Talk:Saturday Night Live

Saturday Night Live was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (October 2, 2006). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Saturday Night Live article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3

Television Unassessed

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The Hot Chick

As bad as it was (never saw it myself though) it wasn't based on any SNL characters IIRC. The "hot chick" segments that he did with Farley were completely different from anything in this movie. I removed it. 75.21.89.187 05:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

David Grohl

Since David Grohl appeared with Tenacious D as "The Metal", shouldn't his appreance tally be at 8?--TheBooRadley 04:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't him. -- Viewdrix 14:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Black F-bomb?

Somebody has already edited the infamous moments section to say that Jack Black swore during his monologue tonight, but it is not clear that he did, some think he was trying to say "funky" instead. Should we leave that bit off for now? I've edited it in the meantime. Ab85 06:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I took it off. Even if that is what he said, nobody really made a big deal out of it. It's not infamous at all.

I put it back on. I belive it was part of a possible infamous moment in SNL history!!

 Newsflash930 02:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)Newsflash930[reply]

I saw this and did not think it was what he said - he said "funky". Was it mentioned anywhere in the news? I couldn't find anything anywhere. Jeff schiller 04:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No one cared about that, and it's clear to me that he said "funky." Macarion 03:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sinead screencaps

I'm not sure if this would be relevant though.

Episode 573

Can we get a year label on "episode 573" in infamous moments? Sure, hardcore fans may know what you're talking about when you rattle off episode 573, but I haven't a clue as to when it happened, especially because Jimmy Fallon caused me to stop watching SNL for about four years. Mike H 23:55, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

The incident is far from an infamous moment simply becaue it was not only noticed by a few people, but it aroused no controversy.--Yoni 01:34, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Can we delete the recurring section?

The front page is quite lengthy, but I think most of the content there is worthwhile, except the recurring characters section. A number of people on that list were not popular characters (Merv the Perv, for instance) and just because you are a recurring character does not mean you are popular. Some of the popular recurring characters are discussed in the history pages, and ultimately, each fan has their own idea of what "popular" is anyway, based on their own personal preferences.

Can I delete that section, or just take out all the names in favor of a link to a list of all the recurring characters over the years? I think snl.jt.org has one. --JamesB3 18:51, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I went through and deleted all the "RED" links from the recurring characters. if you ask me, if they don't have a page dedicated to a particular sketch, than that sketch probably isn't popular enough to be listed (even though some that were hardly popular do have their own page for some reason). You can delete the whole thing, for all I care, or link it to snl.jt.org, but it definately needed to be pruned for now. Takes up entirely too much space.user:bmb8609

(the above wasn't me; not sure who it was)

Since no one objected, I removed the recurring characters and just left the WU mention and a link to a page of recurring characters. I also trimmed the catchphrases area because while some of those moments were popular, they weren't catchphrases, things that you would hear everywhere. Norm Macdonald was popular with the fans but you really didn't hear a lot of national discussion about anal rape or what the Germans believe. And aside from those I left on the list, I don't remember any other Molly Shannon catchphrases.--JamesB3 11:22, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

JonMoore, you ignored our points that many of the recurring characters listed were not very popular, and that it's redundant and takes up too much space. It is also a very broad definition of a catchphrase, since you can basically pull out anything and call it a catchphrase. I think that list needs to be trimmed down and after others have discussion on this, if none of them disagree with me, I am going to go back to the changes that you blacked out. I might just delete the recurring area altogether instead of including a link. Would that please you?--JamesB3 20:57, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the link, if it serves a purpose (in this case, keeping the page from being cluttered). It's not like the whole page is a list of links. Also, that above post was me. I forgot to sign my name...also any edits made by 207.192... are probably me as well (I usually don't sign in). I'm the one who put together that comprehensive list of all the WU anchors, and wrote summarys for each of the historical "eras" bmb8609

In response to JamesB3, I missed this section of the talk page, I'm sorry. I agree it takes up too much space, but deleting it entirely as you did is a little silly. I think breaking it out into a seperate page would be the best recourse. Something like "Recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches". Would that be an acceptable compromise? Again, I apologize for missing this section; I thought you just randomly deleted these. [jon] 12:37, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the further clarification, Jon. I think that to keep both sides happy, creating a separate page would be the best idea. --JamesB3 14:43, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

New stuff and possible split up

I've added external video links to every opening montage for each season (except 1977, which is the only season I don't have). I've also added a Season Breakdown for 2000-2005. Anyone else agree that the 90s section needs to be broken up into 1990-94 and 1995-96? It's incredibly too big,and the table of contents takes up half the page. Plus, given the cast and writers, they're virtually two completely different eras of the show that deserve their own seperate attention. Unless someone disagrees here, I'll get around to fixing this sometime this week. If anyone has any of the three opening montages from 77 season, let me know...bmb8609

Yes, I agree that the 90's should be split into 2 different sections. Thank you for adding the 00-05 season breakdown, I hadn't got around to it yet. BTW, I think you meant 'writers' and 'eras'. You didn't need the apostrophe. I make that mistake all the time too. --JamesB3 11:22, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OK...fixed that error. I'll try and get that done tonight. Also, do we really need a page of hosts that have appeared as musical guests? I don't see why it's very noteworthy. It's not like you get a "prize" for it or something (i.e. The "Five Timers" club sketch). I'm going to remove it. user:bmb8609

UPDATE: The split up is finished. I now just need to go through each article and fix any continuity errors. Also the page titled "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_SNL:1990-2000" (the 90s page before I split it) still exists, but is now completely blank. I have no idea how to delete the page so that it's no longer taking up space on the server, maybe someone else can check into that? Thanks

I applaud the work being done here on the "History of SNL" as it is remarkably detailed and highly informative. However, I must also point out that personal opinion runs amok throught the "history" articles, even in the short versions that are featured in the main article. A great example is "side-splittingly funny coverage of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal." --Feitclub 22:04, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Mr. Saturday Night and the Rutles

Were these movies really based on SNL material? I don't remember any SNL content in Mr. Saturday Night, and the title alone is not a good enough reason for inclusion. --JamesB3 11:23, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The Rutles made many appearences on SNL, but I don't know if they originate from SNL or Monty Python. I'd leave it in until we discover otherwise.

As for Mr. Saturday Night, it appeared in a sketch from Nov. of 1984 titled "Buddy Young Is Back" so yes, it is based on an SNL script, but via a distant relation. Much like how "mo' money" is based on SNL only because Damon Wayon's originated the phrase through a Weekend Update sketch. So the answer is that yes, they're technically an SNL spin-off, but neither Buddy Young, or Damon Wayans' characters were recurring. I guess it all just depends on how technical you want to get with it. bmb8609

Actually Buddy Young Jr. appeared four times (October 20, 1984; November 3, 1984; February 9, 1985; April 6, 1985), so he was recurring. Considering that Billy Crystal was only on the show for one season, I'd say a character that appeared four times was on pretty high-rotation.

Why was A Mighty Wind deleted from Movies Based On SNL sketches? The Folksmen appeared on SNL in 1984, and were the focus of that movie. Can I put it back?

Split?

Apparently this discussion page is at the 32K limit. Should it be split, or trimmed down? --JamesB3 22:02, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

As I understand it, that 32k limit is sort of outdated. I was told not to worry about it anymore, and I don't recall seeing it lately. Spalding 00:15, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Vague

It would be nice if a short explanation regarding some of the obscenities could be presented. Like, for example, with Charles Rocket: "I'd like to know who the fuck did it" Did what? Can this be placed into context? Same goes for Norm McDonald. I'd be really grateful if context could be given. Mike H 21:51, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

This is a good point, and I think the reason it wasn't explained there, was because it's explained in further detail in the History: 1980-85 section. It could probably stand to be detailed a little more, but not too much since these parts are intended only to be "blurbs" for a lack of better terms. user:bmb8609

Eh, just a short context...copy and pasted from the history section, if need be, with a "See history of SNL 1980-1985 for more" or something like. Mike H 05:45, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

Simpson matter again

Considering just about everyone here disagrees with his biased editing of this page, is there anyway to get people banned from editing here (considering he's contributed NOTHING to this page, other than making sure that we don't hold a person who otherwise has nothing to do with SNL accountable for lip-synching onstage)? For crying out loud, this had gone on long enough.

p.s. I cut the top half of this page off, since it was getting so big. feel free to add anything back if I cut off someting important.

Actually, I do keep an eye on the article in general and copyedit new additions periodically. And I'm not doing any biased editing. I just think that if we're going to mention it, we need a few words about her illness. It takes very little space and makes a world of difference in providing an objective account, even if it is just a brief summary. Everyking 18:05, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That's all well and good, but the other additions you make present the issue as Ashlee being a victim. She handled the situation terribly. If she'd simply started to sing her song, or attempted to, or, hell, just STAYED ON THE STAGE, instead of doing her goofy little dance and running off, this incident wouldn't be nearly as important. Instead, she showed a complete lack of professionalism by blaming it on 3 different things. It's one thing to bring up facts, it's another to distort them. Mo0[talk] 00:49, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Settle down folks.

First off, this is an article about SNL. So Simpson's motivations, illnesses, statements, etc, are secondary. Simpson did not play the backing track. Simpson's manager did not play the backing track. The SNL control room played the backing track. One version of the text insinuates that she was at fault for what was coming over the sound system. An important fact to mention is that it was widely reported/commented upon, unlike some of these other "infamous events".

I put in what I hoped would be a compromise version, and even edited to please Everyking. But he took it further and now we're going back in circles. For reference, here's my suggestion again.

In 2004, musical guest Ashlee Simpson walked offstage when a pre-recorded backing track for the wrong song was accidentally played. It appeared to viewers that Simpson had been lip synching, though the singer denied this, claiming illness. The incident received wide-spread coverage in the news.

Regardless, let's not lose any sleep over this. Cheers, -Willmcw 01:22, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

That's a great version of it. Mo0[talk] 01:35, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I think it is short, simple and balanced. It's basically a condensed version of what was around on the other article for a while. The only thing that might be added, on reflection, is a mention of the skits that referred back to it. It is uncharacteristic of SNL to be self-referential. I'm trying to think up a way of saying all of that in a couple of words. Cheers, -Willmcw 05:16, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

However it's written, the essential things that neeed to be mentioned are: 1) she was the first person ever to walk off like this; 2) the problem was that the vocal tape for her first song was accidentally recued for her second number (we should make it clear exactly what happened); 3) a lot of people claimed she was lip-syncing, even though she claims she was going to sing along with the track (that needs to be spelled out, because a lot of people don't know what a 'backing track' is). 68.118.61.219 12:36, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I have no problem with mentioning all of the facts involved with the situation. Everyking, when you read this, the only reason I object to your edits is that Ashlee was not a victim of anything but her own stupidity when she walked off of the stage. If she'd stayed on, she would have shown a lot more professionalism than that stupid little dance that she did. Mo0[talk] 13:52, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the facts in the matter, remember this is only a passing mention. The incident is handled in greater detail in the article on the current era of SNL. I'm not sure that Simpson walking off stage was the most newsworthy aspect of the incident. Do we have a source for her being the first performer to walk off? Or is she only the first musical guest to do so? If the latter, that's much less notable. Was it the first time the control room ever played the wrong backing track? Is that news? Regarding the backing track, I hope someone more familiar with the music industry than I will write an article on backing tracks (Everyking?). Cheers, -Willmcw 23:14, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

Here it is again, with a provisional addition at the end:

In 2004, musical guest Ashlee Simpson walked offstage when a pre-recorded backing track for the wrong song was accidentally played. It appeared to viewers that Simpson had been lip synching, though the singer denied this, claiming illness. The incident marked the first time a performer had walked off stage on camera and was the subject of wide-spread coverage in the news.

Can we get any confirmation that it was the first time anyone walked off? Other than that, is there a consensus that this is an acceptable version? We ought to settle this and move on. Cheers, -Willmcw 03:08, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

I dislike "claiming illness". There is very strong evidence that she was indeed sick, about as strong as the evidence could be, but this phrasing presents it like it's just some excuse. Everyking 03:18, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

OK, how about "citing" instead of "claiming"? "It appeared to viewers that Simpson had been lip synching, though the singer denied this, citing illness." Is that fair? -Willmcw 03:34, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

That seems unclear. She says it was a backing track, so that should be mentioned. How about "it appeared to viewers that Simpson was lip synching or singing along with a backing track; apparently she was suffering from illness and was unable to sing live as usual"? Everyking 04:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Didn't she deny lip-synching? If there's no doubt that she was lipsynching then we should write the whole thing differently. The backing track was already mentioned in the first sentence, no need to repeat it. And why does the illness have to be "alleged" or "apparent"? Nobody has questioned that she might have something wrong with her. -Willmcw 04:41, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

She has denied lip synching per se (at least she did on the Today interview), but I would prefer to stress the alternative backing track explanation over that. Everyking 04:45, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

And with that I am going to withdraw from editing the article except to copyedit and revert vandalism. I feel that I have caused stress and conflict on the article, regardless of whether I'm right, and so I need to do penance by withdrawing from it. Everyking 05:32, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

OK Everything, thanks for your input. Here's a version trying to better incorporate Everyking's input:

In 2004, musical guest Ashlee Simpson became the first performer to walk offstage when a pre-recorded backing track for the wrong song was accidentally played. It appeared to viewers that Simpson had been lip synching, though the singer later said she was using the backing track on account of a throat illness. The incident was the subject of wide-spread coverage in the news and even SNL skits.

It is longer than ideal for a stubby listing, but it is succinct and NPOV. Any objections? -Willmcw 06:33, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

what you have there is fine.

Cool! It's posted. Thanks everybody. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:12, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

1980-85 Summary

I've presented what I hope is a "compromise" to the ebersol era summary. I want Eddie Murphy in "Season Six" metioned first (before Ebersol) so that it remains in chronological order. (btw, "Show-Runner" is a widely-used, but unoffical term for an executive producer, I used it here to avoid literary redundancy since the phrase "executive producer" is used in the next sentence, but since it is technically unoffical, I have removed it as a compromise). I agree that the phrase "home-run" is silly and have since removed it, but since you bring it up, I would disagree that it's inaccaurate, as 1984 is a cited by many fans as a "classic" season. However, it IS objective, and so again, I have removed it. I also removed the "all-star" reference from the 1994 season, since this season was not truly an "all-star" season - at least not in the sense of the 84 or 85 seasons.

The 1984 season has a mixed reputation at best. Many complained and still complained that ebersol watered down the program by relying to heavily on pre-taped over live sketches, and by having people like Martin Short come in and rehash characters they had already been doing on other programs. And to say that Ebersol "finally" hit a home run with that suggests that it was considered better than the earlier seasons with Murphy at his height, which is doubtful. Whether or not you want to call them 'all-star' shows, 1994 followed the same practice of hiring established performers to fill out the vacant spots in the cast- there just weren't as many vacancies in 1994. The connection should be made because both times Michaels tried it, it was a disaster.68.118.61.219 18:59, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Many who? Many leading TV critics? Many cast members? Many friends of yours? Wikipedia isn't for artistic criticism. What are the sources for your assertions? -Willmcw 05:46, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Dolly Parton picture caption

Does anyone know who the third person in this photo is? Image:Tv_snl_dolly_parton.jpg. The caption reads, "..w/ SNL's Victoria Jackson," but that only accounts for two people. (Gee, it almost looks like there are four or five people in there.) The one on the right resembles Carvey. If we can't name the other cast member, maybe we should at least acknowledge his or her presence. -Willmcw 09:12, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure, and I don't really know why that pic is even there anymore. I think it referred to a section from way back when when the SNL pages was only one page long. In all reality, we ought to remove it, and maybe replaced it with something else (the page is running over 32K as it is right now anyway...)

UPDATE According to this page it's Jan Hooks...

-bmb8609

Awesome! Thanks for tracking that down. I'll correct the caption and move the picture to the History of SNL:1985-1990. Cheers, -Willmcw 20:12, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

It's Jan Hooks and the sketch was originally written in the late 70's for host Raquel Welch, but cut for time. ~Rodney Conley

Catch Phrases?

A lot of the so-called "catch phrases" only showed up in one sketch, as far as I'm aware:

* "I got a fever. And the only perscription is more cowbell!" (Christopher Walken)
* "Strategery" (Will Ferrell)
* "Lockbox" (Darrell Hammond)

Should we remove these, or possibly rename the section "memorable phrases" or something more appropriate? When I think of a catch phrase, I think of something that happened at least three times or more. Am I wrong here? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:50, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

More or less typical wikibloat. I'd posit that a "catchphrase" is one that "catches on" to some extent in the general public -- Emily Latella's "never mind" is clearly a catchphrase; dozens more are not, despite the best attempts by the SNL people to make them so by using them ad nauseum. The problem is, and will continue to be, that everybody's definition of "catchphrase" or even "memorable" is going to be different, and sooner or later we'll have every stupid line ever used on the show. This is the kind of thing, like the lists in Rock opera, that has me giving up on even trying -- it's like digging a hole in sand. (It's perhaps worth noting, also, that "stratergery" and "lockbox" are not only not catchphrases but they aren't even, technically, phrases). Jgm 00:29, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've felt the same way, and put in some notes regarding these additions that we're constantly having to remove. I put in some editing notes that roughly describe what constitutes a catch phrase, and how - on the characters section - we're not trying to make a list of EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER. These notes can only be seen when you're in "edit" mode, so they in no way, affect the asthetics of the page.

However, I must say that the three lines you've listed, although only heard once, do constitue as catch phrases since they are very popular in the public "pop culture" vernacular, and are used quite often. In fact, I recently read an article on the cowbell sketch, and how that phrase is 5 years strong.

FYI, I also made a note regarding the Ashlee Simpson moment, and requested to consult this forum before editing the long-awaited compromised version that is shown there

UPDATE: Just to cover any disagreement, I've changed the title to catch phrases/memorable quotes, and updated the Edit disclaimer.

--BMB8609

Shouldn't this section be more appropriate on Wikiquote:Saturday Night Live? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:44, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think they are memorable phrases and that they should stay there, because there's really no way some of these things could have been said a large number of times, they made a lasting impact the one time they were used and became memorable, so I think that, yeah, it should be memorable phrases. Could I just change that now, or should i talk to somebody first? Temp 23:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infamous Beastie Boys appearance

I remember seeing an episode in which the Beastie Boys were the musical guests, and the lead singer dropped a couple F-bombs while singing. The song normally had profanity, but he added some more for good measure. I thought this would make a worthy addition to the infamous moments section, but I can't remember the date of the show. I know it was when they were performing "Sabotage", so mid 90's?

The episode that you are referring to is Alec Baldwin/Beastie Boys--12/10/94 from the 1994-95 season.

Opening credits

Any idea why the band isn't still credited in the opening credits? They were in older episodes. Deltabeignet 3 July 2005 19:08 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware it's because the band is no longer "G.E. Smith and the Saturday Night Live Band." Smith left in 1995 but apparently came back in 99-2000 RasputinAXP 8 July 2005 22:00 (UTC)

Don't get this?

I was reading the SNL page when I came across this:

"On the August 17, 2005 episode of Late Night with Conan O'Brien (also aired on NBC), Conan mentioned hearing furniture being moved around in the studio upstairs. When Conan asked if it was a rival show, someone mentioned that it was Saturday Night Live. Conan responded, "Saturday Night Live? It'll never make it." Late Night with Conan O'Brien is filmed in Studio 6A, on floors 6 and 7 of "30 Rock"."

I don't quite get that quote. If someone could clear that up for me, it'd be appreciated.

OutRider2003 13:28, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, SNL is filmed in studio 8A, and Conan is filmed in 6A (but the studio takes up both the 6th and 7th floors), so SNL films directly above Conan. When SNL does their rehearsals, it can be heard muffled in Conan's studio. Conan's joke is both 1) that SNL is much more established than his own show and 2) he used to write for that show. It's pretty obscure though, I don't really think it's all that encyclopedic. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:20, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

The Beatles & "Saturday Night Live"

I don't recall the Beatles being mentioned in the article. See: http://abbeyrd.best.vwh.net/satnite.htm

Quoting from the start of the article:

"On April 24, 1976, "Saturday Night Live" producer Lorne Michaels made what would become a running gag on SNL with his offer of $3,000 to the Beatles to appear on the late-night comedy show...McCartney reported that he and Lennon briefly toyed with the idea of going down to the NBC studios and taking Michaels up on the offer."

Two small suggestions: The entry for Frank Zappa mentions "mugging the camera" and the following entry about Milton Berle mentions "mugging for the camera". The use of the word "mugging" in two completely different meanings so close together should be changed.

--Luis Fernandes

Notable tenures (Chris Parnell)

Does anyone think he belongs in that section? He started at the same time as Horatio Sanz, but he was fired and brought back after missing the first half of the 2001-2 season. So he has been on the show for 8 seasons, just not the entire time. --Scaryice 04:03, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How much time exactly did he miss? If a half season, we could list him at 7.5 seasons and counting with a note about the missing half season. By January 2005, he will have completed eight seasons. However, I'm not sure there is an official standard for accruing time on SNL. Would this be different for Tina Fey, who is currently out on maternity leaved or Maya Rudolph, who will be going on maternity leave? Rillian 17:23, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion is to leave him out. He was fired for at least half a season, if not close to an entire one (when you add up all the episodes he missed), AND, he is going to be on and off throughout most of this season to shoot his new sitcom (note he was not even credited in the opening montage for episode 2 or 3). --BMB

Stolen ideas section

This section is not very well written, and i'm not sure if it's deserving of its own section. Perhaps a criticism section in which this is mentioned? Themindset 04:11, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(Trivia) Born After Premiere

Does the trivia snippet about Kenan Thompson being the only one born after October 11, 1975 have to be changed now that the new featured players have been added? I know Jason Sudeikis was born just weeks before, so that rules him out, but Andy Samberg looks pretty young. Does anyone know the birthdays of Samberg or Bill Hader?

I don't have them at this time. My opinion is to simply leave it as it is, until we find out otherwise. I doubt it will take long to get their birthdates if or when they become established cast members. --BMB

Family connections section?

"Time and time again" and "casting trend" are hardly justified by the few cases this new section cites. My suggestion is to put these details in the trivia section. Please comment if you disagree.

If someone's interested in exploring casting trends, write something on Harvard graduates or Chicago's improv theatre as sources of cast members and writers. 66.167.253.60 01:10, 15 November 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Infamous Moments?

I personally think that the "Infamous Moments" section is growing too big and many of the listings in there are hardly infamous. First off, I think any instance of a singer singing a cuss word during a musical number shouldn't be listed. This happens often (I could list about 10 instances off the top of my head), and may make some small articles in the AP but other than that, it doesn't cause major controversy. This includes the System of a Down reference. I'm still trying to figure out how this was infamous. It made a few newspaper articles in some back pages, but it hardly caused any kind of uproar on the level of Sinead O'Connor, Charles Rocket or even something generally memorable like Elvis Costello's 1977 performance. Also I think backstage situations should not be included. Such as the fistfight between Murray and Chevy (not there anymore since I removed it). These didn't happen on air, so I don't think they can really be considered "infamous" or memorable since no one but those who were there witnessed them first-hand. Finally, some of the instances run too long, and go into too much detail. They either need to be cut down to bare bones facts and straight-to-the-point, or removed entirely. 207.192.206.107 07:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)--BMB[reply]

Perhaps they should be given their own articles?

What happened to the RATM one? now that was real censorship right there, by a supposedly "cutting edge" show. Xunflash 06:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International Rights

In the "Rights To SNL" section it says: "Due to international licensing restrictions, Saturday Night Live cannot be seen outside North America, with one exception: Sony Entertainment Television (in Latin America)." SNL is shown in Australia on cable channel Arena TV on the Foxtel cable platform. So maybe this is incorrect/outdated.

-- It is also broadcast on the Armed Forces Network; over the air in South Korea.

The Rutles

I have removed "The Rutles" from the film section, incidentally the film was called All You Need is Cash. The Rutles were created by Eric Idle and Neil Innes for the British show Rutland Weekend Television, the only sketches to appear on SNL were reruns from RWTV shown when Eric Idle appeared on SNL. I acknowledge the fact that it was the SNL appearance that led to the film, and that an SNL producer directed it. However, I really do not think that The Rutles should be mentioned next to the other films, which all came from original SNL sketches. Rje 01:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

another infamous episode

In an episode hosted by Tony Danza, there was a sketch where he and others kept using the phrase "funkin'" in place of "fuckin'." (I dropped the funkin' pizza, etc.) There was a big media uproar afterwards, I remember complaints to the FCC, talk of firings or disciplining the staff, possibly even politicians complaining. Anyone have more on this that could be added?

Salary

It states that the starting salary for an SNL cast member is US$5000. This is not correct (what is that, like one month's rent in Manhattan?). Does anybody know the real figure? Is it $50k? ColinKennedy 19:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's almost correct depending on who and the contract, but it's not a month, it is an episode.

Brody

There is an entry in banned hosts saying on the May 10, 2003 SNL, Adrian Brody came out dressed rastafarian and introduced the host incorrectly etc. Well, I'm watching the rerun of that exact episode right now and none of that happens. In fact, it is the day before mother's day and his whole opening monologue is done with his mother (he is quite normal and dressed in a suit). Sean Paul is the musical guest, but he introduces him just fine. Can whoever put that in there clarify if they have the right incident? Maybe there is an explanation. Thanks Superclear 23:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the episode was edited for syndication? In any case, the article refers to an introduction of Sean Paul and not during the monologue. There are generally two appearances by the musical guest. There could be one introduction by Adrian that was normal and the second one was the one in Rastafarian garb. Here are some comments from a review of the episode at http://www.saturday-night-live.com/snl/reviews/02-03/brody/bob-b.html "Thoughts- Adrian Brody's introduction was some funny stuff but ran a bit too long. It got a great response in dress though." Here's more from IMDB "Adrien hosted Saturday Night Live on 10 May 2003 and came out in full Rastafarian attire to introduce the night's musical guest Sean Paul. Speaking in a Jamaican accent, he carried on for a full minute before finally bringing on Paul. While the skit was funny, Brody did not obtain clearance to perform such a scene." Rillian 18:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a note from Brody's bio on All American Speakers - "Brody appeared on Saturday Night Live on May 10, 2003, his first TV work, but he was banned from the show after giving an improvised, yet funny, introduction for musical guest Sean Paul (The show's producer, Lorne Michaels, is infamous for hating unscripted performances)." However, I haven't found a contempory source yet. Could this all be an urban legend? Rillian 18:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's marked down on the TV.com's episode summary. [1] -- Viewdrix January 20, 3005

Removed Incorrect Info

To whoever noted that a 2005 show contained the 'only time in the show's history' that the entire cast said LFNY, that's incorrect. The entire cast of SNL '80 said it in unison on their final show, the Bill Murray episode.

Actually, it was not the entire cast in that 1981 episode, just several members of the cast. Also: the whole cast did not say it in 2005; Maya Rudolph, who was on leave, and Darrell Hammond didn't. There was another episode (Steve Martin, 1991, with the famous "Tonight Song" cold opening) where most, but not all, of the cast said LFNY. These can all be verified at SNL Archives (snl.jt.org). Has the *entire* cast ever said it? (Just curious.) Ab85 02:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"the program introduced a very attempted logo"?

What the hell does that mean? --Closedmouth 05:33, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banned Guests

What are your sources for the banned guests? I can't find any evidence that guests are banned from SNL, they are just not invited back. I think the section titled "Banned Guests" should be removed or edited to note that there is no evidence that guests are ever banned from SNL. (128.113.146.178 18:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

If they're not to be invited back, that's basically a ban, is it not? To get on the show, you have to be invited, and if they're not to ever be invited again, by extension, that's banning them from the show. Besides, try looking at every other source of information on Saturday Night Live, including tv.com and IMDB. Plenty of information about bannings. It's not as if Lorne Michaels goes to media outlets all the time and talks about "so-and-so is banned". It's just that "banned" is a much easier way to say "Lorne Michaels shall not be asking this person to return to the show". Don't get pissed and try to get rid of a section because you were wrong to try and add Prince to the banned list and people reverted your edits. -- Viewdrix February 5th, 2006

How about Fine Young Cannibals? It's been 17 years since they performed, are they banned? The truth of the matter is that your definition of banning is weak and not founded in fact. IMDB and tv.com are hardly reliable sources to be using, and other than that you completely sidestepped my question. If you have no sources, how can you consider these bannings fact? Do you have some sort of inside information that the rest of the world doesn't have? The only decent argument you have is with Andy Kaufman, and that is only because it happened on the show and is incontrovertible. However, that is no excuse for the rest of the section, which is speculation at best. (128.113.146.178 23:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I didn't think you'd have an answer to that. Go ahead with living in your plastic bubble, I suppose. (128.113.146.178 09:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I missed the alert because someone else edited this page between the time you added your reply and I came online. The truth of the matter is that I answered the only question you posed: "What are your sources?", and saying I sidestepped is a total lie. And what does the fact that Fine Young Cannibals performed 17 years ago have to do with anything? Not only that, but you completely failed to acknowledge that you tried to add to the list of banned guests, and that after your edit was reverted, you seemed to take this stance of anti-"banned" pretty quickly. You had no sources yourself in your addition of the Prince information, so saying that IMDB and tv.com, more sources than you ever had, aren't reliable is incredibly ironic. Why don't you just accept that your edit was wrong, that previous guests have actually confirmed they've been banned from the show, in addition to which Lorne Michaels has not denied that guests have been banned, but would naturally not talk at length and detail about it, and move on? Why don't you do that instead of try to come up with completely unrelated "evidence", such as the implication that if banning existed, surely Fine Young Cannibals would be allowed to perform after 17 years. Am I Lorne Michaels? No. Do I know about the intricate policies of a banning? No. I just know that there have been bannings, and they havn't returned to the show. Stop being immature and get over it. -- Viewdrix 10 February 2006

Times Square?

The box says mentions that NBC's studios are in Times Square, but I'm pretty sure that they're in Rockefeller Center, including those studios in which SNL is shot. Can anyone confirm? dsemaya 17:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's Rockefeller. Viewdrix 02:55, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new york stub

does it really belong here?

Infobox Caption

I have moved the infobox caption for the photograph of the title card to the image's page. It was far too long to work as an infobox caption. If anyone has a more appropriate caption, feel free to edit it again.

WikiProject?

Hey guys. I proposed a WikiProject for SNL. It is my first proposed WP, so please tell me if I did anything wrong or if it was an inappropriate request. If you think it is a good idea, go here and sign your name to the list. I hope it works out. Lbr123 03:55, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Farly & Phil Hartman deaths?

I was wondering if any mention was made about Farley or Hartman after they died on SNL? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.27.102.34 (talk • contribs) .

I am fairly certain that they did a "best of" episodes for the two former cast members. --Asbl 22:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

I think a section on criticism would be interesting. I know that Bob Odenkirk has had much to say, such as in this Suicide Girls interview: "No I think I would have developed more interesting and in a healthier way in my life if I hadn’t done it. But what are you going to do? You aren’t going to say no to that job."

http://suicidegirls.com/words/Bob+Odenkirk/ Benbenbenben

I think I will add a criticism section. There seems to be much that can be said.

Cast

On the main SNL page, it says Horatio Sanz and Chris Parnell are presently in the cast, but on the 2005-present page, under "2006-2007," neither of them are included, but Maya Rudolph is. Which is it? Macarion 05:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's people making guesses. So far, Fey's scheduled to leave the sketch cast but return for Weekend Updates, so she stays, and Rachel Dratch is so likely to leave because of 30 Rock that she should be being left off. Otherwise, nothing's official, so the cast lists should stay the same until someone's officially added or dropped. -- Viewdrix 15:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Official [[2]] Koolgiy 05:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chevy Chase Banning / Stick Around

There's nothing that makes me more anxious than seeing a Wiki fact without further explanation. This article says that Chevy Chase was banned from hosting again in 1997. I would love to see that explanation.

Also, I am not going to make this note myself because I have not done my research - but I don't believe I have EVER seen a monologue that didn't end with the phrase, "(So) Stick around, we'll be right back." To me, it seems a defining tradition of SNL. Does anyone know anything about that? --Spesek 20:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are more, but I saw one a couple days ago with Kate Hudson or something and she just said "so stick around." Macarion 23:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Weis short films & Skred

I'm surprised to see nothing about the short films by Gary Weis from the first few years. Those were a prominent feature in the early days, and it was the only place you'd see such pieces pre-Night Flight/Liquid TV. The twisted little world of Skred the muppet was another early fave.

I came looking for info on these, so I can't really start a section for them. But a Short Films & Features section would be very useful. It could also include stuff like the Eric Idle directed video of the George Harrison song Crackerbox Palace, which debuted on SNL. Laszlo Panaflex 23:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will Ferrell

I believe Will Ferrell should be added to the list of "notable tenures". He was on the cast for seven years (1995-2002), which the paragraph above states "few have broken the seven year barrier." Dtemp 15:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Molly Shannon is coming back?

Source? --Macarion 20:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hosts who auditioned(or were offered a part)

I really think this category should be broken down into two seperate categories. Why are guest hosts mixed in with people who auditioned and turned down?

Rerun editing

I added a note about the earlier encore showings sometimes including sketches from other episodes. Two examples are the Rod Stewart and Lauren Hutton reruns; both had non-show specific (ie no host/musical guest appearance) sketches edited into them from the Donald Pleasance show. My research found that Pleasance never re-aired on NBC.

74.115.226.191 09:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

anyone able to help

I keep seeing a caption that says recorded from an earlier live broadcast. does that just mean that it is a rerun or does it mean something else? Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 03:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Depends. The text appears on every rerun now but if you're watching Classic SNL and you see the modern disclaimer (one very non-intrusive line) during a pre-1996 montage and you don't see the older versions with "SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE" mentioned by name in big block letters, it's probably the original live episode reairing. The other ways you can tell if it's a rerun edit are listening to the bumpers in the post-1985 episodes (as a rule they are silent in live broadcasts, and the band fanfare in the reruns), or listening to the closing theme in older episodes (sometimes they used a canned recording of the closing theme to get rid of Pardo's voiceover announcing the next show). 74.115.226.191 06:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If your watching it on the normal 11:30 time slot, and it looks like a newer show (in widescreen) then yes its a repeat. Most likely becasue their on break. Koolgiy 05:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Louise, Two-headed housewife

Hiya, I'm trying to properly a cite a character in another article about Terry and Linda Jamison. According to their information, they were performance artists who created a "recurring character" on SNL (possibly just an SNL film), known as "Louise, the two-headed housewife." Does anyone here have more information about this, such as which episode(s) the character appeared in? Thanks. --Elonka 18:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not Always Don Pardo!

"The opening credits are voiced-over by long-time NBC announcer Don Pardo." -On 8/26/06, NBC reran the October 3rd, 1981 episode (where James Kaan backed out has host), and I discovered that the opnening credits WERE NOT DELIVERED BY DON PARDO. I don't know who it was but it sounded like the guy who used to voice the credits for Letterman when he was on NBC.

Mel Brandt, as noted in the 1981-82 season summary. Lambertman 02:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There have been many times recently when Pardo hasn't been avaialable for the live telecast. Darrell Hammond fills in with his best Pardo impersonation.

Has SNL ever been live in the summer?

Does anybody know when the seasons begin (and end) in terms of production/filming? Although minor animated sequences might have been produced in the summer, it doesn't seem that they ever cast a live host in the summer.

So far as I can remember, SNL has almost always been reruns in the summer.

Am I right?

What's your point? --Macarion 02:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read message at top of page "Please do not use it as a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.". - Mike Beckham 03:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Beckham: Please follow link at top of page regarding new users. No need for everyone to freak out, the message was clearly started with a question which can be answered and perhaps added to the article.

All I can contribute is that the first episode usually airs in the last week of September or first week of October. - Tyler 02:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current cast having dates attached.

Is it really necessary? I wouldn't mind keeping their starting years, as it seems the dash to nothing is redundant when you're listing a current cast member. However, leaving just the starting year date may be confusing without the dash adding the context of, eg. "1996 to". Can we just list the names, that's it? -- Viewdrix 19:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How many episodes survive?

How many of the 604 episodes survive today?

Edited Charles Rocket section in "SNL Curse"

Removed part about him being member of "much-maligned 1980-1981 season", as it does not fit the tone suitable for an encyclopedia article (i.e. it seems to suggest people are waiting for all the members of that cast to do so. And even if they ARE, that's immaterial).-Jkazoo 01:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone tried re-wording this and re-inserting this, but I'm removing it again. It really is immaterial. We don't say "John Belushi was the 1st 1st Season Member to die" or "Chris Farley was the 1st cast member who joined in such-and-such season to die" and so on so on. As I said before, it reeks of a "I want every single member of that season to die" vibe, and like I said, even if that's so, it's not encyclopedic. -Jkazoo 08:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA NOMINATION ON HOLD

Not nearly enough references, and the History section could contain more than simply links to other articles. -- Ci e lomobile ^{talk / contribs} 21:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are major issues, and such the GA must fail rather than be put on hold.

There's a further issue in that the article doesn't seem able to decide if it's prose or a list. It needs structural improvement. --kingboyk 23:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Live Start Time

It said that the shows live start time was 11:35 PM Et. (With some markets delaying) It really goes live at 11:30PM Et. with some markets delaying so I changed it.

For all of you Saturday Night Live fans

I have an idea to make it better, because it's beginning to suck. They should restore it back to classic, like from 1990-1995ish. Here's my idea of the perfect cast (if they can get some of these people to come), and this is nothing against women (there's like 2 women), I'm just picking out the perfect mix:

Darrell Hammond, Will Forte, Fred Armisen, Jason Sudeikis, Horatio Sanz, Kenan Thompson, Amy Poehler, Will Ferell, Adam Sandler, Rachel Dratch, Kristen Wiig, Jimmy Fallon, Tim Meadows, Jack Black

Anyway, here's my opinion on it now: Last season the writing sucked and the writers couldn't make a skit have a satisfying ending, it was usually some stupid ending. Seth Meyers was the best writer on there, and now that he's the main one, the skits are a little better. Now, about 1/2 make me laugh, 1/8 are okay, and 3/8 make me want to vomit. The cast is pretty good, though, actually better than last year. Weekend Update's pretty good, and I think Seth is a good addition, but he could do better. And usually Amy's bits are funny and his are drawn out and dry and stupid, which is weird. I love Kenan, Will, and Jason, and I think anything with Will Forte in it is hilarious and anything with Kenan is generally pretty funny (depending on if he's the star or not). Anyway, please feel free to debate me on this. Temp

Wikipedia is not for discussing like a forum. -- Viewdrix 01:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The people at the ref desk told me to put it here. Temp

Way to welcome a newcomer to WP, Viewdrix...NOT. Since you're into rules maybe you should look at this one: Please don't bite the newcomers (Temp, a suggestion: to add your username and the date/time of your contribution on the Talk page of any WP article, follow it with four tildes (~).) -- Jalabi99 21:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Jalabi, I was pretty sure that this was something you could post here. The bite marks will heal soon :) Temp 19:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SNL films from sketches section

I noticed that the two Blues Brothers movies were included and took them out seeing that the criteria for this section is supposed to be films that originated as SNL sketches. The Blues Brothers were never a "sketch" - they originated in part based on a sketch (singing "I'm A King Bee" while still dressed in bee costumes from a Killer Bee sketch), but mostly they began as an outgrowth of Belushi's music hobbies and their first appearances on the show were actually helping to warm up the audience (documented in Hill and Wiengrad's book). In this regard they are more of a musical act than a sketch performance. RoyBatty42 19:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look, as long as the section titled "Films based on SNL sketches" and not "Every single F-ing thing someone connected to SNL" has done, then it should stick to that criteria. I also would like to suggest that it might be retitled to reflect that BOB ROBERTS and OFFICE SPACE were not sketches, but short films done by outside talent not part of the SNL staff. RoyBatty42 00:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SNL Curse

As it clearly does not fit the definition of a theory, I edited the word out and replaced it with "superstition." RichieGB 18:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nonlive?

One trivia bit discusses "The non-live opening..." - to what does this refer? As far as I was aware, even the cold-open is live, is it not? The trivia talks about episodes that don't say "live from new york, it's saturday night". I suggest that this entire trivia note be killed anyway - there have been many instances I've seen in which the phrase is slightly modified, such as when Hammond's Schwarzenegger says it, etc. TheHYPO 19:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When It's Not Live

"Encore showings are not always identical to the original broadcast. Frequently, successful sketches that aired later in the show during the original broadcast will be reedited to appear earlier, and segments that did not work well during the original showing are replaced by a) alternate performances or b) completely different sketches that had been taped at the dress rehearsal that preceded the live broadcast. In the earlier years of the show's history, reruns occasionally replaced weaker sketches with segments from other episodes, usually from episodes that did not have an encore showing at all."

Are there any specific references for this? --David Bixenspan 05:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Every Saturday

The opening to the article states that SNL has been broadcast "nearly every Saturday night since its debut on October 11, 1975". This is both vague and innacruate. I am changing it. --Lakeshark 09:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings

There is nothing in this article about how the show is doing in terms of the number of viewers. --theDemonHog 08:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need a timeline with players

I was disappointed to see there was no timeline with matching players. I'm very interested in knowing how many seasons Eddie Murphy overlapped with Martin Short and Billy Crystal -- or did they?

It would be nice to see the evolution of casting.

Hope someone has the info

144.59.12.138 03:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Pimju9[reply]

Format

I think the show's format should be outlined in more detail before anything else. I'm a UK resident and I've never watched the show. Reading this article is made practically impossible by the use of jargon- Notable tenures? 'Best Ofs'? Repertory Players? I'm left completely in the dark. Even if these terms aren't unique to the show, they should be linked to articles explaining them.

Sound Glitches

What about something on tech based problems during the live shows(like the sound glitch during AFI this past weekend)?

(LadySatine 16:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]