Talk:Fairly OddBaby

Untitled
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you!

This article needs some serious work done to it.
I believe that this article needs some serious work done to it. I will try my best to do what I can, but I would like to encourage others to help out, also. There are many grammar problems, irrelevant links, useless sentences and sections, etc. Please do whatever you can to make this article better. - J-Whitt (talk) 21:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. It really needs work, and currently reads like it was written in 5 minutes. Lord Of Demise (talk) 23:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

There, i rewrote the ENTIRE story over again. It was like written in 5 mins, and if you look at mine, you can tell I took the time. Your Welcome everyoneOnepiece226 (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)Onepiece226

there was a lack of commas and capitalization so i fixed that, i might have missed something though. the plot is way too short for a movie!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.220.162 (talk) 03:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

No I was the one who made the long plot, but then someone put it back to a smaller one!Onepiece226 (talk) 22:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)Onepiece226


 * Please read WP:PLOT to understand why. Powers T 16:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

the inconsistantcies section is all stupid opinions, it should be removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.191.68 (talk) 04:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:The Fairly OddParents - Baby Poof.png
The image Image:The Fairly OddParents - Baby Poof.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --09:05, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Poof
I know that its not article worthy, but I thought that some people might be interested to know that 'poof' (short for 'poofter') is the British equivalant of the American word 'fag' (short for 'faggot'). Zestos (talk) 01:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Poof was kicking Cosmo's belly and it hurt. I might delete it for sure. CatScratch12345 (talk) 07:58 PM, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Plot summary
This text is far too long and involved for a plot "summary". It is more of a blow-by-blow, scene-by-scene description of the entire teleplay. It is also written from an in-universe perspective instead of from a real-world perspective, contrary to the guidelines in WP:Writing about fiction.

The plot summary should give only the most basic overview of the plot -- Timmy wishes for a child for Cosmo and Wanda -- and then fill in what details are necessary to make sense of the critical reviews and other secondary sources (of which there are basically none here).

Since I've been reverted twice, I'm appealing to cooler heads here.

-- Powers T 21:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * "Road to the Multiverse", an article for a Family Guy episode, is FA status and contains a plot summary that is definitely longer than two sentences. Okay, so the plot summary on Fairly Oddbaby may need to be trimmed and should be written less of an in universe style. However I think it should not be trimmed so much that the plot summary would only contain one or two sentences. 89119 (talk) 00:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * To some extent, it's a matter of proportion. That FG article can support a two-paragraph summary because it has plenty of background information, production info, reviews, and things like that.  This article, on the other hand, has virtually nothing except a single sentence on the ratings the show got.  That makes it look very much like this article is here just to recap the plot, not to provide encyclopedic information on a notable production.  Powers T 12:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)