Jump to content

Talk:Phineas and Ferb

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.57.243.166 (talk) at 19:06, 20 July 2014 (→‎What do you guys think?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good articlePhineas and Ferb was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 23, 2007Articles for deletionNo consensus
May 2, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 4, 2009Good article nomineeListed
January 5, 2010Good topic candidateNot promoted
July 15, 2012Good article reassessmentDelisted
April 23, 2014Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article
WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by Gonzonoir, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 16 July 2009.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
Previous copyedits:
/ 
Note icon
This article was copy edited by Zeality on 12 July 2009.

Start Date

Can somebody please edit the preview date so it is formatted correctly? I didn't know how to and that's the only way to end the premiere dispute. THANK YOU!! DLWDWFreek (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Editing

Please insert your comments above this line so people don't have to sift through the GA review to navigate the page. Divod (talk) 02:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Phineas and Ferb/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Start of review

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. The rules for GA reviews are stated at Good Article criteria. I usually do reviews in the order: coverage; structure; detailed walk-through of sections (refs, prose, other details); images (after the text content is stable); lead (ditto). Feel free to respond to my comments under each one, and please sign each response, so that it's clear who said what.

When an issue is resolved, I'll mark it with  Done. If I think an issue remains unresolved after responses / changes by the editor(s), I'll mark it  Not done. Occasionally I decide one of my comments is off-target, and strike it out -- Philcha (talk) 14:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I've occasionally had edit conflicts in review pages, and to reduce this risk I'd be grateful if you'd let me know when you're most active, so I can avoid these times.

Coverage

Structure

  •  Done I'd prefer "Characters", "Plot and humor" and probably "Music" to appear at the top, so that readers who are not already fans will know what the series is about. I'm working by analogy with typical artciles on books and films, which generally start with "Plot" followed by "Characters". In the case of Phineas and Ferb I'm happy for "Characters" to appear first as the series appears to be character-driven (unlike e.g. Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV series), where each season has a main story arc), and I'm happy for "Music" to appear early as it's an integral part of the product rather than something added later for atmosphere. --Philcha (talk) 14:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll get to that tomorrow. Where exactly early on do you want them? The Flash {talk} 04:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I think I've been quite specific about my preferences. Of course if you have other ideas I'm willing to listen. --Philcha (talk) 16:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Scratch that, rearranged to your description further. The Flash {talk} 17:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite what I envisaged, but quite good enough - thanks. --Philcha (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, happy it's good. The Flash {talk} 18:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot and humor

I don't understand. Why are you calling these primary sources unreliable? Futurama, a good article, links to a chat with Matt Groening, from a fan site. How is this any different at all? The Flash {talk} 20:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{done} The whole of "To do so, they built outrageous and somewhat impossible inventions ... secret agent for the O.W.C.A ("Organization Without a Cool Acronym")" has only 1 citation:
    • It's another page from the same wiki,and IMO not an acceptable source, see WP:RS.
    • I dont' see how that source supports all the points made in the passage "To do so, they built outrageous and somewhat impossible inventions ... secret agent for the O.W.C.A ("Organization Without a Cool Acronym")". Sorry guys, you need some more and better sources.

--Philcha (talk) 19:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Done In " Like fellow cartoon SpongeBob SquarePants, live-action shots are included alongside the animation several times, most recently in the episode "The Chronicles of Meap." Coincidentally, both creators worked on SpongeBob,[14][15] and likely asked for such elements", the only part supported by references is "both creators worked on SpongeBob".
Also, I would just like to restate the links to the wiki e-mails and stuff are 100% reliable as they were e-mails from the creators; you can check the whois for "Swampym." The Flash {talk} 19:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, for the reasons already stated. The whois for "Swampym" shows only that, if the protocol header info was not spoofed, "Swampym" wrote from a Web client on Disney's premises. --Philcha (talk) 20:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Besides the point, you're calling a primary source unreliable. How is the person who created the show unreliable? Just because it's from a non-official website does not damper on the clear fact that this is info directly from the co-creators. The Flash {talk} 20:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • (comment) This has made huge progress since I last looked at it - well done! --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could mention that Doofenshmirtz' schemes are based on vanity rather than the conventional global domination - see Phineas and Ferb: Kid Inventors and a Secret Agent Platypus, it's in line with the "no one is really evil" ethos. --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I dont' think "almost always lead to the eventual destruction of whatever contraption Phineas and Ferb have built that day" is exactly supported by Disney's Phineas and Ferb do it all, which says, "the Doctor's malevolent plots being foiled, which directly contributes to Phineas and Ferb's exoneration from their sister's accusations." Remeber that P&F's project of the day is not always a construction, see sources you've already cited. Can you rephrase or find an additional source. Perhaps some sources you've already cited may help - my comment about Doofenshmirtz' schemes is based on an item from an already-cited source. When you've gone to the trouble to find good sources, milk 'em. --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • How does one destroy an activity? The source says "These encounters consistently include the elements of Dr. Doofenshmirtz capturing Perry, as well as the Doctor's malevolent plots being foiled, which directly contributes to Phineas and Ferb's exoneration from their sister's accusations." which is poor writing in the source as it's unclear. Best would be to find another source that's clearer and then paraphrase that. Otherwise you'll have to find some phrasing that's as non-specifc as the current source. --Philcha (talk) 19:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I've fixed it. The issue here is that, like you've said, they do more than invent, so it's hard to find a single phrase that grips on what you can call everything they do... The Flash {talk} 16:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done "... and occasional double-entendre" cites one of the episodes. This has 2 flaws: it covers only one episode; and it's your interpretation that some aspect of that episode is a double-entendre. Another source you've already cited may help. If not, Google for "Phineas and Ferb" double-entendre. --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done Actually, it does - ""The truth is, we make this cartoon for ourselves," said Marsh. "We don’t make it for children; we just don’t exclude them, which is something that John Lassister once said. When you get to writing the jokes and finalizing the content, you just want to make sure you don’t do anything that’s going to make you cringe as a parent or that’s going to alienate the younger viewers." You must have missed it. The Flash {talk} 14:28, 23 July

2009 (UTC)

  • You've asked me this before, and the unfortunate thing is there's no time marker on it or any sort of way to denote which place is which. Ideas?
In this case, drop the podcast as we already have a good text ref for "not created just for kids, but simply did not exclude them as an audience". --Philcha (talk) 06:11, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can't just drop a third party source because it takes a while to listen to it - that'd be a waste of a reliable reference. But in this case, I'll drop it for this specific reference, The Flash {talk} 15:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done "Aspects of the show's humor are aimed at adults" apparently also relies on that podcast. How far in? --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you find alternative text sources? In our discussion of "not created just for kids" it turned out that there was a very strong text source. I think you should milk the text sources before using other types. --Philcha (talk) 06:15, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Not doneThe O.W.C.A. is listed as being "all-animal", however Major Monogram and Carl are both human, as are other, less often seen characters who play the same position as Major Monogram for other agents. As such, the organization is not "all-animal", rather, it has an all-animal field agent cast and (seemingly) all-human office cast. 71.179.97.219 (talk) 23:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Characters

  •  Not done Re "blended family, a premise the creators considered underused in children's programming and which reflected Marsh's own upbringing" relies on that podcast! how far in? --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    [Phineas and Ferb: Music, Mischief, And The Endless Summer Vacation covers this, and is text rather than a podcast - we don't need no stinkin' podcasts :-) --Philcha (talk) 06:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, fixed. But you seem to really have issues with the podcast, and like I said, it gives no time of mark of percent but gives heavy production detail and can't be dropped for every reference because it's, well, long. The Flash {talk} 16:39, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • It isn't fixed, you haven't added the text ref I found.
        • If you cited a book, you'd be expected to state a page or fairly small page range. You said the podcast is "well, long". The principle's the same - you can't expect reviewers to listen to the whole podcast for one point, then for another, then for another, etc. You need to give some guide on how far in the relevant parts are, so reviewers and readers can go directly to the relevant parts. -Philcha (talk) 16:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'll guess I'll have to say this again - there is no other way, why don't you see that? A book you can pinpoint a time because there's a page number, but you can't cite a commentary. I will not drop a reliable source because it takes a while to listen too when the same thing happens with commentaries and I don't see anyone arguing over those. My logic is sound. The Flash {talk} 17:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Animation director, Rob Hughes, concurred: "in all the other shows every character is either stupid or a jerk, but there are no stupid characters or jerks in this one"" is phrased as a quote from Hughes, but it's Povenmire's comment on Hughes' feelings. --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Not done fine on attribution, but "Povenmire has stated that their animation director, Rob Hughes, concurred with them" is clumsy (sounds like a rather shifty political press statement) - can you make it a bit more like plain English? --Philcha (talk) 06:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unsure how I can incorporate how Rob H. said it, as well Povenmire being the one roughly quoted them, without it being a run-on. I think another copyedit is needed and if so, it'll be fixed then. The Flash {talk} 16:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! Thanks, fixed. The Flash {talk} 16:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"concurred with them"? This isn't a White House press release. --Philcha (talk)
What? I did exactly what you said. The Flash {talk} 17:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, now is it better? The Flash {talk} 17:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music

  •  Done The source simply says they created one song in 40 minutes, it does not make a generalisation. That's impressive enough, no need to go beyond the source. --Philcha (talk) 06:34, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done. Also, you seem to have serious issue with the podcast and I think it's pretty clear there's no way to fix it. This is pretty much just like when a source is a DVD commentary, so I'm unsure how you wish me to prove it and further... The Flash {talk} 16:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the text ref.
The passage still looks clumsy and a little over-blown to me. How about "Both creators had musical backgrounds, as Povenmire performed rock 'n' roll music in his college years[ref] and Marsh's grandfather was the bandleader Les Brown" (also fixes DAB link)? --Philcha (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'll add that. The Flash {talk} 17:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you liked the text. But I think you missed the link. --Philcha (talk) 17:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh! Missed that - fixed :) The Flash {talk} 17:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Review suspended

  • If I had to pass judgement right now, the article would fail by a mile on lack of references to good sources - please read and make sure you understand WP:WIAGA, WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:RS.
  • Please work you way right through the article, making sure that every statement, item in a list, etc. is supported by at least 1 reference to a good sources. --Philcha (talk) 19:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You really need to take WP:V and [[WP:RS] seriously. I'm not going to argue every single refence with you, I'll just fail the article. You must read and comply with WP's policies. I'm not in favour of policies for the sake of policies (in some areas I'm one of the more combative dissidents), but I totally support WP:V and WP:NOR, and my views on what's an acceptable source are very much closer to WP:RS than to your ideas on the subject. --Philcha (talk) 20:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am taking it seriously - you can't call it unreliable when it's from the co-creator of the show. I'm not arguing, I am telling you the facts. I understand where you're coming from, but the point is they are the creators and anything they say about the show is reliable. The Flash {talk} 20:32, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, I don't want to argue either. You are telling me that a direct e-mail that even shows the creator's e-mail address is not official, which cannot be true. I know the policy and I have read it - this is without a doubt a primary source, no original research. Your defending a fact that cannot be true because there's no better source then from the creator of the show. Please actually explain why you do not consider this true. The Flash {talk} 20:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, do you wish me to remove every single instance of it? Also, what other way could it be reliable? The Flash {talk} 20:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Visual aspects and animation

Prose quality

  • Unfortunately the prose is poor. I'll highlight examples as I go, but you really need to get someone who's good at English prose to copyedit this. At present the article does not meet the GA criterion "well-written: the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct". If you attempt to copyedit this article yourself, I recommend that you first work through User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a (of FAC - "engaging, even brilliant prose"), omitting the MOS-specific parts. --Philcha (talk) 15:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Early inspirations

  • Re "... one of the many stepfathers he was raised by had given him words of advice ... best advice he's been given throughout his life":
    • Poor phrasing at "had given him words of advice, which told him that" - it can be half as long and twice as good. --Philcha (talk) 16:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • How far into that damn podcast? % or minutes, I on't care. You haven't said how long it is, and that's a big turn-off in its own right. You need to listen, pause, make notes about times / positions of relevant items and total time. --Philcha (talk)
      • I'm gonna say this again - there is not time or percent marked. Look, do you have issues with DVD commentaries? You can't pinpoint time in that, can you? Why are you taking, like, heavy issue with this? The Flash {talk} 16:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conception

"after 16 years of trying, Povenmire landed a pitch with Disney" (next section) makes the point. --Philcha (talk) 18:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done Oh dear, the inaccuracies start to creep in again. "At college in the mid-nineties Povenmire took up animation professionally,[19] working alongside future Phineas and Ferb co-creator Jeff Marsh as a layout artist on The Simpsons" makes it look like Povenmire moved straight to the Simpsons. P's first published cartoons were in the student mag but apparently he was not paid for them - it was his energetic merchandising that made the money. --Philcha (talk) 07:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • So you need to describe briefly how P came to work on The Simpsons and meet Marsh. Likewise you need to summarise Marsh's route to their first meeting. --Philcha (talk) 07:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done Re "Hey, I think we have our show", the source quotes P as "... told my wife, "This is the show I'm going to sell." I called Swampy that night and said, "Okay, I've got Phineas."" --Philcha (talk) 07:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Read it carefully - "All the other characters grew out of [the triangle doodle]." If that doesn't cover it enough, below they state "This guy's a triangle, this one's a rectangle, this girl's half a circle. Then we worked geometric shapes into the background design to tie it all together -- give it a visual/thematic through line. There's a little bit of Tex Avery in there -- he had that very graphic style [in his later cartoons]. A lot of what I see now is borrowed from Tex." Putting it together you can see what they were saying is that the artistic style and actual characters were developed because it was made. The Flash {talk} 18:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent post appears to imply that you have a solution that does not involve my trawing through the podcast multiple times. --Philcha (talk) 18:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, would you like me to start it? The Flash {talk} 20:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Second pause

  • Problems about inaccurate use of sources start showing up again in the "Conception" section, which I've only just reviewed. Please check everything in the rest of the article to make sure that:
    • The result is balanced (see comments about Marsh' role, above)
    • The sources used fully support the corresponding text.
    • No embellishments or interpretations not clearly supported in the sources. --Philcha (talk) 07:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Podcast

Since we've disagreed about how a podcast should cited, I requested some second opinions. A few responded at [Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations and one at Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources - all in favour of stating how far in the cited content is. If that turns out in this podcast, I suggest you check the existing text-based sources to see if they can provide the necessary support (I saw some while I looking for other things); if any points need additional sources, Google for the appropriate phrases. --Philcha (talk) 07:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Duh, duh, duh, duh-d-d-duuuh. :P And I'm done! Now there's a general location located for every statement supported by the podcast! For some reason I'm having serious issues with ref issues with "AM3" because it's not working at all for no reason, but other than that there should be zero issues now. The Flash {talk} 17:41, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just tried using the podcast, and it's totally unusable as a source of verification:

  • The Flash version at A Phineas and Ferb Extravaganza, Special Podcast Included! has no method of navigation to specific points in the conversation.
  • The downloadable mp3 version from the same page provides only very approximate navigation to specific points in the conversation. For example I tried to the reference to support "Furthermore, one of the many stepfathers he was raised by had given him words of advice, which told him that he would only have a good career if enjoyed what he was doing. Marsh cites this as the best advice he's been given throughout his life" but did not hear that despite runign through to the end of the podcast.
  • It's glacially slow, at least 30 times faster than reading text. Speech is slower than reading any way, and there are pauses and laughs and "ums" and "ers" and a lot of material that is irrelevant to the article.

Please find text alternatives that support the points that currently cite the podcast. Some of the text sources already used will help, for example I know one that covers Marsh's computer accessories career (411, IIRC). --Philcha (talk) 06:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I'll remove a reliable third party source because you think it's too long to be used (don't agree, but after all this time I'm just gonna yield on this one, lol) - it'll take me a while though, so please be patient, thanks! :) The Flash {talk} 17:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Characters (2)

  •  Done In 2nd para ("The creators sought to distinguish the show by characterizing its cast as fun-loving ... no stupid characters or jerks in this one") the source cited supports none of this. You used to have a good source back in the article's history - looks like something fell off while you were moving the furniture. --Philcha (talk) 07:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, I'm getting really sick with this one - I have no idea why, but it keeps changing. I used <ref name="AM2"/> which is page two of the interview, but for no reason at all it keeps getting screwed up. I hope it's fixed. The Flash {talk} 14:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good now. --Philcha (talk) 06:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Early inspirations(2)

Thanks. --Philcha (talk) 06:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings

That's fine. --Philcha (talk) 06:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marketing and merchandise

I've copyedited, is my attempt accurate and clear? --Philcha (talk) 06:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, looks good! :) The Flash {talk} 15:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I'd prefer a more concise summary of gameplay, but it's now a matter fo taste. Thanks for the rankings. I concsider this one resolved. --Philcha (talk) 06:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence should be reworded: "Some reviewers were displeased that the discs covered selected episodes rather than providing box sets of whole series, but noted that Disney does not generally release full-season DVD sets." Since the show is still in production, they can't release a box set of the whole series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.250.135.51 (talk) 20:59, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Homages

  •  Done The first para needs some copyediting - look over all parts of this comment before dealing with them individually - you may need to move senteces around: --Philcha (talk) 08:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done In "The United Kingdom Disney Channel currently airs a series ...", the word "currently" will be out-of-date as soon as season 2 ends, especialy if there's no season 3. Series that may run for additional seasons will always maintenance. But "currently" creates uncertainty for a reader in e.g. 2012 - is it still running in 2012, or did someone just not update it? Better to present start dates of seasons 1 and 2. --Philcha (talk) 08:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Start of 1st season would be nice, but the date of the 2nd & currently latest is an improvement. --Philcha (talk) 06:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, those were the only sources I found, nothing mentioned its premiere. The Flash {talk} 15:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would have been nice, but not a devastating omission. -Philcha (talk) 16:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, alright. --Philcha (talk) 06:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What the hell, it's not great but intelligible. --Philcha (talk) 06:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done In Stetzer, Ed; Stanley, Richie; Hayes, Jason. Lost and Found: How Churches Are Connecting to Young Adults. p. 183.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link), you need to provide date, publisher and ISBN. --Philcha (talk) 08:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Phineas and Ferb was also mentioned in season 5 of Psych; Shawn mentions that he "took a nap, watched Phineas&Ferb, had a snack, I'm tired", to describe a day without a case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.229.22.35 (talk) 15:24, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Links validity check

  • Ref #17 (USC dropout makes it big in animation) is a deadlink.
  • Done.
  • Ref #30 (common sense media) moves the link to a different URL; replace.
    • Done.
  • Ref #32 (DVD Review - the fast and the phineas) is a deadlink.
  • Done.

Check for disambiguation and other dubious wikilinks

Byrial's checker shows the artcile w-links to no disambig pages. It links to 25 WP redirect pages, but I don't think that's problem. --Philcha (talk) 04:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use of images

The text says nothing about "downtown", and I'm sure he didn't grow up in the middle of the bay. Even if P grew up in the middle of the bay, which the pic shows, this artcile is about the show rather than about 1 of the 2 creators. --Philcha (talk) 04:27, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's the best image I could find. There are zero (and I mean zero) free-use images of Dan and Swampy on the internet. The Flash {talk} 15:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not necessary, but what the heck. --Philcha (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:MOSIMAGE - images at left should not kick headings sideways. --Philcha (talk) 04:27, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, done. The Flash {talk} 15:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Eh? The pic on en.wp has a banner "candidate to be moved to Commons", which should mean it's still on en.wp and you should be able to upload a revised version. --Philcha (talk) 04:27, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is quite confusing... The Flash {talk} 15:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, well. --Philcha (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What on earth is this pic doing in this article? As if the image of the Mobile, AL waterfront wasn't bad enough, the inclusion of File:Whitney Matheson.jpg is absurd. That's like a double-whammy of irrelevance*.
*irrelevance = two or more degrees of seperation from the subject of the article -K10wnsta (talk) 05:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Dump both of these pics. --Philcha (talk) 05:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cast

  • You've just added a picture gallery. IMO that was a mistake, and you should dump the pics:
    • It's toon, so pics of the voice artists add nothing.
    • AFAIK Povenmire and Marsh are not members of the cast.
    • "No free image" pics of Povenmire, Marsh and 2 voice actors.
    • Spreading the pics in a table is no good at less much than 1440 window width - e.g. at 800px width a reader has to scroll horizontally to see all the content - a heinous web sin. --Philcha (talk) 20:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't agree with you. The Simpsons and several other animated series pages use this exact same thing. It is not a picture gallery, either, but a table to list the main cast members. But I will not get into another huge discussion on something you do not like with the page (because we all know where that ends :P) so I'm just going to yield if this will become that. The Flash {talk} 20:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've asked for comments at WT:GAN. --Philcha (talk) 05:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • The WP:GA? criteria is (6b) images are relevant to the topic. I believe images of show's voice actors are relevant (a gallery of the cast of The Simpsons would be irrelevant). I would err on side of inclusion if the main editor believes it is important enough to include. I don't see which GA criteria regulates the format of images (I think there is an option for 'width=100%' that automatically adjusts to the screen size but the coding for these tables has long since passed me by). --maclean (talk) 21:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, keep the gallery in - but remove the "no free image" placeholders. --Philcha (talk) 07:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gone. Is this done now? Wizardman 16:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

You've added a little too much - the Emmy for The Monster of Phineas-n-Ferbenstein is not in the main rtext, and the lead can't contain material that's not in the main text, see WP:LEAD. Of course if you also added the Emmy for The Monster of Phineas-n-Ferbenstein in the "Awards" section that would be fine. --Philcha (talk) 16:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional sources

Can the review be wrapped up, whether on the reviewer or reviewee's side? Only one comment in September, so looks like progress has stopped. Wizardman 18:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I, as well, am extremely annoyed by the length of this review. Most of the references to the podcast are found solely there so it's difficult to do so, plus it's a long process, especially when I'm busy with other things and in personal life. I'll try and get done/almost done with it this week. The Flash {talk} 21:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Finished - it took a lot shorter than I thought, as I forgot I removed a lot last month. The Flash {talk} 22:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A 52kb review either means the article is in terrible shape or the reviewer is being way too nitpicky. In either case it should be passed or failed very soon. Wizardman 23:26, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Wizardman, can we wrap this up?--Giants27(c|s) 23:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Result of review

I'm very pleased to say that this article meets or exceeds the Good Article criteria: it provides good coverage, is neutral and well-referenced, clearly-written, complies with the parts of WP:MOS required for a GA and uses appropriate images that have good captions and comply with WP's policies on images. Many thanks for the work you've put into this. -Philcha (talk) 16:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! The Flash {talk} 19:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - - please add review comments /responses above this line - - - - -
 If you want to start a new section of the Talk page while this review is still here, edit the whole page, i.e.use the "edit" link at the top of the page.

Main Image

It's the size of the entire window, can someone find a way to shrink it please? >_< --Alpha299 (talk) 01:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

== Episode articles == phineas eated a doodoo ferb drinkeded orange juice that was read that came from a cow

User:TheSimpsonsRocks and User:King007ofrock have been making Episode articles that are on non-notable episodes. I am not sure they know the notability rules, or what.

These articles include:

Do what you want with them. They generally seem like some work was put into them. Blake (Talk·Edits) 13:30, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IDK about these. I've already redirected Chronicle of Meap and Bubble Boys, but the others have at least a bit of production/work put into them. I think for now I'll just tag them and wait for an outside opinion. The Flash {talk} 00:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I came here to ask about this too. Is there any rhyme or season to this, or should they just be redirected to the list page? None of them seem to be notable. Fences&Windows 21:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Quantum Boogaloo" has already been expanded and is now a GA, and "Meap" has been redirected; the others could easily be redirected. The Flash {talk} 17:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phineas and Ferb songs

1.Today Is gonna Be A Great Day (Theme Song, by Bowling For Soup) you smell like you eated a doo doo 2.Gitchie Gitchie Goo-Extended Version(by Phineas And The Ferb Tones) 3.Backyard Beach (Ferb) 4.Busted ( Candace and Vanessa, Dr.Doofenshmirtz' Daughter) 5.Perry the Platypus Theme 6.S.I.M.P.(Squirrels In My Pants) 7.I'm Lindana And I Wanna Have Fun 8.My Nemesis ( by Dr.Doofenshmirtz) 9.My Goody Two Shoes Brother (Dr.Doofenshmirtz) 10.Disco Minuature Golfing Queen (by Laura Dickinson) 11.My Undead Mummy (Danny Jacob) 12.I Love You Mom (Candace) 13.Ready For The Bettys (The Bettys) 14.When We Didn't Get Along (Danny Jacob) 15.He's A Bully (Robbie Wyckoff) 16.Truck Drivin' Girl (Danny Jacob) 17.Do Nothing day ( Jeremy and Candace) 18.E.V.I.L. B.O.Y.S (By Candace) 19.Fabulous ( Phineas And Bobby Fabulous) 20.Little Brothers (Stacy) 21.Let's Take A Rocket Ship To Space (Danny And The Jay Tones) 22.Queen Of Mars (Candace) 23.Chains On Me (The Smile Away Reformatory Glee Club Featuring Dan Povenmire) 24.Phinedroids and Ferbots 25.Ain't Got Rythm (Sherman and Phineas) 26.You Snuck Your Way Right Into my Heart (Love Handel) 69.29.87.121 (talk) 02:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cast

I hate to bring up a previously-discussed topic, but I really have to object to the cast table featuring photos. The real-life appearance of the voice actors adds absolutely nothing to the article. All of the voice actors have their own pages, so readers can follow those links if they want to learn more about the voice actors. In addition to plain irrelevance, it looks cluttered (pictures are not remotely uniform in size, causing a weird aesthetic) and there isn't even an image for one of the voice actors featured. This was simply an awful choice. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 18:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It does need to be removed, as it does in Family Guy and The Simpsons. See this discussion for an excellent discussion about it. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 20:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lawn Gnome Beach Party of Terror

I propose that the above article be merged into thsi as it completely failsd the general notability guidelines and specifically WP:EPISODE. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Super strong oppose to merge: There are plenty of sources to support this article and plenty of critical opinions. Your argument is ridiculous. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 00:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How does it fail either of those? It seems to have good amount of relaible, third-party publications, and has sections that go far beyond plot summary and in-universe information. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 00:43, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose merge. What can I say that Scapler hasn't? Clearly, this article passes WP:N as there are plenty of reliable third-party sources to establish notability. The articles are well-written, well sourced and contains plenty of information beyond the plot-and-trivia-lists that most television episodes articles unfortunately end up becoming. — Hunter Kahn 01:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please state how the article meets the criteria in WP:EPISODE. Where is the "substantial coverage" in reliable sources? Please remember that WP:BURDEN requires that this be provided. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 03:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's see. In the article, it includes reviews from DVD Talk, DVD Verdict, DVD Town, Toon Zone, and Wired magazine. As seen here, both DVD Talk and DVD Verdict have been cited in reliable sources, and recent publications from the sites come from professional reviewers (Note especially that places like CNN use them as sources). Toon Zone appears to be run by fans, so unless the reliability of the particular writer is established, that one is out. If you look at Wired's staff here, you can search there names and find that nearly all of them wrote for a number of reliable publications before going there. It has good editorial review as well, and thus is a RS, not to mention the fact that it is widely used as a source in a number of quality articles, including featured articles like BioShock. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 04:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read those reviews? Can you point out specific sentences that review this episode, remembering that a one or two line plot synopsis is not a review?. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Toon Zone is cited in a plethora of animation journals, books, and other published works, so that there should establish it's reliability as well. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 18:39, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So we have: [3] A Disney Channel press release, which gives a summary plot and cast for the episode; [4] a line line tease and cast list; [5] an online game, no mention of that episode; [6] a one line plot summary; [7] a nine word comment on the episode title; [8] a short plot summary; [9] one sentence plot summary; [10] a track listing from Disney records, no mention of beaches, gnomes, lawns or parties; [11] soundtrack review mentions a track which may have been in the episode, but no mention of the episode; [12] a passing mention of them constructing a beach; [13] no mention at all of this episode; [14] a link to another Wikipedia article {not a WP:RS) which lists a song as having been in the episode. None of this is "substantial coverage" of the episode.

WP:EPISODE clearly states: "While each episode on its own may not qualify for an article, it is quite likely that sources can be found to support a series or season page, where all the episodes in one season (or series) are presented on one page. (See examples listed below). Such pages must still be notable, and contain out-of-universe context, and not merely be a list of episode titles or cast and crew: Wikipedia is not a directory." There is nothing in the article Lawn Gnome Beach Party of Terror that asserts or supports the notability of this episode, which is why it needs to be merged or deleted. The series has sufficient notability, but not the individual episodes. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 18:46, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your so called "justifications" as to the uselessness of the sources is completely and utterly ridiculous. I'll go through some of the glaringly ludicrous statements here, which is the all around majority. Let me start with just how completely and utterly dumbfounded I am as to how you aren't grasping anything at all with how these sources are being treated. Everything having to do with the song means it has to do with the episode. It matters not if there is no specific reference to the episode, there are specific references to the song. The fact that the song is covered itself asserts notability. Next, the Wikipedia page itself is not being cited. The special is. If you decided to even bother a tiny little glance at the GAR page I mentioned this quite vehemently. Onto the reviews: Some of your concerns with them leads me to believe you didn't read clearly enough. Just because there is a little statement that is critical of the episode at hand does not mean it isn't substantial enough, especially when there a plethora of them. If you did a bit more research as to how WP:TV discussions on the notability of episode articles, you'd know that a reception section is the key to an article asserting notability. I am sorry for sounded sharp in the tongue and belligerent, but your argument as to how these sources aren't being used accurately or how they aren't good enough for you is crap, and it leads me to believe you possibly don't like the subject matter at hand or am simply being outright difficult for no justifiable reason. Thank you, The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 23:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, I urge others to give their opinion on Jezhotwells' argument so I can get some different interpretations of this situation. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 23:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I still contend that the sources give notability; remember that the WP:GNG states, "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material", so reviews of the DVD that can one pull this much reception from have enough coverage. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 01:24, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please show me the references that give "substantial coverage" to the episode Lawn Gnome Beach Party of Terror. Remember that a two or three line plot description is not "Substantial coverage". –– Jezhotwells (talk) 11:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Scalper and I have each explained this throughougly. You're avoiding our clear fire explanations in order to stick with your own opinion, and that itself is incredibly thickheaded. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 18:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, but you have "explained" nothing. You have asserted that the episode is reviewed, when in fact examination of the "sources" shows that it has not been reviewed, just mentioned in lists of episodes. Your comprehension of Wikipedia policies and guidelines, seems tenuous, to say the least, as is evidenced by your statement: Everything having to do with the song means it has to do with the episode. It matters not if there is no specific reference to the episode, there are specific references to the song. The series is undoubtedly notable, but this particular episode is not and the burden of proof is upon you to prove notability, which you have not done. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I shall now let the remainder of this discussion be building a consensus towards this discussion so this isn't just a futile argument between you and I. The majority of opinions thus far assert that the consensus is leaning towards keeping the article, and I will let the community build the discussion with their opinions until a consensus is reached. Good day, The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 18:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge. - It seems a little silly to have an article about one episode of a tv series, no matter how excellent that series may be. However, the article is well sourced and appears to easily clear the notability hurdle. - JeffJonez (talk) 18:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Movie sources

Where are the sources that say the movie is rated TV-PG when Disney has only done 1 or 2 other DCOMs with the same rating? Let Us Phineas and Ferb Wiki users know soon69.228.210.138 (talk) 23:18, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and what's with the sudden new date, trailers, and people in the cast?! --24.188.236.175 (talk) 23:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All of that information was entirely false and made up, so it has been removed to avoid any further confusion. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 15:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you people know, the movie article is proposed to be deleted May 3rd. Please use puppy-dog eyes (like the Fireside Girls when they sell cupcakes) to save the article and find good info by then so it can be kept. 69.228.210.138 (talk) 18:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not need to be kept until the movie actually comes out, in which I will personally overall it to meet standards and notability. Merely be patient until then. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 23:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Never mind of the puppy-dog method since it is now safe, but Patel needs to be deleted since we don't know his last name (Baljeet) on the movie article. 69.228.89.220 (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Baljeet's last name has been cofirmed to be Rai by Jeff "Swampy" Marsh and has been added to all pages that needed it. Isabella and Lego Liker Whatcha doin'? 02:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Swampy Marsh has scrapped Rai (despite its use in offical sources) and settled on Tjinder. User:Alexschmidt711 21:05 EST, 26 December 2012 —Preceding undated comment added 02:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

adult appeal

Look, folks, according to wp:lead each section of the article should be mentioned in the lead. There is an entire paragraph on its appeal to adults:

Variety noted the show's appeal to all ages with its "sense of wit and irreverence."[34] Similar reviews have emphasized the series' popularity with adults; Elastic Pops Rebecca Wright wrote, in a review for the volume one DVD, "As an adult, I really enjoyed watching this Phineas and Ferb DVD, and I think it is one that the whole family can enjoy." Wright also called the series' "irreverent style" reminiscent of The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle.[35] Wired's Matt Blum has stated in reviews on the series that he "can stand to watch just about anything with (his) kids, but he actually looks forward to watching Phineas and Ferb with them."[10] Notable adult celebrities who have openly considered themselves fans of the series include Bob Eubanks, Anthony LaPaglia, Ben Stiller, Chaka Khan, and Jake Gyllenhaal.[36][37]

The fact of this show's appeal to adults (If you want OR. I do know a 71 year old woman who regularly says "whatcha doin?") is one of the most notable things about it. There seem to be a whole lot of bizarre superstitious ideas about what doesn't belong in a lead. Defining and notable characteristics do.μηδείς (talk) 01:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said in the edit suimmary, yoi need a source to back it up, and 138.23.235.103 also said it was OR as well. So there! Isabella and Lego Liker Whatcha doin'? 02:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)I think it does belong in the lede, but not the first sentence. Saying that it is "an American children's animated television comedy series with appeal to an adult audience" in my mind seems that the series is geared towards both adults and children. I don't think that is the case here. I believe it has been written for children but also appeals to adults secondarily. I'm sure there is a way of saying this without some deceptive implications. BOVINEBOY2008 02:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that. Adding "happens" should make it better.μηδείς (talk) 02:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why would adults like it? There's no adult humor, it's a kid-friendly show. I hate most of them/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by VegetaSaiyan (talk • contribs) 00:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tri-state area?

From the first sentence of the "Plot" section:

The show follows the adventures of stepbrothers Phineas Flynn (Vincent Martella) and Ferb Fletcher (Thomas Sangster), who live in the fictional town of Danville, somewhere in the Tri-State area.

Which tri-state area? The relevant article speaks of 62 different locations in the USA that fit this description. Nyttend (talk) 13:13, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's the whole point. We're not suppose where exactly they live. JDDJS (talk) 13:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Phineas and Ferb's Live Tour

There is no section of the article regarding the Live Tour. Perhaps the following could be added: LIVE TOUR On August 21st, 2011, Disney launched 'Phineas and Ferb Live!' The 2 1/2 hour show features live actors in costumes for the characters. Some are full body suits, including Phineas, Ferb, Buford, and Perry. Others, including Candace, Jeremy, Isabella, Dr. Doofenshmirtz, and Baljeet, are wearing costumes that resemble the character's clothing and masks with the character's haircuts and large goggles for eyes. A few backup dancers and a henchman for Dr. Doofenshmirtz also appear. The show features one original song written for the production, while the rest are re-worked versions of the songs from the television show made to fit the characters singing them. Dr. Doofenshmirtz also sings a medley of Broadway hits, including 'One' from 'A Chorus Line' and 'I Feel Pretty' from 'West Side Story.'

PLOT An animated Phineas and Ferb appear on a large screen trying to make the most of the last day of summer, when Phineas notices that there's an audience watching. Discovering that they can't walk through the screen, Phineas and Ferb use a heretofore unnoticed slide to get onto the stage, where they decide to put on the best live show ever, including the one song written expressly for the show. When the animated versions go down the slide, the live action characters appear. Others from the cast, including Isabella, Baljeet, Buford, Candace, Jeremy, and two Fireside girls quickly join in. Meanwhile, Agent P appears (with his theme music), beats up some generic bad guys, and gets his mission from an animated Major Monogram- to stop Dr. Doofenshmirtz and his audience-controllinator.

Phineas, Ferb, and the rest of the crew then start brainstorming about what to do for their show. Ferb suggests a beach, which everyone agrees to, because a beach will help them think of something to do their show about. This leads into the song 'Backyard Beach.' Then, they end up having so many ideas, that Phineas and Ferb decide to make an idea mash up machine, which will combine their ideas. We go back to Perry and Dr. D., where it's revealed that Doofenshmirtz has always wanted to perform in a Broadway musical, but cannot due to his lack of talent. With his audience-controllinator, though, he will be able to force to people to admire him. He then lunches into a medley of Broadway show tunes. The canes used by Doofenshmirtz and his backup dancers eventually become the bars for a trap for Agent P. Afterwards, we go back to Phineas and Ferb, where the machine is now complete, but they decide to give the audience a break for intermission.

After intermission, some small kids are brought on stage from the audience to test the audience-controllinator. Dr. Doofenshmirtz commands them to dance, and they do. Then, Phineas and Ferb being mashing up ideas. First, Isabella's marshmallow roasting idea and Buford's monster truck idea are combined to make a monster truck with marshmallows for tires, but not before Phineas & Ferb appear in marshmallow-tired go-carts. The song 'Truck Driving Girl' is re-purposed as 'Truck Driving Boy.' They then add in Baljeet's Bollywood idea to launch into another musical number. Back to Doof and Perry, where the audience-controllinator isn't working on the whole audience, and needs a few adjustments. Phineas' miniature gold idea and Jeremy's desire for disco are combined, and the song 'Disco Miniature Golfing King' (originally 'Queen' in the television show) plays. Giant beach balls that look like golf balls are launched into the audience. Candace then wants her idea presented by itself, which is to try on pants. She finally finds the perfect pair, bringing on the songs 'I'm Fabulous.' Now satisfied, she allows her idea to be combined with the Fireside Girls' idea about cute furry animals, resulting in the song 'S.I.M.P. (Squirrels in My Pants.)' Before Phineas and Ferb can then combine everybody's ideas, the machine breaks, and they need a new handle for it. Perry and Doofenshmirtz fight, resulting in Doof's audience-controllinator bring broken. Phineas and Ferb come across the audience-controllinator, and discover that a part of it is just the right size to fix their machine. Upon discovering the audience-controllinator's true purpose, they decide to control the sun so that it never goes down and summer can truly last forever. The cast launch into 'Summer Belongs to You,' and a curtain call.

Merchandise: Available merchandise includes a program with games, photos, and more; on-site photos with Phineas and Ferb standees against a backdrop of their backyard, a Perry the Platypus mug, an Agent P disguise kit, and cotton candy that comes with a Phineas hat (a cone with red foam hair mimicking Phineas' traditional look).

Babadavis1 (talk) 16:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You need sources and too shorten all this information. JDDJS (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Carrey?

The source listed immediately after Jim Carrey is cited as being a possible contender for playing Doofenschmirtz—even if this is only an example—does not mention Jim Carrey at all. In fact, I don't think the source had very much information whatsoever. This may be post-GA referencing, but it should be fixed. I got excited there for a minute. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 22:05, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Subtittles?

In Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina the show is dubbed in Serbian language, is not subtittled (only the songs as they're keep in english).
Watch here, here, here, here, or just search in internet by "Фића и Феђа", "Fića i Feđa" or "Fica i Fedja". --Gabriel M.C. 200 (talk) 16:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Franchise article

I think this article should be spilt with a an article about the franchise. It could have info. about the live tour, movie, spin-offs, toys and other merchandise. Caringtype1 (talk) 20:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say go along the way of the Toy Story page. 75.111.18.181 (talk) 05:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Phineas and Ferb/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article was given GA status in 2009, and has since been abandoned by its top contributors. I'll re-review the article, since I believe it doesn't meet the GA criteria anymore. TRLIJC19 (talk) 05:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. The prose is sometimes not grammatically correct. Some examples just from the lead: "The series is also known for its musical numbers, which have appeared in almost every episode since the first-season "Flop Starz"." -- It should be 'first-season's' not 'season'. "Phineas and Ferb is currently on its third season.[8]" -- Should say 'in its third season'. "On August 25, 2011, the show was picked up for a fourth season on Disney Channel, a possible spin-off and feature film for the series.[9]" -- I think it's safe to assume that it's on Disney Channel, and that shouldn't be written. There are also a few dablinks. The prose could use some polishing, but that is not the article's primary problem.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. This doesn't seem to be a significant problem, although I see two uses of 'currently' and a contraction, and that giant table of worldwide airings is questionable. I also don't think "Potential" needs to be its own subsection (It's one sentence.)
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. This is the largest problem. When I got to the article, there were 42 citation needed tags, and I have added more, as well as a handful of dead links. At a glance, I also see two bare URLs used in the reflist.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Harmonious with the above comment, many "facts" and statements are left unsourced, due to the lack of citations.
2c. it contains no original research. There are two "not in citation given" tags, constituting OR. In addition, all the unsourced statements also count as OR.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. I am not too familiar with the show, but I do not feel that the article is leaving anything out.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). The international release table, in addition to being largely unsourced, seems to be unnecessary detail.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. I have not noticed anything that is not neutral.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. There is a bit of vandalism, but nothing major.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. There are two non-free images, and I believe the character photo is necessary, but I don't know about the logo.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. All images appear to be relevant, and the captions are appropriate.
7. Overall assessment. I am delisting this article, largely due to lack of citations/original research. The prose, MOS, and image concerns should be addressed too. Once citations are added, dead links are replaced, and MOS/Prose/Image issues are resolved, I recommend renominating. TRLIJC19 (talk) 05:57, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since then, the international release thing has been taken off, so there is far less OR to go by (2 and 3), and most shows have logos, so 6a is likey not much to worry about. 75.111.46.7 (talk) 03:30, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After some copyediting, I think you should be able to nominate this successfully. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mission Marvel

I started to create a page on the upcoming episode at User:JDDJS/Phineas and Ferb: Mission Marvel, which I will make into a full article once there is enough content. Considering that this is the first Disney/Marvel crossover, I feel that this page could expand fast. Please help contribute to it. JDDJS (talk) 16:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

International Release

Why this was deleted? It was a very useful information, and even more for people that investigate about foreign dubs, I know the references list was almost empty, but the official websites could serve as an actual reference too, and dubs without official website still had sources like articles or videos. In any case, I find completely out of place the deletion of this. --Gabo M.C. 200 (talk) 21:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The information might be useful, but it is not necessary. The official websites do not say when it first aired in those countries. If you can find reliable sources proving that the show premiered in those countries on those dates, then you can add them back in the article. JDDJS (talk) 21:59, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Marble Mover Challenge Sources

One additional source for the this section is a promotional poster. My concern with this resource is that it is not hosted by the content owners, rather it is a copy on another site. The original copy is no longer availible on the Disney Channel Australia site. Another additional source is the YouTube video made by the creators of the show congratulating (and referencing) the winners of the competition. My concern with this is that there is ambiguity over whether the video has rights to use the copyrighted material. As the channel that has the video appears to be owned by one of the creators then I would assume the creator is legally able to use the copyrighted content. I am new to Wikipedia so I was not sure about how to handle this. Flankattack (talk) 13:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Categorization

Here are three categories that the article can fit in:

108.210.216.127 (talk) 16:21, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the TV show and not the individual characters. JDDJS (talk) 20:06, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the articles for the individual characters? Nope, that's a pronoun (talk) 21:59, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Under their names JDDJS (talk) 23:50, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2014

2601:B:9080:451:C0A1:2DF5:FD08:3AD2 (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 19:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Phineas and Ferb on Hiatus for 2014

http://www.bubbleblabber.com/disney-xd-new-home-wander-yonder/

A sentence or two needs to be added to the main section about how Phineas and ferb will be on hiatus for a while. Link above, scroll to the bottom of the article --24.72.210.195 (talk) 02:56, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They'd had breaks of this length before, no really needed to put in. 75.111.52.129 (talk) 23:01, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Phineas and Ferb/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 01:51, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give the review a go. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:51, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. Passing "Episodes".

"Characters": I took it to mean the animation director was critiquing the creators' shows, not all all shows. I've reworded, to try and focus it. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:16, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Josve05a

This is not a proper review, just me stating my opinions to the real reviewer.

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·


  • On 1b: This article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long, – consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.
  • On 2: This article has 31 dead links.

Remember, these are just my opinion, trying to help a little bit!

(t) Josve05a (c) 22:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I was simply busy. I know that the little bit of comments above weren't a review in themselves. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Back on track

https://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Phineas_and_Ferb#view:0.0.0.1.1.1

Here's the list of dead links. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Failing, as it doesn't seem there's much response to this review. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Emmy

Someone please add "Thanks But No Thanks" to table of awards for Primetime Emmy. Was just nominated. http://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Downloads/66th-nominations-list.pdf

PS, the table on this page is unlike other animated series award sections... EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:42, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


What do you guys think?

Well, in August, there's only one premiere of Phineas and Ferb, and that's Imperfect Storm by itself, and it's airing on Disney Channel, I mean, Phineas and Ferb: Star Wars is airing August 4 on Disney XD but it's not new since it's been on Disney Channel before. So, there are actually no new episodes planned to air on Disney XD, does this mean that Phineas and Ferb is a Disney Channel Original Series again? It's still on the Disney Channel website, now we just need it back on WATCH Disney Channel and Disney Channel on Demand. 68.57.243.166 (talk) 19:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC) the Phineas and Ferb. Gravity Falls, Wander Over Yonder, Mickey Mouse, Disney XD, Disney Channel, Super Mario, Sonic the Hedgehog, Super Smash Bros. franchise fan.[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Phineas_and_Ferb&oldid=617741547"