Difference between revisions of "Wikisimpsons talk:Notability"

Latest revision as of 23:07, July 8, 2014

Rethinking this[edit]

Okay, I've been trying to make a policy that makes sense but I just can't manage to get it just right. Therefore, I'm asking for help. What do others think is notable or not? ^{(Talk - Contribs.)} 16:26, 28 January 2012 (EST)

The grey area, I definitely think is around mentioned characters. What mentioned characters deserve a page? Also, should every named character, despite the fact they do not say any lines, get pages? I think they should, as long as they have pictures and names but that's just me. ^{(Talk - Contribs.)} 16:32, 28 January 2012 (EST)

All characters with pictures, should have an article. Characters that talks, should have a name. Characters that doesn't talk, but is a celebrity, or an parody of one, should have an article. That is what I think. FatHomer^Talk 16:43, 28 January 2012 (EST)

All characters with pictures? That means every background character too, which is a no. Not all unnamed characters who only say one line deserve an article. The named characters who say one line should have an article as they are named. I'm still not sure about mentioned characters though. I think a decent amount of information must be revealed about them, or they must have some relation to a largely recurring character. The Solar Dragon 16:53, 28 January 2012 (EST)

See I get the approach as names = searches. But one would say in some circumstances we have more to add on, say a character who speaks one line, then a named one. This is something that is very hard to define, and so maybe we should just take a leaned back approach, letting, if users want, create equally one-liners and named no-bodys. Content is content, and as long as it's up to standard why not have it?--Cook879 17:35, 28 January 2012 (EST)

That's the thing, if the article is just one line, I don't think it should be around. If it is two-three lines long then that's fine. If it can get no more than one line though, I don't think the article should be here. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 17:41, 28 January 2012 (EST)

I think, if they are speaking or have a mentioned name they should excist, people can search on that, and if they don't find it, they be sad. Even if they have none name and none line but we have fact about that person, it's should be written down here. /AleWi 06:43, 29 January 2012 (EST)

I agree with AleWi in that speaking characters should get articles whether they are named or not. However, one exception I would make is if the unnamed character in question only said a few words like "No" or "thank you," or something and that was it. --Nick97 ^{(talk ~ contribs)} 22:19, 25 March 2012 (EDT)

References in The Simpsons[edit]

"If a movie or TV show has been referenced at least 5 times on The Simpsons, it gets an article." I think 3 times would be better. FatHomer^Talk 10:52, 25 March 2012 (EDT)

We discussed this at an editor meeting and decided on 5. Solar Dragon ^{(Talk • Contribs.)} 10:57, 25 March 2012 (EDT)

Products[edit]

I think we could have section for fictional products (esp. food and drink). Right now we have a bunch of very generic food related articles. Also, shouldn't there be a section about merchandise, or is that elsewhere? --Nick97 ^{(talk ~ contribs)} 09:59, 15 May 2012 (EDT)

More changes[edit]

I think the time has come for us to go over this policy again. We have a lot of crap minor articles that I think need to be deleted, merged and the like.

Characters:

• Mentioned characters shouldn't get articles if they are mentioned briefly, in one line of dialogue, or if their name is seen briefly. Unless a huge amount of emphasis is placed on them. This includes celebrities and cast and crew. This would eradicate a lot of celebrity articles that don't have a lot of information on them.
• Unnamed characters who say one line at most should not have an article. i.e. Doo-De-Doo Boy, unless voiced by a guest star. Reasoning is that people won't be searching for these kinds of characters and them having an article is just stupid. In fact, the policy says "who play a decent part in an episode", which should be clarified to mean more than one line.

Media:

• There's a lot of magazines and comics etc. that appear in the show or comics that are just titles on a rectangle. I feel that these types of articles should be deleted. Mainly those magazines and comics made from one word which just don't have enough focus on them. Those the camera lingers on and shows some design should stay.
• Books where only the spines are seen and generic books like "Math" and "Algebra" shouldn't get articles as they are only minor.

Food and drink:

• Things like Beer Battered Chicken etc. should be counted as generic food products. We should only have articles for named brand products and those food items that appear a lot (i.e. donuts, pork chops, bacon) as a lot more emphasis is placed on them.

Songs:

• Songs in comics shouldn't get articles as there's no music, only the lyrics.

I have made changes to the policy in my userspace so please read and discuss here. The Solar Dragon 09:12, July 6, 2014 (EDT)

This is a wiki about the Simpsons. I like articles about mentioned characters, it's funny to read which celebrities that has been namned in the series and how many times. I someimes find this infomration important. I don't like unnamed characters, if it's not a guest star. I like articles about magazines, comics and books, I know some images are ugly but it's fun to have. If we should stay big we should accept as many typ of articles we can. I only like namned brand products and not articles about bacon but I think donuts it's important. I like articles about songs that only has lyrics, it's often a parody on a real song and you know then the music./AleWi (talk) 10:51, July 6, 2014 (EDT)

If a mentioned character is mentioned several times, then they should get an article, I agree. Just once, they can be mentioned on the references page. They're just too small articles to have. I'd much rather us have less pages than more pages that are only one or two lines in length. Hence these suggested changes. These articles will be stubs and will always be stubs. We don't want a wiki full of stubs. The Solar Dragon 11:26, July 6, 2014 (EDT)

I've been giving the comic songs notability issue some thought. After several brainstorming sessions, my thinking is that a comic story song is notable if:

1. It is original and clearly indicated to be a song rather than spoken dialogue, or
2. It is a parody of a real song, clearly indicated to be a song, and the portion seen in the comic story represents at least a substantial majority of a chorus or verse of the real song.

A line or two of a real song "heard" in passing should get a mention on the story's References page, but doesn't justify its own article. By the above reasoning, following on from a discussion a few weeks ago on Solar's talk page ...

• "Maggie and Moe Mysteries Theme Song" would deserve its own article. (Original song, complete in itself)
• Snippets from "Memory", "Singing in the Rain", and "Shall We Gather at the River" would not get their own articles because they're too short.
• The "N-A-C-H-O" song (parody of "Bingo Was His Name, Oh") would get an article as the parody represents the whole chorus. Also, the song is sufficiently well-known for the parody to be recognizable.
• Homer's "Call Me Maybe" parody (probable title "Drink Me Maybe") would get an article as it represents the entire chorus of the song it parodies.

My $.02 worth ... -- Mythigator (talk) 00:07, July 9, 2014 (EDT)