Talk:Jewpacabra

Untitled

Please do not add mention of pop cultural references, continuity notes, trivia, or who the targets of a given episode's parody are, without accompanying such material with an inline citation of a reliable, published, secondary source. Adding such material without such sources violates Wikipedia's policies regarding Verifiability, No Original Research, and Synthesis.

While a primary source (such as the episode itself, or a screencap or clip from it at South Park Studios) is acceptable for material that is merely descriptive, such as the synopsis, it is not enough to cite a primary source for material that constitutes an analytic, evaluative or interpretative claims, such as cultural references in works of satire or parody, because in such cases, such claims are being made on the part of the editor. This is called synthesis, which is a form of original research, and is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia, regardless of whether one thinks the meaning of the reference is "obvious". Sources for such claims must be secondary sources in which reliable persons, such as TV critics or reviewers, explicitly mention the reference.

In addition, trivial information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, per WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE and WP:TRIVIA, and this includes the plot summary. As indicated by WP:TVPLOT, the plot summary is an overview of a work's main events, so avoid any minutiae that is not needed for a reader's understanding of the story's three fundamental elements: plot, characterization and theme. This includes such minutiae as scene-by-scene breakdowns, technical information or detailed explanations of individual gags or lines of dialogue.

If you're new to Wikipedia, please click on the wikilinked policy pages above to familiarize yourself with this site's policies and guidelines.

What can be added to the article

All we can post on here is a Plot summary. So for anyone who, like me, isn't native to America and wants a much more encyclopaedic and comprehensive wiki on South Park go visit http://southpark.wikia.com . Those who have bookmarked this South Park wiki page might as well move to the Wikia one. The South Park pages on Wikipedia are currently a joke and only contain a Plot section making them quite redundant. Why not scrap the individual episode pages altogether and combine them into series pages? That would certainly be in tone with what certain individuals are after. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.128.253 (talk) 12:49, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that because it has been a little while, some Nightmare (can't recall his username) auto-proclamed himself wikipedia police officer and armed with his 20 wikipedia badges is chasing the bad non referenced addition. Makes me think of this SP episode when Cartman becomes Hallway monitor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.195.72 (talk) 15:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

You can indeed post more than a plot summary; You can post material on critical reception to the episode, which is found in articles on other episodes, such as "Reverse Cowgirl", "The Poor Kid" and "1%". Is there some reason you can't add that material?

I haven't "auto-proclaimed" myself anything; Wikipedia's policies and guidelines explicitly indicate what I've posted above. If your position is that they do not, then have the decency to explain how, in a manner that is intelligent and civil. (I assume that your position isn't that you don't feel that this site's rules don't apply to you, right?)

Lastly, do not remove signatures from talk pages, as 88.114.195.72 did with this edit. If you're going to participate in a talk page discussion, then have the decency to sign your posts, which is required. If being known as the author of a message that violates Wikipedia's Civility Policy troubles you, 88.114.195.72, then perhaps the solution is to not violate such policies in the first place. Nightscream (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I might add that things that are being directly satirized by the episode can be included within the article as long as there are reliable sources for those inclusions. Other material that can be included is any significant impact in the outside world (such as controversies, legal actions that were directly prompted by the episode, etc), again, as long as there are reliable sources to back it up. So, no, this article is not limited to plot only. — al-Shimoni (talk) 06:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Grammar in plot section

I tried to fix a few of the most egregious grammar errors, but the overall level of writing in the plot summary is just too crude to be fixed without a complete rewrite, which I don't care enough to attempt. Perhaps someone can further clean it up.69.165.159.162 (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I rewrote it. Hope it's better now. Nightscream (talk) 01:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

reference to storage wars

Hi I looked at this show called storage wars and there's an episode called "Dial C for Chupacabra", you have the show on wikipedia, but there's no description of any of episodes and no webpage for each episode like south park 190.139.62.226 (talk) 19:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Reception section

Where is the reception section? This episode was reviewed heavily just like any other SP episode. This article is quite short by the standards setup by the rest of the SP project. 97.85.168.22 (talk) 03:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You haven't added one yet. Nightscream (talk) 10:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Reception sections were existing in most articles but were removed. It's not worth my time to fight up that stream. Even referenced ones were removed. 97.85.168.22 (talk) 22:18, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Which articles? Removed by who? When was this? All of the Season 16 South Park articles have Critical reception sections, except for Jewpacabra and Faith Hilling, so feel free to add sourced material on that to those articles if you like. If it's sourced and relevant to the article, the no one's removing it. :-) Nightscream (talk) 23:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC)