Talk:Stop Team Go

hmmm, waiting

No really the appropriate topic for the episodes page, but I'm betting that Kigo fans will go nuts over this episode, it's got Shego and Kim hugging and holding hands, and plenty of subtext that they can read too much in to.

perfectblue 18:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Trust me, we already went nuts over the COMMERCIAL for the episode. Particularly the screengrab where it looks like Shego is checking out Kim's butt.  ;-) Rdfox 76 23:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying Shego and Kim are Gay??????!!!!!

I think not! I noticed no such thing, and I've seen this episode like five times! When was she checking out her butt?!

There was one screengrab that someone took by frame-by-framing the scene where Kim and Shego are clothes shopping where it looked for all the world like Shego was checking out Kim's butt. Just an accident of the animation process, but amusing for those of us who semi-seriously think they'd make a good/cute couple. (And let's leave it at this, as we're veering off-topic for a Wiki discussion board, 'kay?) Rdfox 76 19:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

We REALLY need to leave this alone, but I hadda weigh in. The still in question is, as pointed out, a coincidental eye-line match. Now the scene earlier where Shego kisses Kim on the forehead-- THAT actually happened. When Kim drops Miss Go off at school-- It's a wide shot. It's followed by a shot of Kim wiping it off her forehead and frantically calling Wade. (If anything, this thread points out how maddeningly subtle the KP creators are playing this!)

Mind you, This TOPIC is not entirely off-base-- "Fan reaction" obliquely addresses it, leaving open the question of just what sort of messages are hidden (or not hidden) in "STG". The problem: As the article points out, it's all pure speculation. Discussing it here is completely pointless. Sbgdcom 19:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Sbgdcom is right. If you want to discuss about this, go to a forum. --Alexlayer 19:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

You people really are 14 year old boys, aren't you? --=CJK= 02:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm 30. I just think they make a good pair. And they're cute together, too. Nothing perverse about it. Rdfox 76 02:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm twenty, and c'mon, CJK, there's nothing perverted in Kigo that there isn't in ANY other pairing. I know that you don't like it, but please get over that. --Alexlayer 03:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, however old you are, it's just stupid! I thought you guys were real KP fans, not pervs! --=CJK= 04:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Man, you're hopeless -_-UUU. --Alexlayer 05:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

It'd be a good idea to keep the discussions civil here, and not indulge in ad hominem attacks. There's absolutely no need to call anyone names, even in jolly comraderie. RdFox, Alexlayer, =CJK=; I admire and enjoy your contributions in this corner of WP.

As far as I'm concerned, I have nothing against people who like Kigo. If you think about it, the presence of Kigo fanfiction MAY have been influential in the creation of the episode "STG." So even those who don't care for it may just owe Kigo fans for one of the best episodes yet.

Like it or not (and I know I'm being a hypocrite-- see above entry), you won't find it here and you won't find discussions of it here, except on a indirect level. (actually, there is a Kigo Article in WP: lovely pictures.) That's why painfully methodical objectivity is being maintained on article level.

BTW, I'm older than BOTH of you! In fact, I used to tutor English 110/1A in college-- And for the most part you all write better than the brain donor candidates I used to tutor. :) Sbgdcom 06:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Sbg. However, if Kigo infects any other article but KP... --=CJK= 06:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

That will require vigilance on all our parts.

This brings up another subject: The perception that a certain percentage of Kigo fans are immature and will not hesitate to deface pages they don't like or understand. From what I have observed, the opposite has been true: the more egregious vandalism in these articles has been anti-Kigo rantings. Anybody else have any thoughts on this? Sbgdcom 06:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Look, you guys win, okay? Stop rubbing it (and Kigo) in our faces! --=CJK= 07:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, whoa! "Win?" Re-read this topic again. The people working hardest to keep WP neutral and Kigo-free are avowed Kigo fans. (And no, I'm not a Kigo fan either, but not 'cause it's "stupid;" Nothing against it, just a matter of taste.) No "win." No nothing.Sbgdcom 07:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Operation "Gerkhin"?

What Draken says sounds actually more like "Operation Gurken" to me. This would make some sense, considering that "Gurken" is the german word for pickles. I therefore suggest an edit to "Gurken". - Andromedos

Gherkin is an english word for a type of pickle. Rdfox 76 21:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, alright, I did not know that (English is not my first language). I guess both words might have a similar etymology. Even though, with a more obvious operation name, it makes me wonder why Shego was surprised when Drakken came with the pickle jar. Anyway, thanks for the correction. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.232.118.15 (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

Plot Summary

There is established policy regarding plot summaries: NOT#IINFO 7 Plot summaries. The plot summary in the article falls outside of this policy, hence the tag. Please do not remove the tag unless you have addressed the issue. - Tiswas^(t) 08:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Great stuff - props to Sbgdcom. Now it needs the {{trivia}} section cleaned up - Tiswas^(t) 07:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

On actually reading the article, it still blatantly falls foul of WP:PLOT - the guidelines need to be read, and then actually followed. Until then, the tag stays - Tiswas^(t) 12:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Aw, thanks. Hey , I didn't make the synopsis longerer, though. I made it shorterer, took out the end, and for a few days at least the tag was not there. It can easily be shorterer still... Sbgdcom 22:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not the length on it's own - It needs to follow the guidelines as set out in WP:PLOT - Until then, the {{plot}} tag needs to stay - Tiswas^(t) 14:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay... I'll take that on, but still: To say Wikipedia articles are inconsistent in this area is a gigantic understatement. (For instance, I was gonna link up a Star Trek: TOS episode to this article. The plot summaries over there are so huge they break them into acts!) In fact, in looking at the recommended articles in the Guideline section--Wikipedia:WikiProject_Television/Episodes#Feature-- the plot summary should actually be longer and more detailed but written in a factual, passive voice. D'accord? Sbgdcom 17:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

On further reflection, the article is far better structured and written that other similar articles - It would be in the articles interest to adhere closely to stated policy (particularly WP:SR) and guidelines (WP:EPISODE), or it may degenerate into fancruft. I leave it to your discretion as to whether the {{plot}} tag is relevant and justified. - Tiswas^(t) 19:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

What do you make of this line?

It can be argued that the plot of "Stop Team Go" is likely a response to intense fan interest concerning the relationship between these two characters. The producers of "Kim Possible" have demonstrated with regularity they are very aware of, and responsive to, their fan base. However, whether the details and subtexts of Kim and Shego's relationship revealed in this episode constitute a simple acknowledgment-- or a canonical answer-- to this fan interest is, due to the nature of the show and it's Disney Channel venue, impossible to actually verify.

What's up with this convoluted statement? Disney Channel targets younger viewers, so if it's what I think it is, there is no way I can see them trying that without losing most of their audience. WAVY 10 16:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Think that, even if they'd do that, children wouldn't notice nor care about it. And there is older people watching the show. --Alexlayer 20:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

But the primary audience is the "tweener" audience, so I doubt if their common sense sensors are working properly, they would even bother with it. WAVY 10 16:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

After the lines about the cakes in "The Big Job", I'm not surprised at all. --Alexlayer 17:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

From the person what wrote it: Actually, the intention of this section is to illuminate the invisible line between the episode "Stop Team Go" and Kigo/Fanshipping.

To answer as to whether or not this content is actually there: It seems to be overwhelmingly obvious. Like a lot of "tweener" targeted entertainment, the plot and dialog are "bipolarly skewed;" On the surface, the story is inoffensive and kid-friendly, but a sub-current of oblique references or subtle implications also runs through the same story, designed for an older audience. Shego's "cake" line outlined above-- "I don't bake 'em, and I don't jump out of 'em--" is clean evidence that this dual-layer content is woven throughout the show.

The rather carefully worded, firmly neutral tone of the section came out of a dialog between Alexlayer and I concerning exactly WHAT the producers were saying about fan faction, Kigo in particular. I thought the episode took a very firm line against it, showing Kim and Shego existing in completely different states of maturity; my interlocutor said the opposite was true, and the episode was "fanservice," a positive nod to fandom. Ultimately, either assertion is unprovable: The producers haven't said anything about the intentional message of "Stop Team Go." Taking a side is speculation, hence the hanging disclaimer at the end.Sbgdcom 21:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Cakes?????

This is going to sound VERY stupid but I don't get the whole 'Cakes' line in "The Big Job". :) Um.....could someone explain what the big "Oh my god I can't beleive she said that!!!!!" thing is all about !!! please.....

...how old are you, anyway?  ;-)

It's an old joke that at bachelor parties and other parties intended for men only will feature a giant cake that an attractive, scantily-clad woman (usually either a stripper or prostitute) will jump out of, who then proceeds to provide the person the party's for her own form of entertainment. Shego was saying that she sure as hell wasn't gonna do THAT--particularly not for Senor Senior, Sr. Rdfox 76 17:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Go Team Question

I have set up a Go Team page on Kim Possible Wiki. It would be very helpful if someone could tell me how old they are so I can add it on. THANKS!;) --KPprincess 01:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

If you mean making a page of "Team Go" (It's not Go Team), there has been already one once but was deleted and fused with Minor allies in Kim Possible. In any case, the characters ages were NEVER reveleaded, and that's for every character in the KP series. --Alexlayer 01:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Attitudinator section expansion

Too much? Relevant, but too broad for an episode article? Just wanted to outline this "plot device" in full context. From a storytelling perspective, The Attitudinator is a fascinating and clever prime mover: The basic "switcheroo" gimmick is wearily familiar in various fictional works, But that "secondary-inner potential" effect: Never seen anything quite like it.

The insights on the examples given aren't, I think, Original Research: They're quite obvious even to a casual viewer and just needed to be specifically pointed out. Sbgdcom 02:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you guys think that perhaps the Attitudinator is interesting and important enough to get it's own page? --=CJK= 05:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

As things stand now, I'd say no. It makes reading the STG page more interesting, and as a section it is similar to expansions in other episode articles.

If the Attitudinator shows up in a future episode, I'd say yes. Holds for any series element: once is unique, twice is a follow-up, three times is a series motif.

It leads me to some thoughts about Frugal Lucre I may bring up in "Minor Villains."Sbgdcom 05:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Ockham's razor on the Attitudinator?

It seems to me that there is a less "deep" explanation for the personality changes induced by the Attitudinator: suppose it merely changes those personality aspects to the polar opposites of themselves? Thus bumbling sidekick Ron becomes self-assured mastermind Ron; Drakken's overwhelming hubris becomes meek and mild; et cetera. The good/evil swap is just one of many polar reversals taking place.

I freely admit that I have not seen the episode in question, and if the creators have weighed in one way or the other then that pretty much settles it. But I wonder if the author of the article as it stands now may be reading too much "inner potential" into this one. Strunkenwhite 05:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

A quick jaunt on YouTube and I'm rather more knowledgeable on this episode. I think it supports my theory that Shego exhibited almost a Valley Girl personality in the coffee shop. More than her good/evil balance got adjusted! Her family seems to be pretty gormless either way, although we only get to see their good side briefly. I guess they were just funnier that way.

In "Bad Boy", it's a bit harder to judge whether Ron is his own evil, or just influenced by Drakken's evil that was injected into him. His new aptitude for building devices might indicate the latter. But Drakken himself seems just as emotionally needy as he was when evil, undercutting my theory. Interestingly, he seems pretty competent at being good, especially in the area of baking?

I think that the best explanation is that the two episodes show different (but related) phenomena, which is not at all incompatible with the canon, since one episode features a broken/malfunctioning machine and the other a heavily modified one. Different results are to be expected.

Again, I am a fairly new if enthusiastic convert to Kim Possible, but I think that these thoughts are well-supported. I welcome responses including counterarguments. Strunkenwhite 06:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Occam's razor meets Preponderance of Evidence!

If "Bad Boy" was the only use of the Attitudinator seen in KP, I'd say it's just a simple good/evil switcher, and Ron's abilities are somehow crossed over with Drakken's. But the events of "Stop Team Go" give more examples of switches, and the asymmetrical results on the various affected characters are a sort of evidence.

The writers of KP are using the device to say something at a thematic level. Basically, what they're saying is: "Ron has a lot of potential; Team Go, absent of Shego, does not. It is not inherently possible for Drakken to achieve his lofty goals. And Shego can easily live a rewarding life if she simply chooses good over evil." This is what's meant by a "contextual signifier."

You bring up the different affects of the Attitudinator/Reverse Polarizer as a result of it's working state (broken or enhanced). Again, the KP writers throw out a strong signifier to tell us the device works exactly the same way (but in obviously different modalities) in both episodes: Zorpox. Same speech patterns, same abilities, same theme music! Shego, Kim and even Rufus immediately recognize Zorpox when he re-surfaces.

Hey-- Good, thought-provoking talk subject, Strunkenwhite! There's a whiff of "English Major" to that handle. :) Sbgdcom 07:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess the problem I have is that your examples don't seem to be consistent: Shego's personality does a 180 into "girly girl" territory, which agrees with Ron's sudden supercompetent megalomania; but Team Go seems, as I said above, to be fairly equally directionless whether good or evil -- they plainly state at one point that without Shego they lost focus and fell apart, even as heroes. Drakken, on the other hand, actually seems (arguably) to be a MORE effective good guy than bad guy. It's beyond doubt if you count his cooking into the equation :P

I came up with the broken/enhanced theory on the spur of the moment, and am perfectly willing to admit it has little support. But I don't think that the contextual signifier is very well supported either. You cite Team Go as evidence, but I don't think that they support a claim of contextual significance. Yes, they're ineffective without Shego, but if they already knew that, it's not a revelation. I think that the scene in the coffee shop is telling: Shego is an exaggerated caricature of a good girl. I don't believe that STG's Shego is an example of what could happen if she "chooses good over evil" because I don't think that, if she did choose good over evil in the normal way, she would end up acting like she did in STG.

I agree that the Bad Boy episode included themes of Ron's hidden capabilities and Drakken's . . . lack thereof; but I don't think that Stop Team Go has a similar moral. Still, I'm happy to agree to disagree . . . with one exception. I want to delete the second paragraph, the one concerning Team Go, because the evidence (the episode) simply does not support that they are less effective villains (without Shego) than heroes (without Shego). See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xNzHexX6Nc&mode=related&search= (at about 2:08, or 1:45 for the whole scene). What I see is not a contexual signifier, as I understand the term from its use in the article and here, but rather a frank spelling out that Shego was the brains of the operation. Strunkenwhite 06:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

"Hi, Sandy: We're robbing you. We're evil now!" --Twigo. Love that line.

Team Go are ineffectual, bickering boobs in "Go Team Go;" The point is made repeatedly in the episode. Turned evil in "Stop Team Go," they have a hard time following Electronique's orders and they bicker just as much. The point is they DO NOT change all that much when turned, which is the really significant point the writers are trying to make.

I'm going to pull out a screenwriting term to re-emphasize my point. Shego's brothers are "incomplete characters." This sort of character type is common in serial fiction. They cannot fully function, they cannot be made whole, without the involvement or intervention of the central character or characters-- That would be Kim (who certainly gave them a big hand a few times) and particularly Shego. She is Team Go's "missing puzzle piece"-- a point that has been driven home repeatedly as well.

Another important thing about this section is that it talks only about the secondary effect of the Attitudinator. The actual good/evil switch is important (again, in the scope of the section) only in how it places the affected characters in novel situations. Shego will almost certainly not turn into "Miss Go" if and when she abandons her career in villainy. We're being shown what she is capable of if and when she does-- hence, perhaps, her regret at the end. Same goes for Ron: He is being shown to have incredible potential, regardless of his moral orientation.

Say: An uncomfortable thought just occurred to me. Doesn't all this "device that unlocks hidden potential" stuff sound a lot like Scientology? Sbgdcom 07:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I see. I thought that a contextual significance implied a message, whereas in the episode we are told. But if that's not the case -- if contextual significance can be spelled out for us -- then I have no remaining quibbles.

As for Scientology, that would explain some of their behavior . . . Strunkenwhite 13:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)