Talk:Imaginationland Episode II

Part Two?

Isent this called Imaginationland Part 2 not episode 2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.243.251 (talk) 12:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, as far as we know, the episode is called "Inaginationland Episode II". The Chronic 14:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Go to the episode guide at southparkstudios.com. The title is correct.--Swellman 16:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Lists

Before a list of nightmare creatures gets started, can be PLEASE discuss the issue of placing the list? I don't want to see the same issue from the first episode on here. Douglasr007 02:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we should place it at the bottom, and slightly off-center to give the article a dynamic look that the reader will find subconsciously unsettling, as befits the "evil" theme of the episode. Captain Infinity 02:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm talking about a list shouldn't be made on here until an agreement in made if a list of characters that appear for a less than a minute fall under notability guidelines. It's obviously notable to mention Freddy, Predator, Alien, and the Woodland Critters. Douglasr007 02:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be two lists - one for the imaginary "good guys" and one for the villains. Aasartor 03:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Due to the overlapping nature of the characters across the three part series the lists are going to get out of control very quick. Already several duplicates are listed across episode one and two. I would rather not see the huge lists but in my opinion if people are going to insist on having a list it would be best to just create an Imaginationland page. Generalleoff 08:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Lets make a new page for inhabitants of Imaginationland and link it to the articles of the three episodes. We could make a key to which episode each character was in. Any thoughts?--Cartman005 16:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

i completely agree. a new article for the entire list then perhaps a very small list of the "major" imaginary characters thena link to the new article on each page Philbuck222 18:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the Main Charakter-List (perhaps every charakter who sais something) plus a list for the good ones and one for the bad ones... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.60.217.1 (talk) 09:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge?

See Talk:Imaginationland#Merge poll for a centralized proposal

Kyle's death scene

Anyone know if this is the same scene as the one in Abyss? --68.209.227.3 02:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly what I was reminded of, too. Anyone know if Cartman is saying the same lines?NiGHTS into Dreams... 02:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't know but it kinda reminded me of one scene on Lost too. Don't now if it deserves to be mentioned tho (when Jack tries to bring back Charlie...)

Cartman's line "You never backed away from anything in your life! Now fight!" is taken verbatim from the abyss —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.191.6.88 (talk) 07:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The way that Cartman vigorously beat on Kyle's chest seems to mirror the way Jack tried to ressurect Charlie. When I saw it on South Park, I immediately thought of LOST, but when that "backed away" comment was uttered, I also thought of the Abyss. I believe they both deserve a mention.--Exer 505 22:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

There's a link to the revival of Charlie in Season 1 of LOST. I think it's awfully similiar, but it's a decision that needs to be agreed on http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=BwKTFeD0ZFY --Exer 505 22:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, in The Abyss, the main guy removes the woman's shirt, and I believe he has her defibrillated once after they say she's dead. We should have a side-by-side comparison of all three videos. NiGHTS into Dreams... 00:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the double post, but IGN's review states the following about the scene: "They've even gone back to an Abyss reference to keep life in the joke. There's a bit of irony that a resuscitation sequence is worked into a joke that is slowly dying." I realize that IGN isn't the most credible source ever, but it seems like this is leaning towards an Abyss reference. Should we vote? I certainly believe it's worth a mention on the page. (NEVER MIND, it was already there. Sorry, I should've checked. NiGHTS into Dreams... 02:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Um, am I the only person who realizes that they are referencing both?98.204.65.214 02:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Uh, We don't HAVE to vote. We COULD just state that the scene was inspired by LOST and the Abyss, as the last poster said. There are some pretty strong simularites with both.--Exer 505 02:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Lots of things resemble lots of other things. Unless something 'big' is mentioned, like Trey Parker saying 'We wrote the CPR scene with 'Lost' in mind', mentioning another scene just because it is similar is pointless. Lots42 18:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

work on the plot for now, then go to the cultural references

--68.9.193.246 02:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it obvious by now (SPOILER?)

Kyle will never suck Cartman's balls because the contract is null and void. The contract is null and void because Cartman had to prove that a leprechaun was REAL. A leprechaun, at least in this case, was not real, it was by technical definition imaginary. I simply can not see this plotline stretching out in episode three. I "imagine" that they'll focus on Stan falling (back) into Imaginationland and teaming up with Butters somehow to fix everything back to the way it was; possibly by imagining it that way. --166.102.104.42 03:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Except that in episode 1, the Mayor explicitly says: "Just because we're imaginary doesn't mean we're not real." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.149.157.2 (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

And also Cartman actually said in the first few minutes of part 1 "we had a deal Kyle, if I can prove that there is a leprechaun you have to suck my balls". The contract said nothing about "real" leprechaun, he just had to prove that there was one JayKeaton 19:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• What about the fact that, since they are both minors, the contract is null and void unless it was signed by parents or guardians? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.210.177 (talk) 07:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
  • This is a very important argument to have here. In the final episode of this three-parter, the Supreme Court will decide to follow the consensus of this Wikipedia discussion. Following that, real-world courts will defer to the precedence of the South Park Supreme Court. --192.150.10.200 21:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Evil Imaginary Character: Man in the Golden Armor

Can anyone tell me who the evil imaginary character in the golden armor is? It looks like some greek god or something. I know I've seen him before, and I just can't remember what movie/tv series/book he's supposed to be from. It's driving me nuts... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.252.188.22 (talk) 03:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

From Saint Seiya I believe, the man in the golden armor is the warrior of Leo or something like that.

Think it is a character from Excalibur (film) this one. [1]▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡^Talk 04:35, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

You're right -- it's Mordred from Excalibur --216.15.61.200 13:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Previously on Battlestar Galactica

Is it possible that this is a oxymoron? In the episode 4th Grade, the nerds argue over if there was ever a two-parter in Battlestar Galatica, coming to the conclusion that there was not. So I am not arguing the dramatic effect that it is common in dramas, just that it is specifically a show that does not have "previously on *****"? 143.195.150.63

Uhm...that's the joke...among other things. Are you sure you watch South Park? Maybe you're tired and didn't "get it." --166.102.104.42 07:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but they argued over how many Star Trek episodes there were, not Battlestar Galactica.

I know they talked about Star Trek through most of the episode. Towards the end, right before they open the portal a second time, they argue about Battlestar Galactica. And I know its a joke, i'm not stupid, but i'm saying there might be more to it. 143.195.150.63 —Preceding comment was added at 15:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing more to it. It's a reference to the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica series which began in 2004 (Parker and Stone are huge fans). In 4th Grade, which was made in 2000, they would have been referring to the original series from the late 70's. Both series had 2-parters, anyway. And so did Star Trek. Schrödinger 21:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

"Every night the dream is the same"

What movie/tv show is this from? Its really bothering me that I cant remember. Is it terminator 3? Iownatv 04:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Terminator 2, actually. Ψαμαθος 07:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psamathos (talk • contribs)

Its from Gladiator. The music is spot on. Aarfy Aardvark 17:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It is from the Final Fantasy movie, the words are exactly the same JayKeaton 19:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

If I remember right, it IS from Terminator 2.--Exer 505 22:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The field of wheat, with the hand passing over it, and dreaming it every night IS from Gladiator. The part when he meets the dream character and the mouth is sown shut is from something else.

-G

The line is definitely NOT from Gladiator, I've seen it 1000 times, and never heard Maximus' talk about any dreams when he dreams of the wheat field. Mallerd 20:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

its from final fantasy spirits within. Philbuck222 23:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The visual image is directly out of Gladiator. Gladiator didn't have dialogue during the dreams, but the dialogue for this episode pretty much exactly matches both Final Fantasy and Terminator 2. In both movies the main character has a recurring dream of basically the end of the world, and they both narrate their dream at some point. Professor Chaos 23:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Final Scene of Episode 2

The way that Cartman in his regal getup rises up besides Kyle in the bed, doesn't that seem like an allusion to a Burger King commercial?--70.253.203.15 06:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

i thought that exact thing--Whitey138

Goofs?

Shouldn't it be noted that this goof is possibly (I believe most probably) intentional? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.78.11.77 (talk) 06:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

im sorry what? Philbuck222 18:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Council of Nine

The wizard is obviously Gandalf the Grey. Dumbledore does not wear a grey pointed hat like that. Ψαμαθος 07:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Legal question

I wonder how many copyright violations are there in these episodes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.117.162.35 (talk) 14:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

None. See Parody.Brian Schlosser42 16:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Kenny?

Where the hell is he in all of this? --68.209.227.3 15:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

maybe he'll show up in the next episode and die some strange death. maybe they just thought it was too easy to kill him off or maybe they wanted to dramaticize the (almost) death of kyle by not involving kenny at all since we all know not to care about his death (yes i know that in the Cartmanland episode this wasnt the case). --Whitey138

Yeah what happened to jimmy too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.70.6 (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I also noticed that Big Gay Al was absent from this episode to! JayKeaton 20:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Not sure cause i haven't seen all the episodes yet, but didn't Kenny die permanently? 213.217.242.7 21:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... kind of.... but no. He's alive, and it irritates me to no end how many people think it's noteworthy to mention every damn character who didn't appear in whatever episode. I immediately delete these and suggest that there be a list in that characters page of notable absences, if people just can't bear to have that all so important information not mentioned somewhere. Keep it out of the episode articles, it's completely irrelevant. Professor Chaos 23:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Two Khans and Real Imaginary Characters

In the scene with Khan Noonien Sihn, Jason, and whomever that is, looks like a robotic Kublai Khan... Speaking of that, should a list of 'Real' Imaginary characters shown, be compiled, with perhaphs a controversy/intended message be given?

It almost looks like Matt and Trey somehow see Jesus as both real, and fake...

Notably, Satan does not appear, likely as he is too similar to other characters use. Matt or is it Treys, 'angry' voice can only be used for 5 different characters in an episode before they sound too similar... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.52.195 (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

There is no evidence of any controversy regarding the characters used. The gods in the list, like Zeus and Jesus, would fall under imaginary. JayKeaton 20:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The thing about Jesus and Zeus; the episode where Jesus is one of the super best friends, he is definitely real, along with moses, buddha, etc. Zeus has never been featured as 'real.' and we all know jesus lives in south park...so why is he in imaginationland? is this a goof? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Exaltedllama (talk • contribs) 21:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The woodland Christmas critters also were fictional characters. And besides the 9 were introduced as imaginary characters and Jesus is IN imagination land. Besides, other imaginary characters like Aslan also appeared in other episodes like Here Comes the Neighborhood JayKeaton 22:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget that Najix the giant taco that craps ice cream was real in one episode, but thats not to say its not imaginary... After all I think that we can all agree that the Jesus in South Park is an imaginary character.... don't you? :-) -- UKPhoenix79 22:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess it can be explained that Jesus, Santa Claus, and the ice cream taco dude are all just imaginary characters all along. The mayor did say that, "just because we're imaginary, doesn't mean we're not real." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.134.130.64 (talk) 00:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

All these characters came from Matt's and Trey's imaginations, therefore they are imaginary and I'm sure there's no reason that Satan's not there other than that he's not there. Professor Chaos 04:16, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Where is Mr. Hanky anyways? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.166.36.24 (talk) 00:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW, is it not worth noting that all of the Super Best Friends characters except for Mohammed appear in the episodes. I think this is relevant as a "sign of our times". I exclude Moses since he/it is supposed to be a fixed supercomputer. Although one will have to wait for the third episode to air, I do think a note should be made about that since it is very relevant in regards to Muslim sensitivity in our day and age. And please, no comments about how Mohammed is truly real and not immaginary since it is all in the context of South Park. If anything, Jesus is very real in South Park, since he has a house and is a regular at a local television show. Plus has regular interaction with South Park inhabitants. I have no problem with Matt and Trey making a point about religion by creating the Super Best Friends personae, but still it should be documented that the use of Mohammed as a character has become off limits even for South Park. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.166.36.24 (talk) 00:58, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Just a thought: Maybe the dead Jesus is imaginary and the live one is real, as he did live and interact with South Park characters when alive and not so when dead. As if to say the spirit of Jesus is just our imagination.--Zahveed 14:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Aren't God and Jesus technically everywhere according to the Christian Religion though? So couldn't God and Jesus could be in the real world and imaginationland at the same time?

The whole issue of Jesus is "adressed" in Episode III. It's a part of the plot. blades (talk) 12:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Council of Nine

The Council of Nine are separate characters in the main body of the story and is interlinked in the article itself so the reader will know who Council of Nine are, merging them with the other characters leaves the reader with no idea who they all are.▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡^Talk 01:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind someone named them all in body of the article▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡^Talk 02:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

No prob :-) -- UKPhoenix79 02:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Unknown Evil Character

Who's the guy with the human body, bull-head (with horns, not sure what it exactly is), and an axe? He has a relatively prominent role in the story since they show him a lot, and he speaks too, but I just can't figure out who he is.

My apologies, I just realized it's a minotaur. Sorry for the wasted space.Dannysk89 04:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)dannysk89 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannysk89 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Cartman's Tears

I don't think the only reason Cartman cried for Kyle is the ball-sucking thing. I think, deep down, he really did care.

And didn't one episode say something like that? 74.132.113.20 22:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Right at the end of "Le pettit tourettes" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.101.5 (talk) 13:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Well you can think that, but it doesn't make it true. There's a reason why the extended Imagination land movie had Cartman say, "He can still suck my balls!" straight after reviving Kyle. The whole scene was a parody of Abyss, already explained above. It was selfish- nothing else to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.148.131.103 (talk) 20:36, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

The Orc

The Orc in the episode is not only borrowed from LotR, but a direct copy of the orcs in the horrible 1977 animated movie based on The Hobbit (film) - compare with http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/tolkien/h-1-2155-goblin.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.150.201.71 (talk) 13:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

If you bothered to watch the old LotR movie or even LOOK AT YOUR OWN LINK you'll notice that they are not Orcs but Goblins. Two different creatures.

That is one interpretation. However, in the published version of Silmarillion, as well as in the LotR series, no goblins are mentioned, ever. However, the old editions of the same stories that are in the Silmarillion (Read History of Middle-Earth), all talk about "Goblins" exclusively, and never orcs. Basically, Tolkien decided to stop using the word goblins and use his own creatures instead, and since the Hobbit was published before he even decided to implement the Hobbit with the rest of the things that ended up being about Arda, in that book and the movie, it says Goblins. In short - yes, I'm aware ;)

See No Evil

Surely the fact that the two parts are the same means it should be noted? The eyesocket scene may not have been taken directly from the movie, but the fact remains, they are the same, therefore it should be noted. 83.100.181.173 09:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Inhabitants of Imaginationland

I don't think that separate article for Imaginationland inhabitants is a good idea. Fleutist 12:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Where else would it go? Rambledamble 21:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It could be part of a merged, single article for all three parts of this one episode; or better yet it could be a section of the List of minor characters on South Park. Professor Chaos 22:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I would go along with it being part of the [[List of minor characters on South Park]}--Cartman005 02:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC) article.

Request for comment

I have requested comment from neutral editors to hopefully have this merge dispute resolved.--Swellman 02:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Monster sighting

Did I see a pirate as the monsters?(TougHHead 03:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC))

Removed section

Whereas Ryan simply removed the sections, I felt that , if sourced, they can return. The following trivia bits from allusions need to be reliably and notably sourced (and no, a fan forum is not such). they cannot be added without aforementioned citation.

Allusions

• The scene where Cartman is walking through the wheat field makes reference to Gladiator when the character Maximus walks through the tall wheat of his homeland, the quote "every night the dream is the same" comes from Terminator 2: Judgment Day.
• The Mayor of Imaginationland telling Butters mockingly to click his heels three times to return home is a reference to The Wizard of Oz where the same method is used by Dorothy and Toto to return to Kansas.
• The scene of the ManBearPig emerging through the gate and attacking scientists is extremely similar to a scene in the videogame Doom 3 where two Hellknights must be defeated before the player enters the Hell level
• The scene where Cartman revives Kyle is taken from another similar resuscitation scene in the film The Abyss even using the same dialog from the movie "You never backed away from anything in your life! Now fight!".
• Butters' meeting with the Council of Nine is a direct reference to the scene in Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, where Frodo is taken to Rivendell.
• When Butters, Snarf, and the Lollipop King are fleeing through the Gumdrop Forest, the path they are using is the exact same walkway from the Candy Land boardgame.
• The table that the Council of Nine sits at is strikingly similar to the triforce from "The Legend of Zelda" series.
• The episode opens with Cartman intoning "Previously, on Battlestar Galactica," over a still of that show's logo, in the same manner that every episode of the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica opens.

- Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 20:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

---

when cartman yells NOOOOOO! it is in a different voice. this was fixed in later airings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.107.163.156 (talk) 19:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

If you are indicating you think this should be included in the article, I would have to disagree. Lots42 (talk) 11:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Cultural references

Again, cite this stuff and it can remain;

• The scene where Cartman is desperately trying to resuscitate Kyle, screaming "Dammit, you've never walked away from anything in your life, now FIGHT!" is drawn from the science-fiction movie The Abyss - specifically, the scene where Ed Harris' character is attempting to resuscitate Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio after she has drowned in water near freezing point.
• Cartman's dream sequence is similar to the dream sequences from Gladiator and from Final Fantasy.

Alastairward (talk) 11:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

As a Devil's Advocate; the last two are already sufficently cited. Lots42 (talk) 20:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it is. Although Stargate was already mentioned in the article itself, should it be repeated? Alastairward (talk) 09:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It may be a victim of edits, but I see no mention of Stargate in either the Part 1 or Part 2.Lizbetann (talk) 03:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Abyss

Can we have some sort of discussion about adding in, or leaving out, a reference to the Abyss? This 'edit war' has been going on for months and months. Lots42 (talk) 09:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

No discussion needed. If it can be cited, include it, if not, don't. Alastairward (talk) 17:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but your deletion of the Stargate ref confuses me. The very -mention- is a ref, because Kurt Russel -was- in a movie where he goes to another realm via a big circular portal. It's like deleting a reference to Kevin Bacon being 'in that one movie about worms living underground'. Lots42 (talk) 04:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

So obvious that it shouldn't or couldn't be cited, which is it? Alastairward (talk) 13:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

???? Demanding a cite for the Kurt Russel line doesn't make any sense. Lots42 (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

It makes perfect sense, without it you're assuming you know what the writers were thinking at the time. Check again all the policies on no original research and verifiability. Alastairward (talk) 19:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks as if we're going to have to agree to disagree. Lots42 (talk) 21:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I think Alastairward is saying that the writers of South Park independentally came up with the idea of a Stargate, and just coincidentally populated the episode with Kurt Russell. It's all just a fluke, really, if you think about it. By the way, is "independentally" a real word, or should I copyright it? --Captain Infinity (talk) 22:13, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I think we surrender our copyright automatically when we edit wikipedia. But aside from that, all I'm asking for is a cite. Alastairward (talk) 16:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Joker

I think you should've included the Joker in that article. He was clearly seen in this episode. --Geekboy6 (talk) 23:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

A lot of characters were. Where do we stop including them? This issue has already been hacked out. Lots42 (talk) 07:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Why are one or two dissenters allowed to put the "general notability" tag on this article?

So, one or two people apparently have decided that this article "does not meet the general notability guideline", and have placed that tag on this article. Despite the fact that I have argued that 1). the three-part Imaginationland is a very popular story arc in the Sotuh Park series 2). It has been released on DVD, and perhaps most importantly, 3). IT WON AN EMMY AWARD, and thusly I have tried twice to remove this notability tag, because it doesn't belong. But, my efforts are reverted and I am accused of edit warring. Can we get some consensus, please, that this article IS notable, and remove the notability tag? I would also like to see the notability tag that ONE editor has put on a lot of other South Park episodes removed. He has apparently made it his life's mission to deem South Park episodes unworthy of Wikipedia articles, and one or two other editors have decided his cause is worth taking up. Personally, I'd like to see this nonsense stopped. 98.220.135.184 (talk) 03:45, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Post references to the emmy and dvd release. That's my idea. Lots42 (talk) 09:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

For the sake of simplicity, I will answer this question here rather than on all three talk pages. Firstly, please do not refer to people whose edits conflict with yours as "dissenters." Quite the opposite, we are just trying to make an orderly encylopaedia, and personal attacks are not going to get us anywhere. Secondly, the tags are placed only on the articles for parts II and III. It is not that the Imaginationland story arc is considered non-notable, it's that we're not sure whether or not there should be three articles for one arc. Often, on Wikipedia, we often condense multiple-part episodes into one article (see Pilot (Lost) for an example of this). This episode's status as having being released on DVD doesn't have anything to do with notability. Even though this episode may have won an Emmy, that doesn't mean it needs three separate articles. As for other articles that may have the notability tag on them: not all of them my necessarily be notable. Take List of Beavis and Butthead episodes, for example. One or two have their own articles, but most redirect to the list article. – Richard BB 13:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Richard makes good points. Lots42 (talk) 15:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)