Talk:Kröd Mändoon and the Flaming Sword of Fire

Slight addition to Episode 4 summary
Should it be noted that Krod's gem is the key to activating Dongalor's weapon? It seems to play a key role in the plot. AznWarlord (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

List of Episodes page
Can someone make a separate page for the episode list. Story V 01:06, 16 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Story V (talk • contribs)


 * Why don't we wait until there are more episodes? If the show (for example) gets canceled after 13 episodes, a separate page won't really be needed.  -- John Broughton  (♫♫) 23:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As there are only six episodes to date, a separate episode list is certainly not needed at this time -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I have some criticism for the episode descriptions themselves. I don't think they should give an entire plot synopsis of the show, as this is a huge spoiler for someone who hasn't watched them yet. They need to be edited down to a less descriptive level. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.66.92.92 (talk) 16:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:Comedy Central shows vs. Category:Kröd Mändoon and the Flaming Sword of Fire
Category:Kröd Mändoon and the Flaming Sword of Fire is itself a cagetory within Category:Comedy Central shows. — Robert Greer (talk) 13:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Reception section?
Isn´t it kinda surprising that nobody has yet started a Reception section, considering how much this show is torn to pieces left and right? --Lennier1 (talk) 15:56, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism, Homage or Inspirations? Shocking similarities to Japanese ANIMe Gokudo
What's with the similarities? Am I the only one to see Hollywood again taking an idea and re-hashing it? The Characters and even their costumes have been directly lifted from hit Japanese Anime Gokudo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gokudo --qfazeem (talk) 15:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

No. First of all that wouldn't belong in this article because it's original research. But anyway the only similarity I see is the sword of fire, which isn't exactly an original idea, and the idea of a fantasy comedy, which has also been done before. The anime version also seems to heave only lasted one short season, and it's article here is only a stub. Doesn't seem like a "hit" to me, and I doubt the creators of this show have seen it. 66.71.70.134 (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Have you actually seen the Anime cartoon? You assume you know it just on the basis of an article on wikipedia? I encourage you to see an episode, search it on one of those famous video sharing websites out there, or just google it. I have seen the enitre series. This TV show is a complete rehash, I like it better than the anime, but it is disrespectful of the original creators not to even mention that the ideas have been lifted, in the english language it is called Plagiarism. Just so is comes to the knowlege of people reading this, the famous Matrix movie is a re-hash of an earlier one called Dark City. And so is the Harry Potter series of book, they derive HEAVY inspiration from the Lord of the Rings Books, entires scenes, and even names have been lifted. But this is the irony of capitalism, the creator may not make it big in his lifetime but the person who Plagiarises his work becomes a millionaire. We have also the example of Steve Job and Wozniaks Apple Windows concept which made it big with Microsoft. The point of all this it not to go away from topic, it is simply that for too long have people been walking over other peoples intellectual property without acknowleging them, and this is not only illegal but also bad manners and not good form.--qfazeem (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Capitalism has nothing to do with plagiarism and many "hits" are inspired by the work of others, which does not constitute plagiarism. Harry Potter is nothing like Lord of the Rings and Steve Jobs? Seriously? 173.209.109.153 (talk) 23:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)


 * So you're in effect encouraging him now to do original research. That won't solve anything.--123.225.191.174 (talk) 11:45, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * For the record, The Matrix steals most of its themes from the book Neuromancer by William Gibson (including the term "The Matrix"), not from Dark City. 118.208.180.111 (talk) 09:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Er, The Matrix is primarily a retelling of Plato's Cave.--Viva la Vaile (talk) 17:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC) (talk) 21:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Harry Potter is not in any way similar to Lord of the Rings... "Entire scenes"... No, "names have been lifted"... Are u saying something like "Aragog" is the same as "Aragorn"? chandler ··· 11:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Names
Okay, something missing from the article is a mention of the character names.

Krod ("Dork" spelled backwards) According to the the Urban Dictionary is slang for a person of limited intelligence.

Emperor Zanus (pronounced Emperor's Anus) Actual line from the show: "Have you seen my Uncle Zanus"?

Horst Draper (pronounced Horse Raper) The "D" sound in the name is nearly-silent. Turns out, he really does have an equine fetish and even encourages Krod along the same lines... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.90.146.42 (talk) 02:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Just for the record, according to the subtitles it's Emperor Xanus, not Emperor Zanus ;-) ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 16:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

cast
Chris Parnell, a comedian formerly of Saturday Night Live, provides the voice of the narrator.

The narrator is played by Michael Gambon in the UK version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Porcepic2 (talk • contribs) 10:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Should it be noted he also plays Dumbledore?--Viva la Vaile (talk) 17:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Peter Knight
I've removed the wikilinks for the creator, Peter Knight: the link goes to a disambiguation page, and I'm pretty sure he isn't the fiddle player with Steeleye Span, a composer who died in 1985, a scientific professor or an Australian pro-life activist who's currently serving time for the murder of an abortion clinic's security guard ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, according to the opening credits, he goes by the name "Peter A. Knight" - I'll change this in the article ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 22:06, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Next season
When will the next season be released? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.52.86 (talk) 19:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * At this point we should just be hoping it's released period.--Viva la Vaile (talk) 17:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Now BBC Only?
I'm led to believe that Comedy Central has dropped their "support" if you will. Can anyone confirm this?--Viva la Vaile (talk) 17:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Speculation on whether or not new episodes have been produced
Someone added a line saying that since it was reported that the series had been cancelled (and denied by the BBC) that no new episodes had been produced. This was reverted with a comment saying that 4 new episodes have been produced. Why are these not mentioned in the article if they exist or have I got it all wrong? Muleattack (talk) 21:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Inserting content about the 4 un-aired episodes or content that states no further episodes were produced would each require citation to a reliable source. Presently, neither claim is stated in the article. Xenophrenic (talk) 05:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * If there's no reference showing that 4 new episodes have been made then the claim that no new episodes have been produced is reasonable. It shouldn't require a citation as you shouldn't need to prove a negative, it's not reasonable to ask that a citation is provided about something that has never happened. Muleattack (talk) 15:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It is not possible to prove a negative; therefore, we should not pretend to have done so in the lead section of this article with that uncited statement. If it is such an obvious conclusion, then we certainly don't need to state it, and if it can't be cited to a reliable source, then we shouldn't be stating it. In light of Mulville's statement, "There is a bit of misinformation going on. As far as the writers and the controller of BBC comedy and the controller of BBC2 and Matt Lucas are concerned, we are developing a second series", and with Lucas' claim that not all episodes have been aired, we should be willing to see what, if anything, develops -- rather than insert our own original research and synthesis. Xenophrenic (talk) 15:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Speculation on whether or not new episodes have been aired
Does anyone have evidence that more episodes have been aired since the initial set? --95.235.226.45 (talk) 05:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Does anyone have evidence that more episodes have not been aired since the initial seven? Please cite that evidence in the article if content to that effect is to be added. Xenophrenic (talk) 15:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Again: if you have evidence that additional episodes have been aired, please provide it. Otherwise, no additional episodes have been aired. --79.55.107.85 (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Evidence that additional episodes have aired need only be provided if content saying so is added to the article. The same goes with evidence that additional episodes have not been aired.  Please review WP:CITE. Xenophrenic (talk) 19:33, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * According to WP policy, inline citations are only needed if a statement is challenged or likely to be. Do you have reasons to challenge the truthfulness of the claim that no new episodes have been aired after the initial set is untrue? If you do have reasons, please provide them so that we can examine them and reach a consensus. If you have no reason to challenge the truthfulness of that claim, please refrain from removing it again from the article. You are of course free to use the "fact" tag if you so wish. --80.181.228.235 (talk) 20:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * BTW, it's still me in the previous comments. My ISP has dynamic IP. --80.181.228.235 (talk) 20:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


 * According to Wikipedia policy, inline citations are absolutely needed if a statement is challenged, "without exception". The statement you have added has indeed been challenged, as evidenced by its removal pending a citation to a reliable source. Furthermore, "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material."  There is no "reaching a consensus" when something is challenged; the remedy is simple: provide a reliable source. This is spelled out clearly in WP:V and WP:CITE. Please refrain from reinserting disputed unsourced content, regardless of how 'obvious' or 'self-evident' you may believe the content to be.  You are, of course, free to raise the issue at the reliable sources and original research noticeboards. Xenophrenic (talk) 09:06, 12 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I understand your intent is constructive and I don't think you would challenge the truthfulness of that statement unless you had your good reasons. Considering that if you have challenged it, what are your reasons to do so? Or in simpler words: do you believe the statement is untrue? --79.36.209.196 (talk) 05:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I never challenged the truthfulness of the statement. I challenged the verifiability. To quote policy:"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true." Xenophrenic (talk) 06:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * So what is your personal opinion on the matter? Do you think the statement is true or untrue? --193.205.233.25 (talk) 04:32, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't have an opinion. Xenophrenic (talk) 05:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I had guessed as much. Have you personally seen any additional episode aired on TV? --193.205.233.25 (talk) 12:59, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

2009 American Television series endings
They're not bringing it back.

Offensive stereotype? Has no reference and needs to be removed according to wiki rules
The whole paragraph ref links to nothing and is not a ref of any sort. So can this non reference be removed? Doing this we dont need to take the whole biased POV of whats a stereo type and who it offends and why.--TobyWongly (talk) 10:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

"The character Bruce, a flamboyant homosexual played by Marques Ray, has received criticism among the gay community, who have described the character as an offensive stereotype."

So the gay community claimed it was a Stereotype and it was offensive! At no point in the show do they claim this is what most/all gays are like!

There are some gays who are just like that. So its some gays being offended by how some other gays are gay! That offends me! But who cares, you will always find some one who dislikes a person from the same group EG Every Religion! --TobyWongly (talk) 06:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kröd Mändoon and the Flaming Sword of Fire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140718204656/http://www.barb.co.uk/whats-new/weekly-top-10 to http://www.barb.co.uk/whats-new/weekly-top-10

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)