Talk:A Picture is Worth 1,000 Bucks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Television / Episode coverage (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborate effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the episode coverage task force.
WikiProject Animation / American / Family Guy (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


I was unsure about the title of the episode with the number "one thousand" in numerals, but a look at the episode guide at supports the numeral version of the title. Robert Happelberg 18:28, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

"A" 1,000?[edit]

Hmm, when I read the title aloud, I hear "A picture is worth a one-thousand...". That sounds redundant. Are we sure this is correct? Shouldn't we drop the second "a" in the title? Vidgmchtr 18:57, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

It irks me too, but that's the way it's listed on --David Iberri (talk) 21:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
I guess, it should be said 'a picture is worth a thousand bucks', so not 'a one-thousand'.
I hear it as “a one thousand” too. Felicity4711 (talk) 09:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Carter Banks[edit]

Before the starting credits, there is a gag about Carter Banks filling in for Brian, who is he? Why isn't this mentioned in the article?


Anyone object if I delete the entire Notes section? Usually such sections have something worthwhile but not this one. Lots42 16:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Hey, it's unusual for you to ask for permission. Double up on your meds today? BTW, you have my blessing, my son. Captain Infinity 22:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, I have gone delete-happy in the past. Relevant word, past. Lately, I try and merge or leave alone. Sometimes I delete -redundant- items off the list. For example, the same item would appear in a Notes section and in a Cultureal Refs section. P.S. No need for insults. Lots42 08:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
the ones remaining seem fine to keep now Grande13 04:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Huh. The way the Notes are as of the moment I write these comments aren't the way I remember them when I wrote the original comment. I didn't alter things. Oh well, such is life. Lots42 08:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I apologize if I sounded like I was insulting you, Lots; I was just funnin' ya, a nod to an online friend (though I can't forgive you for "Peter maked $3000", yeesh, what was that?) And yes, someone edited the Notes section just after you left your comment. Of what's left, I think the one that mentions the change in the children's portraits is the most important and interesting, historically in regards the show. Captain Infinity 10:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, just remember I don't do subtely well. And sometimes I make typos. It happens. That's what the edit form is for. Lots42 10:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • The notes section has information regarding Brian's age and how it wasn't possible for him to know Andy Warhol. Perhaps it is "7" in human years, which comes close to 43 (depending what method you use) in dog years. Meaning it could definitely be possible that Brian could have known Andy Warhol. You know, besides him being a talking dog on an animated television show. I deleted it for the time being, because it is not conclusive. Change it if you disagree, but only if you have further evidence. (talk) 01:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
This note is nothing but goof, which isn't welcome here. It should have disappeared earlier. Goofs are common in animation, and encyclopedias should have something notable, goofs aren't. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 01:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

whoever posted this[edit]

In a cutaway, Walt Disney is seen drawing a picture of Minnie Mouse, ordering her to strip with obvious distress expressed by Minnie.

Thanks for the laugh. I just find the sentence hilarious. ChesterG 10:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Then fix it, since Wikipedia isn't a comedy site. TheBlazikenMaster 00:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:FGPictureisWorth.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

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

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

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

BetacommandBot 04:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Cleveland Steamer[edit]

Later on in the series, when Peter is a prostitute, he offers to give Lois a Cleveland Steemer (where you defecate on someone's chest and spread it around with your buttocks." In one of the gags after they get to New York, there is a cutaway gag where someone is drawing a kid (can't remember who) and says he is gonna draw a man pooping on his chest. Is this a reference to the Cleveland Steemer, or is it just something wierd and random? The man drawing the kid seems like a pedophile to me. (talk) 00:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


Why is the notability template on this? I thought that the deletionists lost out a long time ago on whether indiviudal episoded of popular series were notable. (I might have been on their side, but it's a lost cause now.) Would it be OK to take the template off? (talk) 02:43, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Even though I would have probably placed some of those templates myself in times past, I honest didn't think there was much point in placing one on an episode article for a popular series. Most of them seem to be cited.
It's not a deletion tag, just a gentle reminder to passers by that they can help by providing cites. I'd leave it there on balance. WikiuserNI (talk) 22:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)