Talk:Drawn Together

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Drawn Together was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
October 17, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Animation / American / Web (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Comedy (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Judaism (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Television (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Archives: /Archive 1

The Adult Swim comment[edit]

I tried to delete the part about how it was only negative because of being a rival network but the line keeps coming back and I feel that the line comes off more of an opinion than an actual fact

That's all you needed to say. I kept putting it back because you didn't provide a reason for taking it out in the edit summary. Unexplained removal of text can be construed as vandalism.Raymondluxuryacht 19:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

^^^^ Raymond...that is a really stupid thing to say. You leaving it up even though you knew it had no place but only because no one gave a reason for deleting it. Laff, and you wonder why Wikipedia is seen as missing the mark on many things. Then you threaten Vandalism...ok big boy with alll the power. The only reason why I came into the discussion section was to propose removing the Adult Swim bumper since it is so obscure as to insult the "Praise" section of Wikipedia. It would be like me writing that my 'friend' said the show stunk so I should add that to the page. BTW, I'm not the poster of the first part of this. Delete the Adult Swim, do your job, and don't wait for someone to ask you to do something in order to do the right thing. I'm quite annoyed at that comment Raymond. 68.225.235.242 (talk) 00:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup[edit]

This is a low-rated, second-tier cable show that is essentially cancelled. Why does it deserve a whole series of overlong, over-elaborate articles? One, maybe, but not one for every character. At minimum, these all need serious cleanup. I edit articles about Spanish soap operas with FAR larger audiences and they run just a few paragraphs. See, for example, Marina, which has triple the viewership and quadruple the episode count.

This just seems obsessive. The mere fact that something is animated does not make it deserve of undue weight. Yakuman 02:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC) --JVersteeg 17:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC):If you disagree with the existance of those articles, nominate them on AFD (chances are extremely good they will not be deleted). But beyond that, a cleanup tag does not belong on this article. Raul654 02:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

There are HUGE differences between AfD and cleanup. Simply put, there's too much extraneous stuff here. At least one-third of the material here could be removed. It's just too much redundancy, trivial details and banal insignificant banter. Wikipedia, like the rest of the world, suffers from entropy and decay. This article is no different. Make it shorter and more concise. Yakuman 02:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll admit, The article could do without the Songs section or the Guests in the confessional. It's pretty trivial. But even so, it seems like your argument is essentially your own opinion. It's hardly low rated and was put on hiatus because Comedy Central wanted to premiere season 3 a couple months early. I don't think it would go three seasons and pushed so fast that a season premiered when it wasn't finished if it was low-rated. Besides, It's Wikipedia. The land of over-analyzers and people with WAY too much time. What else would you expect here? DSMeatte 04:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
First off, I'll second that neither Songs nor Guests is needed, so I'll go ahead and remove those. But that aside, DSMeatte is right, your argument is essentially based in opinion. "Second-tier" is entirely opinion; there are lot of people who enjoy this show, and furthermore, who read and enjoy the articles on it. Secondly, "low-rated" is not even factual; it's the second highest rated show on the network behind South Park. But more importantly, just because you personally don't consider a subject notable doesn't mean it doesn't deserve to be written with thoroughness if people are willing to do it. If there are other subjects you consider more important, why not take time to build THEM up?Raymondluxuryacht 05:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I think the article is fine now. Not too many insignificant details or useless trivia but enough information for (already nostalgic) fans (like myself). --JVersteeg 17:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

First off, it's not for 'editors' (and I use that term extremely loosely) to determine what should or shouldn't be in an article WHEN THE MATERIAL IS RELEVANT. Can we understand that? If the material is 100 pages long but stays strictly on the topic of the show, then as long as there are the quick-links (#link) and it is navigable, then the content stays. There is NO set list of how much content or how little content a page on Wikipedia can have. The only rule is if the content is relevant to the article. You pseudo-admins think you have the delete powers of Zeus Almighty, judging and determining what stays and what goes. News flash, you don't have that power buddy. You're job is to keep the article free from Vandalism (such as having a giant Penis in the middle of the page), false info, and copyright material that is illegal to use. I love wikipedia but the shit you guys bicker over is beyond me. I'm not even a huge fan of DRAWN TOGETHER but I found the content (sans the Adult Swim stuff, which I wrote about above) pleasant and informative.

Please get rid of your fine-tooth combs and don't overstep your boundaries. Thank you. 68.225.235.242 (talk) 01:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Here's a substantive suggestion for improvement, if anyone cares to make the effort: All of the voice credits should be moved from the character paragraphs into three tables for the English, Spanish, and Japanese versions. Rationale: the characters as literary creations are of great interest to all viewers; the voice actors' names are of marginal interest, especially outside a given viewer's own language. -- 76.94.222.199 (talk) 11:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion[edit]

I removed:

The film clip accompanying the Double Hemm Productions logo is a windstorm on the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge (also known as Galloping Gertie), capturing the bridge about to collapse.

It was not relevant to the section it was in, and no existing section seemed appropriate for it. Perhaps someone can think of somewhere appropriate for it.--Jeffro77 22:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Drawn together(1).jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Drawn together(1).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

s2 DVD extras[edit]

The article finally lists extras for the season two DVD, but is there a source available for it? --Evildevil 23:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The South Park Season 10 DVD contains a preview which mentions the extras.Raymondluxuryacht 00:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. They sounded believable, I just had to know for sure. (It's hard to believe anything on wikipedia without a source)--Evildevil 03:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

A new season's coming out I think next week. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.194.236.133 (talk) 02:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Cancellation[edit]

Should it be mentioned why it was cancelled, or was it never announced? - Crazyconan (talk) 04:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments from the creators/producers indicate that it was most likely cancelled due to high production costs, but there hasn't been an official announcement either way.Sandmaster (talk) 04:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It's too bad, that show had a good run while it lasted. Is it true they are ending South Park in 2011, or is it an unconfirmed rumor? - Crazyconan (talk) 05:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

2011 is when the creators' current contract runs out, but they haven't said the show will actually be ending then. Most likely they'll sign a new contract unless Trey and Matt decide they want to quit, though they haven't yet indicated any plans to do so.Sandmaster (talk) 07:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ling ling's gender[edit]

I felt this wasn't quite cleared up in the archive. He's a he, because in that episode where they do the apprentice, he's on the male team then gets crushed by a plane--79.65.55.83 (talk) 18:47, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Along with having relations with clearly female battle monsters, father referencing him as son, tail expanding.... MJ56003 (talk) 22:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

IMDb as a source[edit]

I'm removing IMDb as a source and all material related to it. Specifically, I'm removing the portion which was taken from the "Trivia" section of Drawn Together's page on IMDb: "A few main reasons for the series' cancellation include production costs, Comedy Central's impatience with the time it took to produce each episode, and people taking offense to the show's content."

IMDb has already been discussed at length and rejected as a source for Wikipedia articles in general, particularly the user-submitted sections. I've been unable to find a reliable source for reasons why the show was canceled (other than the departure of the creators); if someone wants to add one that would be great. 96.252.169.163 (talk) 07:17, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

DVD region(s)[edit]

I suppose the DVDs are only released in region 1, but as there is no mention of it, I thought I'd ask it here. 82.141.118.40 (talk) 06:53, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Fake revival?[edit]

Hey there, a user called Tfakepants (machting name) wrote a new season is to be annouced, without giving any information of sources. Looks like a hoax. --95.89.189.141 (talk) 19:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Agree, I can't find anything about this on google. -- X7q (talk)

Spanky Ham[edit]

Seems more related to Oolong from the japanime Dragon Ball/Dragon Ball Z/Dragon Ball GT, both have toilet humor and are sexually perverted and both are pigs who wear clothes and walk like humans, i mean with Ling-Ling referencing Pokemon's pikachu, wouldn't it really be them poking fun at another highly popular kids/teen/adults cartoon? 58.167.192.102 (talk) 18:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)