Talk:All Grown Up!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

AGU time frame[edit]

There was a short discussion on Nickdisk about what time frame AGU occurs in. Despite the continuity and universe issues inherent in Rugrats Go Wild!, the consensus (at least among a few fans) is that like Rugrats, it will occur in some unspecified present day. -- knoodelhed 20:48, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Age[edit]

Can you tell me how old the characters are?

Angelica and Susie are 13. Tommy, Kimi, Lil, and Phil are 11. Chuckie is 12. Dil is 10. Lou is 100.
Actually, Tommy, Kimi, Lil, and Phil are 10. Chuckie is 11 and Dil is 9. TheProf07 (talk) 12:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Correction Tommy, Kimi, Lil, and Phil are 11, Chuckie is 12, because on the Chuckie verus the Potty, he say that he is only two. All Grown Up take place what happen 10 years after Rugrats.(mich (talk) 03:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC))

Actually, All Grown Up! takes place 9 years after Rugrats. Only the Rugrats special "All Growed Up!" was set 10 years in the future. For evidence, please see All Grown Up! episode "It's Cupid, Stupid" in which Tommy refers to himself as a 10 year old and Chuckie as an 11 year old. Further evidence can be found in "Rats Race" when Tommy refers to Dil as a 9 year old. Cannonbolt2 (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

?????[edit]

I don't know if this show is that good. I mean, when young children see another kid at their age acting like a teenager, they will act like teenagers too.

I have to agree with this person the rugrats seem to be in more advanced social situations then my friends and i to spite the fact we are sophmores in highschool. march 3, 2006

That's ridiculous. It's a G-ratted kiddy show. Where do you go to High School? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.19.244.178 (talk) 07:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
Actually, it is not very good because it is stupid, anti-snob, politically correct BULLS**T! See history for November 14 for more information.
Check November 14!? Well, i did and have no idea what your talking about. TheProf07 (talk) 12:04, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
This is not a forum, if you have an opinion on the show please express it elsewhere. Eatspie (talk) 04:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Criticism...[edit]

The criticism section is totally off base. First of all "twisting characters personalities too far"? And then the example cited is Susie as a baby had a different life goal from Suzie as a teenager? Of course she does! People change their life goals hundreds of times in their lifetime. Not to mention the fact that almost no one remembers their life as a baby, so she probably doesn't remember her original goal was to be a doctor. I for one can't rememember anything from before I was 5.

Next off the social themes are spot on. That's exactly how kids are these days. And then once again, the example cited is totally off base. Tommy getting his first kiss is not unusual for his age group (and being 10/11 somehow make him "underage"? I've got news for you, there's no set age for your first kiss). Kids have their first kiss on average, around the age of 11-ish (give or take). And 13 year olds have their own cell phones, piercings, and talk about sex and whatnot on a regular basis. This is how kids are these days, you don't have to like it, but it's a fact of life.

Not to mention the fact that this show isn't just aimed at kids, it's also aimed at the people who grew up with Rugrats, a show that was on for (give or take) 13 years. So if you were 1 when you started watching the Rugrats series, and you grew up as a fan, you're just the right age to appreciate the show now. --Venomaru 22:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I still think the show is premoting a liberal lifestyle among children. Familyguyfan1990 June 9 2006

Liberal?! What do you think kids in middle school do and talk about? Dolls? cooking? They talk about all the things he said and is in no way liberal, all pre-teens and teen tv shows on Nickelodeon and Disney promote very CONSERVATIVE lifesyles for kids.

It doesn't need a a criticism section because they're mainly biased and opinon on the show. Plus the they're not even in high school. The show do aim to kid 9 to 10. I case you'll haven't notice that the Doug have gotten his first kiss and he was still was 11 ot 12.(mich (talk) 00:13, 7 June 2009 (UTC))

New Characters[edit]

Should Harold be on the list of new characters? I know he was in at least 1 episode of Rugrats(where Angelica has a playdate with him and makes him her assistant). TJ Spyke 23:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Watch All Grown Up on NICK !

WHY ARE YOU WHACKING ME WITH THE PILLOW ? WHAT ? I WAS PRACTICING MY SWING . UH ' POLICY MONITOR .

Criticism again[edit]

Regardless of the merits of the criticism section, it is entirely unreferenced, and therefore could well be original research. Unless someone can supply notable analytical sources for these criticisms, the section needs to be removed. Brendan Moody 17:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Airings[edit]

I have tagged the "Airings" section as a disputed section, as I feel the info is suspect. If someone can give a source, please do. Otherwise, this section should be changed or deleted. There are some people at the Nickdisk board ([1]) who are actually taking this as gospel, and unless there is tangible proof, it should be changed or gone. -- azumanga 02:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

- Seconded. Somebody should place a 'citation needed' warning by the paragraph indicating that the show will return, because I have seen no official sources commenting on the matter.

Possible Return Theory[edit]

The infobox on this site said there were 18 un-aired episodes in the U.S. Nickelodeon could air the 18 episodes as a 4th season!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.93.96.105 (talk) 23:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Unaired Eps Airing[edit]

I'm surprised no one has caught this: Nick's schedule is full of episodes unaired in the US every weekday starting next week at 6:30AM. 66.31.209.239 04:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Criticism[edit]

This section should be re-added. There was a lot of criticism about how they turned a good show like Rugrats into a s**t one like this. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 07:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

    • If a notable source does it, it is okay. If it is a typical average Joe, Wikipedia says not to include it. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

A source that could be used: Jerry Beck's Not Just Cartoons: Nicktoons![edit]

I found a book in the bookstore called Not Just Cartoons: Nicktoons! by Jerry Beck. I'm not going to buy it and join the project, but I will ask the other members to get the book so that they can add real world information about various fictional characters.

This makes the creation of separate articles for *many* fictional characters feasible. Having information about the development of the character will make the articles satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) WhisperToMe (talk) 20:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Premise?[edit]

The premise sounds less like an encyclopedia and more like it's trying to advertise the programme. Was this copied and pasted from somewhere? I think someone should rewrite this (I would but I don't watch the show).--Moozipan Cheese (talk) 19:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes from the Nick website. Its very hard to make a premise for this show because its a spin-off. So i thought the best thing to do would be to copy and paste one from the offical website. If its ok with everyone, I'll write a proper one this week and put it on. TheProf07 (talk) 20:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Done. TheProf07 (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

WE WANT MORE OF ANGELICA AND HER GROWN UP FRIENDS A LOVELY PROGRAM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.134.93.244 (talk) 08:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Bringing Back[edit]

Are clames that there will be new episodes comming in june true, or are these just baseless rumers?--J intela (talk) 08:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)