Jump to content

Talk:Invader Zim

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 24.47.251.142 (talk) at 23:04, 2 January 2013 (→Celebrities). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured article candidateInvader Zim is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 3, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
February 21, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
March 31, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former featured article candidate

Controversy

Really? It's one of the shows Christian Parenting Today called "non-Christian" and somebody made a joke about an episode? How are these controversial? Having this section implies the existence of controversy. It should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.187.136 (talk) 10:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Failed return and possibilities of future returns

http://www.questionsleep.com/mindspill/?p=2024

This is one of two blogs maintained by Jhonen Vasquez. It talks about how he and Nickelodeon were in talks to continue the Zim franchise VERY recently. It might be worth mentioning. 71.62.125.228 (talk) 23:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Episode Number Inconsistency

Throughout this article and the episodes article the number of completed episodes is refered to as both 27 and 46 (including the pilot apparently). They can't both be right! Surely some terminology needs to be introduced to differentiate program from story. I might be having an episode right now! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.175.252 (talk) 12:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalizing

Some one has put on here that Invader Zim might come back.......that is obviously not true!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frobrother (talk • contribs) 02:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bias Much?--200.77.79.219 (talk) 19:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ummm no thereis alot of rumors going around recently about it might coming back and there are alot of evadice to support it. like a nick forum admin posted "do you want invader zim back?", The Zim DVDs are re-released at an expensive price of $50 for all 27 episodes, A new Zim game is added to Nick.com and Zim reruns return for a month, and its heavily promoted. if you whant prof i can post links to the forum, the DVD's, the add, the game. so it is true it might come back with new episodes and reruns will run for a months. My therory that they are testing the fans to see if the ratings are high and if they are it will come back.--Metalavery (talk) 04:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Nicktoons Network has announced that they will be showing Invader Zim. It is unknown at this time whether there will be new episodes.74.96.4.195 (talk) 23:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)Anonymous '[reply]

Tallest Miyuki

Someone posted on Miyuki#Fictional characters: "Tallest Miyuki a former leader of the Irken Empire who got eaten in the unfinished episode "The Trial" of Invader Zim". I can't find any 'Miyuki' either here or on Invader Zim characters. I've fact-tagged this, if someone knows could you please add relevant information and redirect this name? Tyciol (talk) 08:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unofficial Directors Commentary

I figured I would point this out for anyone who wanted to go and take a look. Make of it what you will. Maybe it's useful, maybe it's not:

http://www.youtube.com/user/SteveRessel#p/u/17/zU1k-y0LBPM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.190.254.143 (talk) 06:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It returns!!!

Invader Zim will return this monday the 21st! I'm recording them! —Preceding unsigned comment added by DownAirStairsConditioner (talk • contribs) 10:30, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No one gives a damn. This isn't a section to talk about yourself. It's for critical information pertaining to the series. With that said I wonder why no one has written anything about the series being rebroadcasted. --99.132.131.7 (talk) 07:13, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The zim wikia says

In March of 2010, Invader Zim returned to Nicktoons Network for one month. This, of course, brought forth rumors from fans, who believed that Nickelodeon was testing the fanbase to see how many people would watch Nicktoons just for Invader Zim, and that they might bring the show back if the results are favorable. And, as of June 17, 2010, Nickelodeon has officially announced Invader ZIM is coming back for good on Nicktoons Network. The show will start airing again for the fourth time on Monday, June 21, 2010 at 4:30 EST.

What does "coming back for good" mean? If something as vague as this were added to the article, then someone would need to clarify whether this indicates a rerun or the continued development of the series. XP1 (talk) 12:31, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

but I can't find reliable sources. If someone could find some reliable sources, this could be added to the article.Smallman12q (talk) 22:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Characters

This is a question regarding characters. There is a whole separate article for the Characters and that content is almost the same as displayed on the main article of Invader Zim. I believe it's wasting space. Why can't "Main Article: Invader Zim characters" just be in the "Characters" section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.52.123.137 (talk) 01:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ZADR

It was created some time ago of wich im not sure exactly. It is still wieldly poppular umong some fanatics. (my point being there should be some attention drawn in this article about this odd fanfiction) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.162.43.28 (talk) 22:26, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fan endeavors aren't noteworthy for wikipedia unless they're profound (Invadercon) or Operation Head Pigeons (debatable- needs one more reputable citing). Fan couplings are just not noteworthy or eventful especially when its a typical and not very defining fan trend since the beginning of the show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gingershepherd (talk • contribs) 17:04, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Season3

If ZIM is a cult hit, why dont they finish season 3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiSpector (talk • contribs) 22:44, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

67.86.22.51 (talk) 03:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)There never was a season 3. They cancelled production during Season 2 because it wasn't popular at the time and ratings were low. It's gotten more popular since, but there has never been a third season.[reply]

Even the show creator said his *best guess* was "ratings and sheer expense" in his blog. Source: http://www.questionsleep.com/mindspill/?p=2024 Regardless, being a cult hit doesn't mean you'll be revived. There have been strides made by the Nick-recognized campaign Operation Head Pigeons but they're not quite enough to report on a wiki article yet.72.92.232.207 (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion

67.86.22.51 (talk) 03:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)When people are saying that Invader Zim is coming back, are they saying reruns will start airing again or production will resume?[reply]

Well right now there's a persistent rumor that if the just released 'Operation Doom' dvd sells well, Nickelodeon will bring the show back for NEW episodes or to finish the 2nd season/movie finale. Considering that as of now reruns still air, it can be assumed that people discussing it 'coming back' refers to production being resumed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.187.76 (talk) 01:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The aforementioned DVD sold very well but "Operation Head Pigeons" (those who claim to have influenced the DVD's release) never seemed to imply the show was certain to come back based on the DVD's sales. Rather it is Project Massive that they assert will be the deciding factor in the show's release. Is it citable by Wikipedia's standards? Perhaps it's noteworthy to say the fan movement got acknowledgment from Nickelodeon via Twitter but that's it.Gingershepherd (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:55, 24 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

InvaderCON

right now InvaderCON isn't mentioned on the article & I'm not quite sure if it should be, but it might be worth mentioning it since is was actually a very big deal among fans of the series & some of the cast was even there, I'm not sure if this is true but I even heard that nickelodeon executives were "overwhelmed" by the turn out. EpiSonic (talk)

http://www.toonzone.net/news/articles/36775/nickelodeon-reps-overwhelmed-by-fan-turnout-at-invadercon

Not sure if this is citable but here ya go.Gingershepherd (talk) 21:46, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Invader

I thought that the show was great. Some parts were funny and other you had to catch the humor. why did Zim not come back on Nick? I suppose that he went back to his own planet and said he destroyed Earth but he didn't...... Darkened wiki (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"In the end, even I couldn’t give you the whole and accurate truth for why the show got pulled. The most likely culprits are simply ratings and the sheer expense of the show, which was monstrously expensive at the time, especially when compared to more modern, flash-based savings fests."-Jhonen VasquezSource--Gingershepherd (talk) 21:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrities

I've been trying to find some celebs to include in this article that are fans of Invader Zim. According to an interview on the NY Times, Lady Gaga is a fan of this show. Would it hurt to include this?StaleCupcakes (talk) 16:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GET OUT 24.47.251.142 (talk) 23:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Project Massive

I've added a small piece of info about [www.project-massive.com Project Massive], an effort to revive Invader Zim. But someone removed it saying "Tumblr isn't a reliable source", which proves that they didn't look at the link, because that specific Tumblr Link is the official "Website" of Project Massive. So, can anyone explain why it was removed? 80.5.68.176 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I didn't revert the change, but I probably would have. Every TV show has fans, and every fan is disappointed when their show gets canceled. So is it notable that a group of fans are organizing a letter-writing campaign to get the show put back on the air? I'd say that it is probably not, and adding a link to the campaign might be construed self-serving and spammy. I also don't think that referencing Invader Zim fan-fiction would be notable, nor would referencing uncompleted episodes animated by fans.
But probably more important than that, there are guidelines about what kinds of references you can submit to Wikipedia. You've linked to the "official site" of the movement, which would be considered a self-published source. Self-published sources aren't usually considered reliable sources. There are a few exceptions, but the question is whether or not your link qualifies as reliable. Look here to find out: WP:SPS Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But it isn't Fan Fiction(In fact, if it's successful, all the cast members agreed that they would return and everything), and -- from what I can tell -- it seems to follow all reliability rules, so I don't see the problem.
80.5.68.176 (talk) 20:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, when I brought up the fan-fiction, I was referring to other recent submissions made by a few editors. Anyhow, the core of my counter-argument is that the inclusion of this letter writing campaign in the article may not even be noteworthy. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like I was the one who reverted the addition of the tumblr link. Material added to the project (Wikipedia) should be verifiable in reliable sources. Tumblr is not a reliable source as the content is end-user generated without editorial review. In some cases, self-published sources like tumblr may be used to augment existing sources; but in this case there are no other sources present. If Project Massive attracts attention and editorial content in reliable third-party sources, then the hurles of Verifiability and Reliable Sources will be meet. That still doesn't mean the material should be in the article (it still must be notable and not given undue weight, for instance); but having those sources (and citations to them) is a necessary part.
I really appreciate your asking here, and if (after checking out the policies and guidelines linked to above) you have any further questions about this then please don't hesitate to ask here or on my talk page. Happy Editing! --Tgeairn (talk) 01:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, co-admin of that campaign. I take Wikipedia's standards for reliability seriously so if this event isn't meeting standards to be included then that's fine because none of us Operation Head Pigeons admin are seeking to be mentioned here. Yet I can't help but notice this when I make rounds for Zim rumor control. If this LA Weekly article not only is verifiable and reliable but notable and not given undue weight then great. Otherwise we'll make a note for our fans to leave you be (we did a few months back but new fans emerge constantly).-"Control Brain" Johnny 68.9.174.223 (talk) 21:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about the editorial practices at LA Weekly, but at a glance it looks like that is a usable source. Adding a new section including a paragraph or two about the fanbase and revival attempts to Reception should be a good fit, I wouldn't add it to the lede section though. Obviously be sure to cite the article and keep the prose limited to what is verifiable in the source. Thanks! --Tgeairn (talk) 17:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Invader_Zim&oldid=530994580"