Talk:You Kent Always Say What You Want

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spoiler warning[edit]

anyone care to add one in? I don't know the template, etc, and I'm lazy :/

70.22.246.71 06:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NO, we don't use spoiler warnings anymore. If the episode has already aired then there is no need for a warning because it is out already, if the article has a 'Plot' or 'Synopsis' or some other similar section then there is no need for a warning because the section title lets you no that the plot is about to be divulged. More importantly, in the six years that we have had the spoiler tag, there has been 0, none, zip, zilch, nada, no complaints whatsoever from readers whose enjoyment of a work was spoiled by reading the Wikipedia article. Check out the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler if you want to know the details. Homefill 15:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original episode title[edit]

What happened to The Kent State Massacre? Was it a hoax, or did the producers change the name of the episode in light of recent events? If it was changed, it probably deserves a mention in the article. --Bongwarrior 18:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it was changed, it was most likely because of the VT shootings, which also affected the airing of Stop, Or My Dog Will Shoot!. But until there is a source confirming its change, I don't think it should be mentioned, but we'll see. Gran2 18:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For the time being, I'm assuming that there will be no Kent State Massacre episode now, but if there is, it shouldn't be too hard to make a new page for it. If we can get a source that says it was originally called that, then we can use it. -- Scorpion 18:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Look it up in the US copyright records database, registration # PAu-3-061-056 --Kaizersoze 01:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't mean that they are the same episode. Yes, they probably are, but we should get a source before saying it. -- Scorpion 01:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's episode JABF15, says it plain and clear in that database. --Kaizersoze 01:44, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A source would still be handy. Also, is there a source for the plot information? There's nothing at the Futon Critic. -- Scorpion 01:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There's a synopsis on Fox's publicity website, listed as episode JABF15, which will soon be on the futon critic I guess. --Kaizersoze 02:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural References[edit]

It looked to me as if Kent's exposée of the media was formatted in a way very reminiscent of Edward R. Murrow's CBS broadcasts during the McCarthy Era. Did anyone else feel this?

Yes it is. Kent Brockman completely cloned Murrow's style in that scene. Y2p731 04:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Simpsons have a feud with Fox News[edit]

And there you have it, The Simpsons has a feud with Fox News. Fox News and The Simpsons are a part of 20th Century Fox. The cast of The Simpsons are now engaged with a feud with Fox News Channel. Each character made a snipe at Bill O'Reilly or Fox News with some comments directed at the channel. Ludacris, a featured guest on the 400th episode, is pretty much a shot at O'Reilly and Fox News. And Fox being the representatives of both The Simpsons and Fox News Channel, it's seems like a deadlock between them. There were comment relates to O'Reilly digging up infomation on a political opponent (usually a person who is a a member of The Democratic Party or a liberal). The most starling surprise is the characters stated that Fox News was "exposed" as a conservative media outlet. Ashame that The Simpsons can get away with this, without loosing the audience. I am guessing right wing media critics such as Michelle Malkin will get on the blow horn and attack The Simpsons. Seth MacFarlene's televisions shows Family Guy and American Dad also take shots at Fox News. It's a war between the adult cartoons and Fox News. We'll see the feud be brought out in spotlight once it hits the MSM. Note: MSM is mainstream media. LILVOKA 01:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, duh! --Jnelson09 03:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The whole "feud" is just staged playful combating to make people think that there is some kind of conflict. It anything it is cross promotion of other Fox shows JayKeaton 01:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it's more like liberal propaganda that The Simpsons has been shamefully promoting in the later parts of the series. Maybe FOX Corp lets them get away with this, so that they can pretend to be more balanced. I miss the days when The Simpsons would humorously satire all forms of politics, instead of just insulting anything they don't agree with. --Ted87 (talk) 00:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ending[edit]

I am not sure if i should have put the ending into this article. Please take it out if you do not think it should be in this article. Duckwariorrandom 01:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don Imus?[edit]

I'm sure it's probably entirely coincidental, because these episodes are made months in advance, but was anyone else reminded of the Don Imus incident by this episode? There's some similarities (swearing on live television, nobody watching and nobody caring until it's picked up by other people, super-sensitive watchdog types, Kent gets fired), with religion instead of race. PolarisSLBM 18:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was a complete coincidence, but Al Jean said this on the matter [1] Gran2 18:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing foresight. The timing was just luck, but the writers did a good job predicting the circumstances that would surround such an event. 171.71.37.103 21:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural References[edit]

Since there seems to be a slight dispute on the main article at the moment on inclusion/exclusion and referencing, I'm putting all my planned additions here for now. Feel free to move material below back into the main article once the issue's been fully resolved:

I've never seen Raising Arizona but the dogs in the Springfield Dog Park that Marge encounters during her run seem to be references to famous dogs.

Then Again, I might be wrong RobertHarrisIII 06:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lacking a relaible 3rd party source that says that the writers intened those dogs to be dogs from other works of fiction; to put that into the article would be a violation of our original research policy. Remember, the episode itself can only be used a source for things that happen in the episode. To say that a scene or character in one work of fiction is spoofing another work of fiction requires a reliable 3rd party source that states the writers intended to spoof the other work. Homefill 12:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are two third party sources that support the Edward R. Murrow reference. The first is from a website called TV Squad. The other is a hardcore political website called The Huffington Post. Do I need to post the links or will someone will do that for me. Y2p731 02:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So what you're saying is that unless the writers say something is supposed to be a direct reference or parody, then it's "Original Research?" Exactly how obvious does something have to be to not be considered original research?66.139.197.42 06:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I put the most plausible IMHO on the page. I'd say the Rolling Stones reference could be coincidental. I've neighter seen Raising Arizona Hauberg 21:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Rolling Stones reference is most likely coincidental. Unless there's a source saying otherwise, I don't believe that the writers intended it at all and suggest it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.146.94 (talk) 01:42, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

I've cleaned up the synopsis, a little copyediting here and there, incorporating the trivia, rewritting the ending. We do need a source for the claim that the episode title was changed because of the VT shooting. I'm not trying to dispute the veracity of the claim, it sounds quite true, but we need a source to cite if we want to include that claim in the article. Scorpion, you seem to have a wealth of Simpsons knowledge. Any newspaper articles or interviews with the show's staff we could cite for this?Homefill 17:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is an impressively overhigh amount of Wiki links in this article including common nouns like "Government" and "Press" and i say that most of them should be removed. Pretty much every other word is a link.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.196.115.179 (talk)
As there are 388 words in the article and only 41 wikilinks, one can only hope that you are being facetious. Homefill 23:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, _only_ 1 in 9 words are links. Yes, obviously he was being facetious....66.139.197.42 06:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Song when Kent gets fired[edit]

The song played after Kent gets fired has already been used in another movie, I believe. Does anybody know its title ?

Edit: I did my research: it looks like it's Midnight Cowboy Harmonica Theme. Link: http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index.php?qid=20070520195946AAchYM3

It also sounds a lot like the background theme for the James Bond movie "You Only Live Twice." I noticed that right away, the slow theme during the movie that is an instrumental version of the theme song. --Snooziums 20:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Worthy of note =[edit]

Kent already made dropped the F-Bomb In Bart's Inner Child[2], and called his audience SOB's (it was the episode where Krusty starts stand-up but I can't remember the episode name.

You're right about the former, and the latter was a different episode. However, the former may have been staged, as it was bleeped. --Jnelson09 21:50, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

two adverts[edit]

when sky one showed it they had two adverts because they showed pirate master right after simpsons with no adverts should this be mentiond in the article? ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 17:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh... it's not notable, so why would it? Matthew 17:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I thourght it might be because people on mesg boards were complaning about it ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 20:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Syndicated version[edit]

Does the syndicated version still open with Family Portait, or is it replaced with the standard opening? 68.146.70.124 (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on You Kent Always Say What You Want. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:42, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on You Kent Always Say What You Want. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:You_Kent_Always_Say_What_You_Want&oldid=1208020684"