Talk:Proposition Infinity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Proposition Infinity has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
August 10, 2010 Good article nominee Listed

The significance of Bender & Amy's relationship in the context of the canon[edit]

It should be pointed out that Bender's human predilection appears in other episodes. In I Dated a Robot he decries Fry's Robosexual tryst with a Lucy Liu-lookalike robot, telling him he has "Metal Fever" and warning him to stay away from robot women. Bender, the most outraged by Fry's sexuality ends up romancing the human head of Lucy Liu, who appears as his girlfriend in another episode Love and Rocket. Now in this latest episode, it appears he nurtures another unlikely romance with Amy. It is arguable that Bender's human (and asian) love interests are not an isolated plot element, but a theme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.187.132 (talk) 03:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps. This isn't a discussion forum for the episode though. It's for discussing improvements to the article. Reach Out to the Truth 04:11, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
The 'robot women' on Futurama, are not robot women. They are robots. Female-styled robots, maybe, or 'fembots', but robots nevertheless, not women.Eregli bob (talk) 05:11, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Continuity[edit]

In the episode Bender is shown to be in contact with a magnet, yet in a difference from The Series Has Landed he does not sing show tunes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.84.131.8 (talk) 22:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Which part? The producers have side-stepped this numerous times in previous episodes by claiming that he can have magnets on parts that are not explicitly his head (neck, chin, etc do not count as "head"). 68.40.78.11 (talk) 21:23, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Wheatstone bridge[edit]

Okay, so early in the second act at 'Camp Rectifier' when Preacherbot is giving his sermon, the logo over the fireplace is a Wheatstone bridge. I have no idea what the appropriate way to work that into this article is, but it does seem like it belongs in there somewhere. 67.173.22.90 (talk) 06:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Generally these sorts of interesting trivia facts only belong in the article if they are mentioned in a reliable source. If you can find such a source discussing this I would be happy to help you find a place for it in the article. Stardust8212 14:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Despite the problem with a reliable source: That is not a Wheatstone Bridge! It is the symbol a full wave rectifer (also known as Graetz bridge rectifier). The difference between the bridges is that the Wheatstone bridge uses resistors while the Graetz bridge uses diodes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.226.227.254 (talk) 16:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Space Invader (the street artist not the game) reference?[edit]

Perhaps it's from having watched Exit Through the Gift Shop, but I'm surprised no one noted the similarities between Bender's and Space Invader's street art.--DrWho42 (talk) 06:08, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

They look similar and it's probably a reference, but try to find a legit secondary source that points it out. Until we have that, it's only OR/Spec on our part.Luminum (talk) 06:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject Futurama assessment[edit]

I see someone requested this article be reassessed by the Futurama wikiproject. I think this easily meets that projects standard for a B-class article. I looked at it yesterday and was going to say that it needed a production section but I now see that has been added. Well done! A few small things I would suggest would be consistency of where it is called "Proposition Infinity", "Proposition ∞" or "Prop ∞". Is the actual title of the episode the symbol or the word? In the episode the title of the proposition is the symbol but for the title of the episode this seems unclear, none of the sources seem to use "Proposition ∞" as the title. A source with this usage would be a good idea or else just be consistent in referring to the episode as "Proposition Infinity" and the fictional proposition as "Proposition ∞". The only things I can think of at this point that need to be added would be the imdb link, if one exists, and perhaps the relevant portal links, see Hell Is Other Robots for an example. In this instance the LGBT portal would probably be appropriate. Stardust8212 13:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: CTJF83 chat 18:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Looks like Stardust got to it before me. :)Luminum (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately they are going to have to be better. Since alt text is meant for blind people to understand the photos, they aren't going to know what Amy and Bender look like, or what Crystal Chesney-Thompson looks like. CTJF83 chat 16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
But alt-text only needs to describe the image so that no information is lost. Even if someone is blind, they would never have to know what Amy looks like or Bender looks like (not that they ever would), or Crystal Chesney-Thompson looks like to understand the article, since the image is there to depict the character engaging in a robot/human relationship and they already know that Bender is a robot and Amy is a human. The current alt text for the main image does that, the Crystal Chesney-Thompson image doesn't depict any more information than the description that it's an image of her (no one needs to know what she looks like), and the NOM/NOI image describes the image enough to highlight the similarity.Luminum (talk) 17:33, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Ok, the addition to the infobox pic is good, being that the plot of the episodeis about human/robot relationships, so looks good. CTJF83 chat 17:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • "George Takei of Star Trek fame" what does the fame mean?
  • "Openly gay actor George Takei of Star Trek fame" means that George Takei is an actor who is famous for being in Star Trek. It was added to give context to Georgeo Takei. He's a frequent guest star because he is a Star Trek legend, but added significance to this episode in particular is that he's gay and was part of the Prop 8 media when he got a same-sex marriage with his partner. Does it need more clarification than that? If so, it can be rewritten.Luminum (talk)
  • My vocabulary isn't the best, does it basically mean "George Takei, famous for his Star Trek role"? If so, it is fine, I just wanted to clarify CTJF83 chat 16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • "the Professor hates robosexuals"...I've only seen the episode one time, should it say he hates robosexual relations? I thought robosexual was only the human/robot relationship, not a class of robots.
  • In the first episode of the series, in reference to those who engage in robot/human relationships, they are called "robosexuals". As cited in the Themes and Continuity section, this is the first appearance of the concept and term, Bender stating, "Okay, but I don't want people to think we're robosexuals..." Since this is the terminology used in the show, I think it applies; Those who engage in robosexual relationships are called "robosexuals". The terminology is also used in this review: [1]Luminum (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Ok, I've never seen any other episode with its mention, so your explanation is good for me. CTJF83 chat 16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • "the episode depicts an anti-Proposition Infinity advertisement ("No on Infinity"), which is a direct parody of NOM's 2009 *"Gathering Storm" campaign" For this I checked both sources, using a few key words (too lazy to read the whole thing), and I couldn't find where it said it is a direct parody of the "gathering storm", can you help me find it?
  • In ref 6 "The ad opposing Proposition Infinity was an absolutely brutal (and completely deserved) evisceration of an infamous commercial opposing same-sex marriage." The words "infamous commercial" are linked to the youtube video of the NOM ad. That ok? Stardust8212 14:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • "The ad opposing Proposition Infinity was an absolutely brutal (and completely deserved) evisceration of an infamous commercial opposing same-sex marriage."[2] This is the most blatant statement in a review, but other reviews also point out the storm clouds, lightning, people' statements, and state that they are a satire or parody.Luminum (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Clearly I can tell it is a reference to that, but since this is going for GA, and due to WP:OR concerns, I'm gonna have to ask for a reference stating the parody of the storm commercial in Futurama. Strike that, source 6 says it. CTJF83 chat 16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • In the lead, "Though the episode satirizes arguments for and against same-sex marriage, it leans favorably toward the idea of allowing same-sex marriage", I don't see it mentioned anywhere else in the article, and it is unsourced....although I do agree with the point, for WP:OR reasons it needs a source, or to be removed.
  • There shouldn't be any references in the lead, and all statements in the lead should be backed up by content in the body. I've adapted the following statement into the "Themes and continuity" section: "Many of the jokes in the episode were inspired by the actual vote regarding Proposition 8 and similar legislative debates over same-sex marriage throughout the United States,[3] with several critics noting that the episode was favorably pro-same-sex marriage.[4][5][6][7]"
  • Here are lines from several of the reviews that indicate the leanings of the episode (all of which source the above statement):
  • "Last night's robotic take on the needless hysteria and blatant hypocricy [sic] of gay marriage was not only steeped in satiric goodness, but it was downright hilarious." [3]
  • "Another show of hands: how many of you expected me to open with some speechifying about gay marriage? I considered it, but I'm not sure I have a whole lot to say on the topic that "Proposition Infinity" didn't already cover, albeit under the traditional science fiction guise of metaphor and silliness. (Basic truth: if you are against gay marriage, you are wrong. There's no way I could've [sic] gotten two paragraphs out of that, unless I busted out my Rhyming Becktionary.)" (Note: Even the reviewer clearly states his own opinion, he equates it to the episode's stance.) [4]
  • "Even so, there really isn't mistaking the show's point of view, and there's definitely no mistaking what the episode was really about. The ad opposing Proposition Infinity was an absolutely brutal (and completely deserved) evisceration of an infamous commercial opposing same-sex marriage. One line in particular had the subtlety of a sledgehammer, and was all the more hilarious for it: "If robosexual marriage becomes legal, imagine the horrible things that will happen to our children. Then imagine we said those things, because we couldn't think of any. As a mother, those things worry me."...The episode also revealed the two biggest opponents of robosexuality - the Professor and Preacherbot - as closeted robosexuals themselves. The robot preacher fared particularly poorly here, but he was probably at his worst when bellowing, "The only lies worth believing are the ones in the Bible!" What the episode's satire lacked in subtlety - and yeah, it was pretty lacking in that category - it made up for tenfold in its unsparing viciousness." [5]
  • "That being said, I was pleasantly surprised that the show has been taking a more active stance on current issues. Though the show has always been satirical, I enjoyed the episode “Proposition Infinity” and its attack on California’s Proposition 8 by paralleling the real-life gay-marriage issue to robot-human relationships. " [6]Luminum (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm still not 100% convinced. The first quote to me only shows that the reviewer supports gay marriage, not the episode leaning that way.
  • The 2nd one is a little closer, but I still don't think it directly says the show leaned towards pro gay marriage.
  • 3 is so close to saying it is pro gay marriage, but the author only says "there really isn't mistaking the show's point of view" which really infers the reader to draw their own conclusion.
  • ....I guess 4 says it, so that one is good enough for me, guess I didn't need to analyze the other 3. CTJF83 chat 16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Good work, I'll await your responses, CTJF83 chat 02:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

  • I'm not the nominator but for the third point I would say you can have robosexuals who are in robosexual relationships in the same way as you can have homosexuals and heterosexuals who are in homosexual or heterosexual relationships. The word can be used either way. There may be a better wording though, I'll think about that tomorrow when I'm more awake, if Luminum doesn't fix it before then. Stardust8212 03:32, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • But from what I remember in the episode, they said gay marriage and gay robot marriage was legal, but not robosexual marriage, which makes me think it just refers to robot/human relationships. CTJF83 chat 06:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation (gay humans and gay robots would not be robosexuals but a human who loved a robot could be referred to as a robosexual) but I still think we can find a better wording so it's not really important. Stardust8212 14:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the review! Let me know if there's anything else!Luminum (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure, any time, ok, just a few slight concerns still, especially with the need to expand the alt text. CTJF83 chat 16:55, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
See my response to the alt-text concern above. Thanks!Luminum (talk) 17:33, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Passing....feel free to talk page me when you get more Futurama episodes to GAC! CTJF83 chat 17:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Proposition Infinity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)