Talk:Mom (Futurama)

Futurama Low‑importance

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Futurama, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Futurama articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FuturamaWikipedia:WikiProject FuturamaTemplate:WikiProject FuturamaFuturama articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Futurama tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Futurama tasks:

Ongoing

Bring Futurama up to FA status.
Better define article assessment levels and reassess to include C class.

Needs attention

All images linked in any Futurama article need to have a fair use rationale, this includes:
- ~~episode articles~~ done
- Character and list of character pages
- All miscellaneous pages (as linked in the Futurama template)
All episode pages need to meet the standards of WP:NTVEP. A basic layout for how this can be accomplished is under discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Futurama/Archive 2#Episode article organization-revisited. Examples to follow include "Space Pilot 3000" and "Hell Is Other Robots".

Expand

Futurama Comics and its issues.
Articles related to Producers, Directors and Writers

Other ways to help:
Monitor changes to the project, changes to articles and changes to this to-do list.

Fictional characters

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Animation Low‑importance

	Animation portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 December 2015. The result of the discussion was procedural keep.

Untitled[edit]

Has anyone else noticed the similarity between Mom and the character Dola from Castle in the Sky? I'm wondering if it's a deliberate homage or just coincidence.

No, I don't think so. You see futurama is a good show. While that is an anime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.40.206.129 (talk) 06:59, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Walt, Larry and Ignar[edit]

This article should only feature information regarding Futurama's recuring fictional character "Mom." Walt, Larry and Ignar are completley different characters, I suggest we either give them their own article or put there mini bio and information on the list of recurring human characters from Futurama. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenneth Hardeman (talk • contribs) 11:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's reasonable to leave them on this page but if you feel strongly about it I would recommend moving it to the list page. I am strongly against giving them their own article. Mom is only just barely significant enough to have an article, actually I doubt this article could pass an AfD at this point, her sons are definitely NOT independently notable and should not have an article of their own. Star dust 8212 03:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Futurama sons of Mom.png[edit]

Image:Futurama sons of Mom.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reception[edit]

Bored at work, doing a random search waiting for the last few minutes to tick off the clock. I don't have time to work on the article at the moment but these links should be useful to anyone looking to add a reception or cultural impact section to this article. 25 Largest Fictional Companies: MomCorp Forbes Fictional 15 Mom at #4 Star dust 8212 21:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miranda Priestly[edit]

Does anyone beside me see similarities between Mom and Miranda Priestly from The Devil Wears Prada? --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 14:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that some mention of this should be made in the article? Because unless you have some sources that'd be original research. Or, are you just making general conversation? Because that's not what article talk pages are for. --IllaZilla (talk) 04:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry everyone, it's my stalker. Yes IllaZilla, I was suggesting that mention of it be put in the article but never mind. --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 11:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't refer to me as a stalker. Your comments are very incivil and if they continue I am likely to take it to RfC. I thought we discussed the importance of not being disagreeable. --IllaZilla (talk) 03:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Father of the SONS??[edit]

just watch the show where the robots are causing gobal warming (sourse), and noticed how much young(er) proffesor looked like them. any chance he is their father?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfrigger (talk • contribs) 03:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Farnsworth is Inger's father, as revealed in Bender's Game. Comrade Graham (talk) 11:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merging proposal[edit]

Not notable, does not meet the general notability guideline (no third-party sources), entire page is merely a plot summary which is discouraged on Wikipedia. Androids101 (talk) 00:16, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support As proposer. Androids101 (talk) 07:44, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 2 sources from Forbes lists, Time named her one of the top 10 worst moms ever. All those provide real world aspects. Also it's a good page to talk about her sons and MomCorp which is prevelant in the series. CTJF83 03:29, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment But 3 sources is definitely not enough to establish notability, her three sons can have sections in the proposed page and thus has coverage, and MomCorp could also be explained in Mom's section. Androids101 (talk) 07:44, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Androids101 is correct that long plot summaries don't belong here. So, after all that plot summary is removed, what's left? Not much. If opposing the merge, please comment on what form this article should take. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:29, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which episodes?[edit]

...did she appear in? A list, perhaps? Thanks in advance, --Jerome Potts (talk) 02:29, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus to merge[edit]

The notion that there is consensus to merge based on a several-year-old split discussion on the talk page is ludicrous. IronGargoyle (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're looking at the wrong discussion. The current discussion is here. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The "anon" editor the other side of DonIago's edit, 134.154.255.43, is a sockpuppet of site banned editor User:Fangusu. Thus, per WP:SITEBAN, I have reverted their edit. Steel1943 (talk) 22:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And then, I reverted myself since I saw the consensus elsewhere. Steel1943 (talk) 22:13, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]