait a few days to be able to contribute to the article. Alternatively, say what you would like changed here and a registered user will update the page for you. JameiLei 20:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed the edit protection. -- Samir 01:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Middle American

Being from the United Kingdom, I am unaware of the term Middle American. Could someone briefly explain if and why the Simpsons class as Middle American so I can support the claim with some additional but not unnecessary information. JameiLei 22:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Middle American usually denotes their class status. Neither upper nor lower class, but Middle class. For some it also hints at their geographic location, as the Midwest, or geographically Middle America, is the bulk of the middle class, with many of the major cities (New York, Miami, LA, Seattle, for instance), mostly upper and lower class, lining the coast.Thesetrixaintforkids 20:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Homer once stated that their family was upper-lower-middle class. If one thinks about it, it means the upper part of the lower section of middle class. This could probably be abreiviated to mid-middle class. Emperor001 23:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

For a very good, if fairly uncited, explanation, read the Middle America (United States) article

In other words, The Simpsons are "average Americans", with whom the average American can relate. It allows them to reach the gross majority of American society's affections.

dgaubin 14:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

FA

I have a question. Why was the FA status removed? I will revert that removal until this is explained. Sjones23 01:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Check the links on the FA template at the top of this page. Wrad 01:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Shortening the Page

Perhaps the simpsons article is too long. There are so many sub-articles that the main page probably does not need to sum them all up. For instance, the movie section can probably be shortened up or left out completely if there is already an article about it. 12.216.100.205 21:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. It's fine as it is. --LtWinters 00:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The article is within Wikipedia's recommandation for article size. --Maitch 09:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

You can never have too much info about the simpsons! Techo 11:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Rumor?

I heard that after The Simpsons Movie, they will end the show. Is this true? -Yancyfry 03:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Nope; it's been renewed for another season. (Check out Google News.) Zagalejo 03:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

iI think some one should put it in some where in the article about that. ~~yay~~

Screen Shots

Why aren't screne shots of each episode uploaded/allowed? I feel this adds A LOT to each episode capsule. Is it possible FOX can allow these for Wikipedia use?

What are you talking about? Each episode page clearly has a screenshot... Gran² 05:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Where? I don't see any for any episode for any season. Gutch220 18:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Just look at any Simpsons episode page (the specific episode, not the list of episodes). Wrad 19:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

That's what I mean. The season summaries used to have screen shots, now they don't. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Simpsons_%28season_12%29 why is this? Gutch220 22:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

This was decided upon about a month ago (see discussion). Screenshots for each episode just decorate "List of ... episodes" pages, therefore violation fair use policy. It is somewhat annoying, but in fairness, needed to be enacted. --WillMak050389 22:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

copy editing

how can we copy edit the damn page when it is locked? or is this just because I don't have an account?

Because you don't have an account. Gran² 07:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

You have to create an account and wait four days. Unfortunately, there are too many who find it funny to vandalize this page, to have it completely open. --Maitch 10:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok guys, thanks for that.

The Waltons

Do you think that the "more like the Waltons and less like the Simpsons' quotation by George Bush Snr merits inclusion in this article? It would be quite indicative of the cultural effect/appeal of the show?81.154.187.97 17:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Its already there... Gran² 17:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

skim-reading never was my strong point. Good job!86.134.33.161 17:39, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Themes

The following passage, located in the 'themes'section of the simpsons page, is completely ridiculous: The show is sometimes political with a left-wing bias.[34] There is a general fondness for progressive ideals, but the show does make jokes from both sides of the political spectrum.[35] The overall philosophy of The Simpsons is nihilism.[36] The show portrays government and big business so that they are out to screw the little guy.[36] Thus any authority figure in the show is portrayed in a negative light. The politicians are corrupt, Reverend Lovejoy is indifferent to the people going to his church and the local police force is incompetent

The Simpsons does not have a left-wing bias. I'd argue that a show that is not intended as informative cannot have a bias. The simpsons is purely comedy, and has never flatly stated any political view, republican or democratic, left or right. Yes, it's true that rev. Lovejoy is apathetic, chief Wiggum incompetent, and so on. So? Is it the firm, unanimous belief of the political left that cops are stupid and priests are frauds? The entire show is a satire. What would be satirical (or funny at all) about portraying a town full of well-behaved, functional, cooperative, intelligent citizens? The simpsons is social commentary, not political (there is a very real difference). Finally, the suggestion that the philosophy of the entire series is nihlism, sounds to me like the claim of a person who's never bothered to learn the actual meaning of it. It is so fuh-reakin' ludicrous, I literally do not know where to begin describing the stupidity of it. I would love to hear specific examples when it was stated (or even implied) that the show's intent or ideology is nihlistic.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.95.225.46 (talk • contribs)

Al Jean, a long time show runner of the show, admits that it has a left wing bias as well as being nihilistic. These references are direct quotes from him. Nihilism is also discussed in the books The Simpsons and Philosophy. --Maitch 09:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Does it matter what the opinion of a single member of the expansive creative force behind the simpsons is? I'm talking about the actual content of the show, not the personal views of one of it's contributors. How could something be both nihlistic, and left-wing? That is nonsense, and this paragraph needs to be removed.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.95.225.46 (talk • contribs)

Well Al Jean and a group of philosophy professors. --Maitch 16:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Since you can't seem to muster the wherewithall to refute even a single one of my varied and completely valid arguments, I will take this most recent reply as your concession that this paragraph is in fact opinion presented as fact. Remove this idiocy from the Simpsons page post haste, please.

I refer to a book written by philosophy professor, which discusses nihilism in The Simpsons and you just call me an idiot. Hardly seems like a varied and valid argument. --Maitch 19:39, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't call you an idiot. Try and stay with me here. Yes you refer to a book. That's fantastic, but sadly, irrelevant. If it was the opinion of every psychologist in america that the Simpsons was a hotbed of leftwing propoganda and nihlism (Which, once again, does not make sense), that would not equal a fact. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. Everything that appears on this website should be a demonstrable, undisputable fact. If you want to write up a page called 'Al Jean and some psychologist's views of the Simpsons', then do it, and I won't be able to argue with you. This paragraph still needs to be removed. On a side note, I love your insinuation that the arguments I was referring to, was calling you an idiot (which, once again, I did not). Come on, now.

Sorry to butt in. I don't know about what is valid to source in Wikipedia, I'll leave that to people who do. However it seems to me ill-conceived that something be left-wing AND nihilistic. Perhaps there are themes which can be suggested to be one or the other, however does this mean you can sweepingly state something about the whole programme. Additionally I would argue that the programme can be tied, in some part, to other philosophies.

As an impartial bystander I would say that the poster was refering to the content as 'idiocy' not the other poster as an 'idiot'. Please don't use a Straw Man Arguement to attempt to discredit a very arguable point of view, maybe back up your point instead.86.134.33.161 00:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Canon Websites

I think that there should be a section about websites from the show itself, for instance whatbadgerseat.com or Mr. X Alx xlA 03:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

No, just note those on the articles for the episodes they were mentioned in, if you can find a smooth way to put it in context. --Jnelson09 19:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Places named Springfield

Currently, the Setting section of this article contains the following sentence:

The name "Springfield" is a common one in America and appears in more than thirty states.^{[citation needed]}

If you do a Google search in an attempt to find a citation, this very article comes up near the top of the results, and Ask.com was no help, either … if this article were not currently semi-protected, I would have changed it to the following:

The name "Springfield" is a common one in America and appears in more than thirty nearly half of the states.

The way to accomplish this is to (a) wikilink "Springfield" with "[[Springfield#United States places|Springfield]]", (b) change the assertion as indicated, and (c) remove the {{fact}} tag at the end of the sentence.

I counted 24 different states in the list (that's "nearly half" without providing a possibly incorrect actual number that requires a citation), and of course that list does not include any others that may lack sufficient notability for an article in Wikipedia.

If Some Other Editor feels that this reference is sufficient to justify removal of the recently added ^{[citation needed]} tag, then please implement my suggestion … Happy Editing! —72.75.70.147 09:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have changed the text, but you can't use Wikipedia itself as a reference, so we still need a reliable citation. --Maitch 09:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Music from the Simpsons

I edited the categories box to include some reference to the numerous music albums produced from the Simpsons, yet it has been deleted. I know there is a link to the 2 singles but how about retaining some sort of link to the albums (singing the blues, simpsonic)

This is the wrong place for this, but I reverted your edits because there is a link to The Simpsons discography so there is no need for links to the indiviudal CDs. It's the same reason why individual characters and episodes are not included. But, there is no "The Simpsons singles" page, which is why the songs are there. -- 21:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Recent wide-spread edits

Several Simpsons-related pages have been edited recently by user 86.151.45.10. A number of this user's changes have been reverted by other users, and many others are questionable (admitting to adding made-up information to Treehouse of Horror XVIII, adding incorrect voice talent to episode pages, etc.). I'd like to suggest some Simpsons experts review the user's recent edits to verify their veracity. -FeralDruid 19:20, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

We already are (User:Scorpion0422/Hidden Message Vandal). Everything he has added has been reverted. Gran² 19:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I suspect 86.151.47.11 is the same user as before (note the similar IP addresses). The edits he's been making today are very similar to the ones made a couple days ago, and some have already been reverted. Note that the prior address was blocked for a day, for multiple vandalism to Simpsons-related pages. I'll be keeping an eye on this user's edits. -FeralDruid 20:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

List of countries broadcasting the show

Could we please have a list of countries broadcasting the show, what channel, etc? The Family Guy page has just such a section.

Yes but the "Family Guy" page isn't an A class going on FA class article is it. Gran² 06:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I just thought it would be an interesting bit of information to add to the page, since its already so detailed. With the longevity and influence of a show like The Simpsons, I think an example of its global appeal would be a good addition to the article. 3rd July 2007