Talk:Rugrats/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Setting?

Has a state or a town been mentioned in any of the stories? The 60 min Christmas ep estabilshed that they were within driving distance of a city with large buildings, where it snows in the wintertime, which appears to rule out much of California. - knoodelhed 08:28, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Why does the statement 'Raiders colors are awesome' mean that Rugrats is in the Bay Area? I had no thoughts about the location until I watched that episode, at which point I instantly concluded that it took place in the Los Angeles vicinity. ςפקιДИτς 03:56, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

• Exactly. I'm only 20, and I live in the Bay Area, but the Raiders will forever be the LA Raiders as far as I'm concerned. Whoever writes these things has got to be 14 or something. I also changed the note about Lou and moving to California. The original bit said that he didn't want to move there because of the dust bowl. That's nonsense, because all the dust bowl folks were moving to California to escape the area, so it is logical to assume he lived in a dust bowl state and didn't want to move in spite of the conditions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.4.28.58 (talk • contribs) 18:13, Jul 8, 2006 (UTC).

Can we remove any of the unsourced statements? By saying that character x is not allowed in place y, it doesn't mena character z is from place y. I can see how this would be used for humor instead of geographical hints. Also, palm trees are in these episodes along with snow, people like the raiders, the oilers, and the cowboys, and they visit southwestern natural wonders. There are so many contradicting things here, should we just take it out?

P.S.> I was under the impression that the Simpsons took place in Springfield Illinois. --Helloworld12 23:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the Setting section in the article needs to be scaled down or removed completly. Who says it takes place in a real life location anyways? It is a cartoon, it doesn't have to be in any logical location in the U.S. or in a specific state. The Setting section is the largest in the whole article, but I don't see why it is even notable to the cartoon series at all. Plus nothing in the entire section is cited, it is all speculation and original research so doesn't deserve a place here. --Dr. WTF 01:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I think im going to either delete or shorten this section. that ok? 90.224.189.88 19:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Errata

Ungvichian 13:18 (GMT+7), 8.6.04: Some nuthead added these entries. Removed them. (under "Characters")

• Antonio Mcgray (voiced by Hank Azaria) Hope's father but married to Anastasia.
• Anastasia Mcgray (voiced by Yeardley Smith) Hope's mother and Charlotte's sister but also married to Antonio.

---

(under "Pets")

• Foo Foo (not voiced) Easy cocker spaniel but grooves like a man. Hope's dog.

What show does this really belong to?

---

There's another Mcgray fan out there who graces us with the following:

• Hope Mcgray (voiced by Julie Kavner) Very bossy babysitter but always being nice to Tommy and Dil. But only 13 years old.

Well, I ran Kavner's c.v. on IMDb and didn't find any such role for her, let alone any listed credit for Rugrats, my search for a character by that name also came up negative. - knoodelhed 05:29, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

---

Vandalism

This person continually adds the line

According to rumor, Kimi is to die a horrible death by strangulation in an upcoming episode.

I agree that Chaz and Kira getting hitched was controversial to some, but this crosses the line. knoodelhed 00:36, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

My 12/5 edit incorrectly attributes vandalism to Pikawil. Vandalism attributed to 68.115.30.231. My apologies. A.Octavia 14:24, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Also, a vandalized photo was being used, several users have made changes in order to restore it to a proper standard. The vandalizing was done by 60.48.34.12.

There was some vandalism done with the spinoff section. Vandalism attributed to 68.45.99.119. Thief Lord 16:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the vandalism with the spinoff section Thief Lord 16:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

There was vandalism in the characters section, writing stuff like, WHO IS GAY, OLD FAGS, and lots of swear words and stereotyping Suzie and her parents. Good thing that's not here anymore. (Plainnym 10:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC))

More vandalism fixed. This was in the brief history section and referred to mental retardation due to incest, Satan, Americans burning in Hell. Not Nice. Breezy hwesta 10:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Airing

Is there a site where you can watch Rugrats episodes?

about the Snow White and Jack and the Beanstalk dvd

they have been released i saw them at my local sam's club.

Invader Zim inspired?

Guys, if I recall correctly, Invader Zim came out and was cancelled before SpongeBob SquarePants was a glimmer in the eye of Nickelodeon, yet this article states that SpongeBob inspired Zim.

Somehow, that just doesn't work. Get my meaning? --FxChiP 00:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

No, SpongeBob debuted a year before Invader Zim. ¿ςפקιДИτς! ☺ ☻ 04:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Question

Can we make this article into featured article status? Thief Lord 14:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

It would need a _lot_ of work -- just on a cursory read, there's lots of repetition, unsourced information and extensive use of weasel words (especially in the section comparing the first and second production runs). The section on the location of the show could also use tightening. I'll try and tone down some of the worst offenders over the weekend if I have time. Gusworld 01:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Running Gags

I was thinking about running gags within the show, the only thing I could think of was "This Coffee Tastes Like Mud!" and the coffee was actually mud. This appears in two episodes, possibly more. Were there any other running gags within this show? Ashton Brood 20:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

During the first season, Angelica kept on making mistakes about her own life; thinking she was a princess, thinking that noone could really see her, thinking that noone really cared about her when she run away... but from then on, she sorta stopped making those mistakes and was full fledged on bullying. Abby724 17:16, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Grandpa constantly uses the number "fifteen" when he speaks. That's certainly a running gag. --CrazyLegsKC 04:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Idea about sections or subpages

Can we put information on subpages? Thief Lord 17:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Worthy of Award?

I hardly think this show should be worthy of being put on a list of 100 Greatest Cartoons. Anyone share this thought? --66.218.28.217 05:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Boris

I don't recall Boris being removed from the show, actually.

--WalterJid 03:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Fixing the contents, looks too listy.

I'm being bold, end editing the characters section, if anyone minds. I'm also considering a new page (List of all characters in the Rugrats). Anyone up for this? Abby724 22:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Is Rugrats Making a Come Back?

I just want to say that since I saw a commerical on television, for one of the Rugrats DVDs, I think it was for the Jack and the Beanstock one and I have to wonder, do you think that the series is coming back. Because I personly hate to see it happen, I mean Rugrats went down because of SpongeBob SquarePants. And now is Rugrats trying to get revenge, and what does this mean for Avatar the Last Airbender that could very well be the future of Nick. Rugrats is dead and should stay dead, SpongeBob should enjoy their time in the spotlight while they can, Avatar should take the place of SpongeBob soon. That is my thoughts.–Simeon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.144.131 (talk • contribs)

Please sign your comments with four tides (~).

To answer your question, I don't think Rugrats is making a comeback. Other shows are more appealed to than Rugrats, and the show has jumped the shark. The lack of original plots has lowered the amount of viewers, and there just aren't enough fans for the show anymore. I doubt it's coming back, but there are DVD's of the Rugrats show. Abby724 04:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

We need pictures...

You know, I bet it would help the casual viewer if there were pictures of the old series (1991-1994). The only picture in the article is the main image. I mean, a side-by-side comparison of the old series and the current series would help the viewer understand the controversy over Rugrats more... Abby724 04:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

criticism

That section is incredibly biased and full of weasol words. It should be fixed. Tagged for now. 199.126.137.209 09:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It does need to be edited, but not drastically. The Criticism section's problem is that it sounds like it's wriiten from the point of view of a fan. The facts are important and should remain, but there should be added phrases like "In the opinion of many fans..." Clevomon 08:19 EST 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, the last sentence needs a citation. No citation, them might as well take it off. Abby724 17:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Music

From what I remember, this show had very distinctive music, vox I think. It's style was also used in the pleasantly campy "Frosty Returns". Anyone with more info on this would be great. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.252.199.130 (talk) 03:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

Protection

I think we need semi-protection because of the latest vandalism from IP addresses.Thief Lord 14:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

"last aired" date

I noticed that the date in the "last aired" date was being changed. I looked into Template:Infobox Television, and it says this is "The last day the show aired. Use Present if it is ongoing." My understanding is that "aired" means the same as "broadcast". I can see that editors want it to be the date of the most recent episode premiere, but I don't believe that is what it is for. Lest there is any doubt about the ongoing status, Rugrats is broadcast tomorrow on Nicktoons UK. I will not fix it now, as that would be breaking WP:3RR. Notinasnaid 21:03, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a problem with this sentence

"SpongeBob's humor style was considerably more sophisticated and at times even more adult oriented than that of the later Rugrats episodes, and because of this was often compared to older, lower-budget Nickelodeon shows such as Ren & Stimpy and Rocko's Modern Life as opposed to Rugrats and other high-budget Klasky-Csupo shows of the late-90s."

I'm taking it out72.130.50.200 06:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Clean Up

I have cleaned up the main page. There were many, many mistakes, such as the Rugrats 'living in the Alaska' and 'the ghetto of a city'. I probably found about twelve of these things.--Sharpay Evans 04:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Abc to t.e.n.

Well i noticed on the list of networks in the australian networks bit only saying abc and nickloden but not ten as ten took over free-to-air airing from abc but i will correct it right now . Richardson j 04:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Nick at Nite airings

At some point in the late 90s-early 2000s, Nick at Nite used to show Rugrats for the first hour or two of their broadcast time. Does anyone else remember? WizardDuck 21:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Content removal

In this edit quite a lot of text, and an image was removed. Could someone who's more familiar with this article decide if it should go back? I only discovered this because a bot told me the image was now orphaned fair use as I reverted the image when it was vandalised over a year ago. Petros471 08:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Useless information

This article should stay clear of unnecessary information or subjects. 53180 22:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)53180

Typos

somebody fix the typos poor spelling and grammar

I cleaned it up a little. I'm here for the words 20:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

The criticism section sites no sources or refrences and features biased opinions where facts should be. For example "Taffy (voiced by Amanda Bynes) was universaly dislike by all fans" unless someone can actually prove this and the other information listed as a majority of fans opinions I suggest we remove this section.Eatspie (talk) 22:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. Could someone tell me who Taffy is? That's the only character I don't know in The Rugrats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.225.128.144 (talk) 23:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I think the criticism section of the article should be removed. Maybe we should have a vote on it? TheProf | Talk 00:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I haven't watched the recent episodes so I am unsure who Taffy is, but a lot of the opinions expressed in the article as "universal among fans" I disagree with and I'm sure there are many others that feel the same way. I suggest we either immediately remove the "criticism" section until further notice or have a vote to decide whether or not it should stay. Remember Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral and only feature facts, not biased opinions that might not even be true. Eatspie (talk) 03:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The "Criticism" section of the article also compares Spongebob Squarepants and Rugrats and gives a biased opinion on which one the edior felt is better without citing any sources or refrences. Unless someone disagrees, can give a reason why this section of the article is relevant and should stay, and can cite reliable sources or refrences that reveal these opinions as universal among fans I will remove this section of the article. Eatspie (talk) 00:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You certainly have my backing. TheProf | Talk 10:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

This article sucks.

I mean, where's all the information? This is one of the most well-known cartoon shows of all time and we get an article that mostly links to other articles? This show DIN'T EVEN COME OUT IN THE 90'S!Dear Lord. Mikeguy 08:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Who should care? The show has long since jumped the shark. 70.101.160.105 22:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Who should care? Anyone who cares about this show and/or articles on Wikipedia. Also, the fact that in your opinion the show jumped the shark is completely irrelevant to its article on Wikipedia. TheProf07 (talk) 12:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not just in that persons opinion that the show jumped the shark. In truth, EVERYONE knows the show jumped the shark. We all know who the objects of destruction are so let's just come right out now and say it, Dil and Kimi.

The two charecters had MUCH potential in their introductions, and they fulfilled that potential, unfortunately, to their fullest as right when they were introduced to the show they...

they just didn't fit in. First Dil, changing the show from, "a baby's life and perspective with fun imagination", to, "Toilet jokes and bathroom 'humor'." I'm sixteen years old, have been closely watching the old cel animation proccesses on the Rugrats, and know what I'm talking about. I don't expect this to effect anyone impaticular.

I'm just asking: Try to have a little more understanding for us. We've all spotted the changes and basically don't like them, but know there is almost no way to take them back. That's very uncomforting to have to live with for the rest of your life. Maybe you may not look at this show the same way other "Rugrats" fans do, but just don't be suprised if you here someone complain again.

ThegreatWakkorati (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you add the information yourself instead of complaining about it? Great articles don't just appear in thin air, you have to write them. Eatspie 19:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think this show is anywhere near "one of the most well-known cartoon shows of all time." I mean, there are plenty of shows that are/were more well-known than "Rugrats". At least we can say that this show is one of the most well-known Nickelodeon shows of all time. Marcus2 (talk) 19:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

"Also, the fact that in your opinion the show jumped the shark is completely irrelevant to its article on Wikipedia."

Whose opinion? It's not his opinion that "Rugrats" jumped the shark; it is fact. Having said that, Rugrats did jump the shark. In analogy to this, Pope John Paul II did die in 2005. This is fact. Therefore, you can't have an "opinion" saying that he did not. Marcus2 (talk) 19:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for being a little late, but does anyone know WHEN the show jumped the shark? --DoubleDee0614 (talk) 10:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

When Dil was introduced. Marcus2 (talk) 10:27, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Rubbish, the show moved on in a realistic way! People have more than one child, deal with it! IPavoider (talk) 19:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

NOT rubbish! And I am certain that all people who believe that Rugrats didn't jump the shark are idiots, period. Marcus2 (talk) 11:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

And I believe that all people that think television shouldn't move forward and be like real life are fools and are in denial. Life is life, things and people move on and progress. Didi and Stu having another child was the most real thing the show ever did! Anyone who disagrees with that is quite simply one dimensional and has no business even watching television shows... IPavoider (talk) 11:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Let's not get out of hand here. We are talking about a television show. A cartoon television show. The show need not mimic real life. Most TV shows do not mimic real life in the first place. Why should the Rugrats? Hit TV shows like "LOST" and "Heroes" are clearly beyond the realm of "real" life. The show achieves its primary goal; entertaining its viewers. Isn't that the point anyway? It's a cartoon show. Leave it at that. Rintaminator (talk) 05:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Cancellation date

I have corrected the error stating that this show ended in 2006. The direct-to-DVD releases are not part of the final season, which ended in 2004. 70.101.160.105 00:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Where did all the info go?

I remember reading this page a while back and getting filled with nostalgia because of all of the things the article described. What happened to the descriptions about the show and the production and everything? Why did it have to get purged?

Aparently, it was shortened because the show is cancelled. Wich is ridiculous, of course, cancellation doesnt mean it isnt culturally significant. - Redmess 12:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

so if a show is cancelled, they delete the info? that's retarded 24.192.136.238 (talk) 02:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You can still read that by going to Page History, ya know. Sabre Knight (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but ordinary civilians browsing Wikipedia and desiring to be filled with nostalgia about a cartoon they grew up with aren't smart enough to go to page history. This is an important article and it ought to be fixed. But whatever. Agelseb (talk) 00:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Dil and Kimi

Will someone please stop adding mention of them in the Premise paragraph?! Their introductions are mentioned in a later paragraph. 70.101.160.105 12:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I've re-added both these characters and Susie Carmichael back into the premise. All three are major characters in the show and need mention in the premise. As for being mentioned in a later paragraph. Arn't they all!? I rest my case:) -- TheProf07 (talk) 12:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re-added them again. The Doctor Who article doesnt just include characters from the first series. So nither should the Rugrats article. Thank you TheProf | Talk 11:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

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

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) 02:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Page on the up and up

I have added some text in the portion of criticisms that contributed to the neutrality of the page and it seems that these have been even further elaborated and corrected. This page is starting to be filled with more worthwhile information and less opinions. I think that the popularity section is by far the worst portion of the entire article. This section would be best benefited if someone would include come actual number of popularity and more pertinent information than what is currently present. --Amurray8 (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

End date

This show ended in 2004, not 2005 or 2006. Will somebody please stop changing this date. The 2004 date is correct. 70.101.182.149 (talk) 21:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Storyboard Jam

Anyone have a link to the source? (Steve Ressel's LiveJournal) VTNC (talk) 18:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

here's a link: [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by VTNC (talk • contribs) 18:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

End Dates and Begin Dates

What was the exact day for the end date in 1994 and the begin date in 1997? --WeezleBeezle (talk) 18:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Pictures.

Okay, I just found a pic with all the mainstream babies in it. (Tommy, Chuckie, Phil, Lil, Kimi, Dil, Angelica, and Susie)

But I'm not allowed to upload yet.

http://kara.allthingsd.com/files/2007/10/300px-rugrats.JPG

Wii24 (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

That same image was in the infobox before, then someone removed it. Should it be uploaded again? Paper Luigi ^{Talk Contributions} 01:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

This page went downhill

Right about here is where we lost the most content. Paper Luigi ^{Talk • Contributions} 00:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

To be fair though, most of that content was original research that really shouldn't really have lasted as long as it did. The article needs a lot of work from someone who knows a lot about the subject, but who can also stay neutral and avoid putting the "OR" back in. IPavoider (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh and btw, thanks for uploading and adding that image of all the babies to the article! It really looks good and makes the article look a lot better :-) IPavoider (talk) 12:01, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Lipschitz

With all the controversy that has surrounded various Nicktoons, no information at all on the use of "Dr. Lipschitz"? Or did people just not care? I doubt that people made a fuss over "shut up" in Angry Beavers and not the "shit" in "Lipschitz"... -- 97.113.113.234 (talk) 21:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

You've actually answered your own question within your question. It's Lipschitz not Lipshits. IPavoider (talk) 22:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

First Air?

I happen to know that the first air, (The Pilot episode) was actually on VH1. Not sure if that counts as being part of the actual series, but should be noted.67.173.167.130 (talk) 05:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Protection status

Can someone please explain why the page is protected? MotherFerginPrincess (talk) 16:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

In short: Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Bambifan101. Powers ^T 17:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Broadcast history

In Argentina, the rugrats also were in Nickelodeon Argentina....

Fact check please

Due to recent edits to the Rugrats articles, can editors please check the episode lists to ensure that they are indeed accurate? Fences&Windows 16:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

How on earth did someone who died in 1980 write Rugrats?

Anyone else checked any of the links to names under the 'written by' section. Some of them link to people who died before the series was written, one links to a ice hockey player and another to an Irish politician. Do us a favour and please check links before you add to or edit an article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.246.55 (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

So fix them. Powers ^T 14:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes

This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Penfding changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC).