Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes (season 21–present)/Archive 1

Is this the right place?
I just added a lot of infos for the simpsons episode list, and discovered tviv.org. So I was just wondering if wikipedia was the right place for such detailed information???

This does not just concern the simpsons of course,... but shouldn't there just be a link to tviv.org? Is this detailed information necessary in an encyclopedia? Or is it just that tviv.org is redundant?

I also wondered... In my opinion the redirection should be from List_of_The_Simpsons_episodes to The_Simpsons/Episode_List not the opposite. If nobody appeals I will change it.

enyo 17:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Don't redirect! The commonly accepted style is to not use slash separaters to organize articles in a hierarchy. --Optichan 19:10, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Why is this? In my opinion it makes much more sense with slash hierarchies...
 * enyo 10:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

First comment
It's great that this list exists. Do you know what the dates for the seasons are? -- Merphant

Indeed I do and production numbers. - fonzy

What does "Series 1", "Series 2", "Series 3" mean? There has only been one series, except for the shorts on the "Tracey Ullman Show". -- Zoe


 * What the Brits call a "series", the Americans, I think, call a "season". Is it that that's causing the confusion here? I didn't know there was any ambiguity about the word "series" in this context, I must admit. I suppose "season" might be better if there is, as that should make sense to most UK readers, who would know the word as an American usage (other countries, I don't know about). --Camembert


 * Thanks for the explanation. Yes, season would probably be best for us limited Americans.  :)  To us, a series is a completely separate program(me).  -- Zoe

I did wonder what I should use when i was creating this. Being A "Brit" i used teh word series. - fonzy

I wonder if someone could add episode codes to the list, instead of just dates. The codes are sometimes more useful. Thanks! David 21:10 Dec 23, 2002 (UTC)


 * Do TV guides publish the episode code in the reruns schedules? If yes, then it is very useful info. Kowloonese 19:45, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * What about brief episode summaries? I'd find that more useful. Bagpuss


 * I would like to see the celebrity cameo listed along side the episode. Kowloonese 19:45, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Next to the Trade center episode there is the comment that this has been removed from syndication in the US since 9/11. I had thought this would be the case as well and was shocked when I saw this episode on wxmi in 2003. Does any one have a reference for the removal from syndication? If not I think I will remove the comment Steven jones 02:01, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

new tables
The new table is good; but it would be better to put each season on a separate page (with a page for the shorts). Andy Mabbett 16:18, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * That's a good idea but I think we should start by making a table for each season and then we can divide the page into 16 different pages for the 16 seasons plus another page for the shorts. I'll start working on Season 2 soon. Paul99 16:35, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * wouldn't it be better to use these tables?
 * {| class="wikitable"

!Pic !Title !Airdate !Production Code !TV Ratings (viewers) !#
 * rowspan="2"|image
 * The Father, The Son, and The Holy Guest Star
 * May 15
 * GABF09
 * 9.4 million
 * 356
 * colspan="5"|Bart and Homer are tempted to convert to Catholicism.
 * Liam Neeson guest stars
 * }
 * Liam Neeson guest stars
 * }


 * enyo 17:11, 30 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Prettytable shouldn't be used anymore - use  instead. -Fred Bradstadt 07:50, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, then wikitable... I ment the structure of the table in fact (having 2 rows for each episode...). With the thumbnails now added, this would make more sense. --enyo 09:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, I changed just a bit in the proposed table above (removed ). Besides that, I like the suggestion of having two rows for each episode, next to the thumbnail. -Fred Bradstadt 09:45, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Hey, is it possible 4 u 2 put the ratings for EVERY episode on the episode list? I really wanna know how many people watched Bart gets an f, its supposidly the highest rated ep.?


 * On the other hand, the episode number is in the leftmost table cell in all tables - shouldn't we keep it there, and then have the screenshot at the rightmost table cell, filling 2 rows:


 * Anyway, I'd like to keep the design consistent with the tables without thumbnails, so that the title, airdate, production code etc. is in the same order throughout the page.
 * -Fred Bradstadt 18:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Am I the only one who doesn't like the new tables? For starters they are not consistent between seasons, and they do not line up correctly with the old tables. And also, what exactly is the point of the color coding? --SeXyRed 13:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't like them either i would one day like to improve this list to look like List of South Park episodes (I am part of WikiProject List of Television Episodes and thats pretty much our standard format) but its a big task i dont have time for right now. Discordance 23:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Episode links
Don't people think that instead of, say linking an episode to Bart the Genius it should be linked to The Simpsons/Bart the Genius. This would both avoid any potential future conflicts with article names(if relavent), and link up the episodes with the simpsons. (Perhaps even putting this page in The Simpsons/List of The Simpsons episodes and the episodes in a sub of that... - Xgkkp 18:44, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * That's a good idea. If someone wants to make that change, they can.  For now i'll concentrate on finishing the tables for the seasons. Paul99 21:06, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I disagree. It is considered standard on Wikipedia not to use subdirectory pages.  The standard solution is to use a name like Bart the Genius (Simpsons) when there is already an article about Bart the Genius.  But that problem won't happen very often with Simpsons episodes.  Dbenbenn 02:38, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * And also, future conflicts are just that. Apparently you're supposed to avoid the paranthesis when possible; we should probably wait to move the articles when a more important article demands the initial space :) --Headcase 23:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I'd really like to see all of the The Simpsons episodes for a season collected together in articles such as The Simpsons: Season Six, rather than taking up their own individual articles and using server space with their images. B.S. 03:24, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * The individual episode articles have absolutely no negative impact on server space and performance. It would be much less efficient to merge them all into one huge collective page, as the entire page and all its images would have to be loaded every time someone looked up a single episode. -Kaizersoze 04:12, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

I'd wholly recommend "TITLE (Simpsons episode)". Cburnett 00:23, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)


 * I really don't understand why subdirectory pages shouldn't be used... in my opinion this would be the most beautiful way to organize all this information!! I mean.... 'Simple_Simpson' should not be a wikipedia entry on itself like this.... thats just wrong! this is just a subarticle of the simpsons.. Well I'm not very used to wiki, could someone please tell me where these discussions take place normally? or where stuff like this gets decided ?
 * --enyo 09:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Regarding season 17
I don't think we need a table for season 17 yet. Hardly anything is known about it, and the season 16 section has barely been started. Kaizersoze 20:54, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * On a different note, I'm questioning the episodes airing in September. For the past several years, Fox has started airing new episodes with "Treehouse" in Novermber.  It's possible they'll break with tradition, but is there a source saying they will?Bjones


 * Hey i noticed that the S17 ep The Mook, Chef, Wife and Her Homer was removed on 22/4/06, is it going to be part of S18? (Dannybriggs93 19:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC))

Regarding the listing of Halloween episodes
Perhaps it should be pointed out that the Halloween special in which groundskeeper Willie attacks the towns children in their dreams is an abvious spoof of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies... IAmAndrewsSoul 16:14, Dec 18, 2004.

A question regarding numbering of episodes
===>Help Can anyone tell me why the 302nd episode was touted as the 300th, and the 351st as the 350th? Thanks. Justin (koavf) 23:20, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe it's explained in the article for the "300th episode". Something to do with sweeps or something. Optichan 02:36, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Because the actual ones were not good enough material for 300th and 350th episode material.

See Strong Arms of the Ma, the real 300th episode, and Barting Over, the advertised 300th episode. Besides, no one was probably counting the number of episodes anyway. -- Bobman123 01:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Good List
GOod list I modeled it for the List of King of the Hill episodes article. If someone wants to help out that would be great, esp. with episode summaries. --ShaunMacPherson 29 June 2005 12:38 (UTC)

Production Code
Is there any logic behind the prod. code? --130.243.79.252 16:41, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Sure there is. They signify the order in which the episodes were produced, but they don't always air in that order. The series started out with the 7GXX production line, and here's an explanation of the rest:


 * 7Gxx - Season one - first 13 episodes (incidentally this is what Sector 7G was named after) (the G probably came from Gracie Films, the production company).
 * xFxx - Seasons two through nine switched to production codes with F as the second letter for whatever reason.
 * 7F - season 2
 * 8F - season 3
 * 9F - season 4
 * 1F - season 5
 * -through-
 * 5F - season 9
 * XABFXX - The show switched to these longer numbers, possibly to fit in better with Futurama (xACVxx) and Family Guy (xACXxx) and also because they were running out of numbers to use for the xFxx line.
 * AABF - season 10
 * -through-
 * HABF - season 17
 * 3Gxx - this was a special production line that consisted of four episodes written by a separate staff headed by Al Jean and Mike Reiss, while the regularstaff was working on the xFxx production line. The four episodes aired in a few different seasons.

--Kaizersoze 04:36, August 4, 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm curious as to how you find the Prod Code for a particular series?  BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  20:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Found what I was looking for.  BIGNOLE    (Question?)  (What I do)  21:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

List of The Simpsons TV ads
If the above topic survives the vfd at Votes for deletion/List of The Simpsons TV ads, I recommend deleting the advertisements section from the article here. Any objections? -- BD2412 talk 19:35, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject - List of Television Episodes
We need some volunteers to give input on how a list of television episodes (such as this one) should look. Please follow the link at the top and join the project. Otherwise, I hope there are some fans who are willing to adjust this page to match the preferred format as described on the page. Thanks!--Will2k 14:47, August 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm glad a list is available, although there are also episode guides I can check. I'm sort of a fan. Although I think the show declined a bit around season 10, but has rebounded a bit recently. Anyway I'm changing this to incomplete lists of Movie, TV, etc. I hope that's okay. It's just that "Incomplete lists" is very crowded right now. I'm not trying to screw up where people find this. If anything it might be easier at the new place--T. Anthony 06:49, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Deletion
List of The Simpsons episodes by theme has been deleted, just letting people know. - Matthew238 02:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Can't create an episode's article
I've been creating anonymously for over two years by now. It was certainly a shock to for me to read about this experimental creation limitation (announced here). As a Ricky Gervais fan I was attempting to add some details, available from Ricky's site about the Gervais-written episode "Homer Simpson, This is Your Wife",. 66.167.253.134 20:34, 5 December 2005 (UTC).

Far too long
This is just too big. I'm not saying that it isn't a good resource, but it's so big it makes it hard to find a particular episode. I think we should make articles for "List of The Simpsons episodes in Series One" or something, and make List of The Simpsons episodes into a disambiguation page.
 * While I agree the page is rather long, I don't feel splitting it down into separate pages would be very beneficial to those looking for a specific episode without knowledge of which season it was from. - Wezzo 14:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, looking back up the talk page, it looks as though this has already been planned. Can't say I agree with it, but it looks like such a plan may go ahead. - Wezzo 14:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It could be split up but still keep a shorter version of the full episode list. --213.67.162.238 20:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC) (Jojan)

No splitting
I don't like the idea of spliting this page. It is more convienant the way it is. Every episode I'm looking for right in the page. Splitting it would cause some difficulties in scrolling through episodes. - Ted87
 * Me neither. I know it takes a long time for the page to load for some, but I really don't know what episode is in what season. Firefox does a good job of rendering the page as it loads, you may want to try that browser.—Fitch 19:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
 * IMO splitting is a bad idea. I've used this list countless times with no trouble whatsoever. When you know the name but not the season of an episode you can Ctrl-F it, which would be a lot harder split up. The ToC links make travelling to distant seasons easy. I really don't see the prob. Ludraman 21:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Disambig
Could we not simply make the links disambiguation page links to "List of The Simpsons episodes (Season One" etc., and then underneath put "Episodes in this season" and then a brief listing of the titles of the episodes in the season. It would be a compact listing, only 20 or so lines long for each season. This would actully be making it easier to search for an episodes, and split up the article at the same time!


 * At the very least, simplify the page -- remove the tables and the images. Not everyone has broadband, after all. tregoweth 05:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest that we keep the current page, but also create a simpler version as Tregoweth suggested. This way both pages can be linked to from the main page giving the user the choice. I personally like the current page with the screenshots, but I can see Tregoweth's point about it being to large for dial up users. --SeXyRed 11:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree keep the current page but also make pages for the separate seasons Discordance 16:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * But this way we will have all information entered 2 times! This will make it hard to keep articles up to date, and is a waste of space.
 * I still think, that having the whole list, is more annoying to people who'd like to split them up, than it is annoying to have separate articles for the people who'd like to keep it that way. enyo 15:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * If we split this page up into seasons, we NEED to have a "list of all simpsons episodes", but i think the large episode list as it is, is much more useful. Perhaps removing the images might be a good idea (as Tregoweth said), for bandwidth concerns (although i'm pretty sure browsers display text first, before loading images.. so it still wouldn't matter much). Fresheneesz 23:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I Agree with members who want to split this article. Ω Anonymous anonymous Ψ: &#39;&#39;Have A Nice Day&#39;&#39; 22:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Which Episode was this?
What episode was it where there was a huge lottery jackpot in Sprinfield and Kent Brockman won it?

--I may be wrong but I think it may have been the episode called "Dog of Death" in which Santas Little Helper gets sick.

you are correct. swidly 01:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Unlock this page right now! &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.21.46.111 (talk • contribs).

spliting
It should not be split because I like to be able to see it all on one page --  A dam1213 Talk [/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new +] 22:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Seing all episodes on one page is an advantage, but I think compared to the disadvantage of having to load the whole page it's not important.

In my opinion the best way would be a simple list of the simpsons episodes, without description, just the name and the number of each episode. And then you can select 1 episode or 1 season to see the detailed list.

Loading the whole Simpsons Episode List site just takes too long! The pictures get loaded minutes later (if they get loaded), and I don't like to scroll around in this huge list!

enyo 16:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Thought I'd throw in my three cents. I think it should be left as is, but also made into separate pages with more details for each season. Reason being I like hitting ctrl f to find a particular ep now and then. Baseballfan 02:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it could be split into a bunch of lists organized by season? 199.224.81.132 22:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[Unsigned comment]
Unlock this page right now! &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.21.35.114 (talk • contribs). The list needs to be updated - there's a new episode on January 29. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.157.55.203 (talk • contribs).
 * I moved this comment from the top and added attributions. Also, if you read Semi-protection policy, you will see that editing is only blocked for unregistered editors and editors with accounts newer than four days." If you sign up for an account and are patient, you too can edit semi-protected pages. tregoweth 05:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Season 5 Tables
I've changed the table layout to match that of seasons 1-4. The only problem is I don't know the code for the colour red. Could someone who does know please change it to red (because that's the boxset colour). --DChiuch 06:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanx to DVD Smith for changing the season 5 colour to red, and to Xls for changing the season 6 layout. Instead of grey could someone change it to yellow (the boxset is yellow). --DChiuch 04:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The standard S6 box set is black - I think we should use that (or at least dark grey, so that we can still see the writing). If we used yellow (the head box colour) then we'd have to use yellow for seasons 7-10 too. For S7 the blue-purple colour should be used, because the standard box is that colour. EDIT: Someone's already done that, but the S7 text could be made clearer. EDIT 2: Done. --DVD Smith 21:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Splitting Article
I think we should vote on whether we are going to split the article or not. Does anyone know how to create a vote page? The page is very long but it is convenient like this. I suggest we have pages in groups of 5 seasons, a page for the shorts, and a page for other things like music videos and television commercials; all accessible from a disambiguation page. My vote would be to split it. So people that use this page, could you either create a vote page if you know how to, or just say your vote here. --DChiuch 04:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair use images - need to be removed
All of the screen shots in the article are licenced under fair use (well I checked most). But they aren't meeting the requirements of fair use, and should be removed (and some, if not all, deleted). I'm going to go through each of the images and deal with them, I'm just letting you know that this article/list will look different if/when all of the images are gone.--Commander Keane 07:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Why do you care? Your not an administrator so why must you delete the images and reduce the quality of this article? Sure it might be copyright infringment but do you really think Fox is going to care? --DChiuch 07:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Um I am an admin, and I care because having the images on this page is against the law - and thus threatens Wikipedia's validity. If Fox don't care then you could email them and ask them to release all the screenshots under a free licence (eg public domain would be nice). I'd love to keep the images, but I'd like to keep Wikipedia running (ie no law suits) too. If you do send that email to fox let me know, I won't delete any until they respond.--Commander Keane 07:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The images can be made fair use, you need to make sure each image relates to the main plot mentioned in the episode summary or a central character of the episode with appropiate captions, sourcing and fair use rationale on the image page. I recently worked on List of South Park episodes which has become a featured list after i reworked all the images on the page. During the nomination it was agreed by everyone that the images under wikipedia's current policies are now fair use. If anyone can take the time the images on this page can be made fair use but it will take a lot of work and i cant guarantee wiki policy wont tighten to the point they have to come down in the end anyway. Discordance 17:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

You could have left the tables alone after removing the images keane, if people want to take the time to add fair use images theyve got to revert all the tables now. Discordance 02:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree, we should keep the tables the same. Anyway some of the images we can use, like ones that aren't screenshots. I'm going to revert the tables back and keep the images that we can use. --DChiuch 06:23, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've put the tables back and kept the images that were released to promote the episodes. Discordance, you said something about we could make them fair use, but it would take a while. I would be willing to do it, so could you tell me exactly what needs to be done. --DChiuch 10:33, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Many of the images have this tag:

Is this OK, under fair use? If so, many of the images are OK.--DChiuch 11:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately not the images need to be sourced and have fair use rationales. Which means you need to give the web address where you found it and you need to specify why it is fair use in each case. Have a look at the images on List of South Park episodes for examples. If i get time ill try and write an example or two here Discordance 14:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Can people please stop readding images for now? Your missing Keanes point and mine all the images could have been fair use but none of them are currently. Look at the page describes what the picture is about, tells you where I got it from, is tagged as a TV screenshot, and tells you why I believe it to be fair use. All of those things are required and on top of that the list must talk about something to do with the picture, in this case the list says "Space aliens implant a transmitter in Cartman and abduct Kyle's brother." along with the image's caption its quite clear what has been implanted in cartman. I could possibly make the page clearer by moving the copyright information into the licensing section and making a heading for the source. Discordance 17:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Almost DC have a look at the changes i made to. Once the image has a source listed its fair use, if you dont know where its from youll have to find another image im afraid. If possible one website with screenshots for every episode should be chosen and new screenshots downloaded from there, makes everything easier in the long run if theyve all got the same source. Ill have a look for a website tomorrow. Discordance 03:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Discordance, I agree, we should find a website with screenshots for each episode. That way they will it will be easier, and it wont look strange that some are screenshots and some are promotional pictures. --DChiuch 06:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey I found this website,, it has screenshots from season 1, season 2, and most of season 3. If we don't find anything better I think we should use these. EDIT - I also found this one,, it has screenshots from all the episodes in season 1, 2 & 3. EDIT2 - This has screens from season 1 to 5,. --DChiuch 07:08, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I found this website (http://www.simpsonsmpg.net/), it has images for every episode. I've uploaded the images for season 1 and done the fair use stuff. Would you accept this? --DChiuch 08:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

This site (http://duffzone.co.uk) has images from most episodes, and a wide array to choose from to make sure the image is relevant to the plot, so there won't be the problem of having some random image of Homer or Bart that has nothing to do with the synopsis. (http://www.lardlad.com) also has a nice selection and was a site used before, but does not have images from every season. Ginothewino 04:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

The site listed above (Simpson Crazy, which as it happens I own) has screenshots in the episode guide, which in nearly all cases are descriptive of the episode: So feel free to use those. Scott 00:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Repeated bogus Season 18 edits
We need to find some way of stopping people from making the same edits to Seasons Seventeen and Eighteen - it's so annoying to have to delete it every time. Things like "Wrecks of the Homeribbean" and "Simpsons Christmas Stories II" are complete bull. DVD Smith 18:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

We should make a rule that when adding new episodes you have to supply a source. This will stop people making fake episodes. If you agree with this rule reply here. --DChiuch 05:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. All my info comes from fansite No Homers Club, which always gets its information from genuine sources. I've noticed that all of the bogus edits are done by anonymous people - maybe the semi-protection needs to be reinstated. DVD Smith 16:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

That's true. I agree, we should reinstate it. Do you know how to make that rule? If so I think we all agree that it should be reinstated. Also we should say that you have to include a edit summary and a source of your information. --DChiuch 07:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. Problem is, I have no idea how to go about that. Maybe we sould ask Tregoweth or someone who does. --DVD Smith 14:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The article remained in good shape when the semi-protection policy was in place, so I would also agree on its reinstatement. Keit 01:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, so its agreed, we will reinstate it. Does anyone know how? We should ask the person that did it previously to do it again. Does anyone know who did it? --DChiuch 04:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

By the looks of the Unsigned Comment section, it was Tregoweth. And even if he didn't put it in place, he would know who did. --DVD Smith 11:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, all -- I've re-protected the article. Edit away! :) tregoweth 14:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm gonna add the genuine S18 info. Thanks, Trego. --DVD Smith 21:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

THX logo?
Which episode was the THX logo used in?
 * That would be Burns' Heir (1F16). The THX logo/sound shows up right before Mr. Burns' message looking for an heir. Baseballfan 10:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

List of The Simpsons media
I think things like the music videos and links to the ads and shorts etc should be moved to the above page. This page should be about episodes only. Creating a media page will assist in disambiguating this page somewhat. Any objections? Discordance 19:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this page should only be for episodes. The shorts already have their own page on The Tracey Ullman Show shorts, and the ads have their own page. I think we should put the ads, music videos, and christmas message on 1 page (List of The Simpsons media). If there are any objections say here, if not I will create that page. --DChiuch 06:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know, no one objected so I've created the List of The Simpsons media page. The television advertisements, music videos and the UK Christmas message are now there. --DChiuch 09:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

the series itself is media and I meant use the media page as an overall list. have a look at the small changes ive made. Discordance 17:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Tregos reverted my change but i still think it works better pointing people back to the media page and using it as a main page. Discordance 17:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

"This is a list of The Simpsons episodes. For a list of the shorts see The Tracey Ullman Show shorts. For a list of television advertisements and music videos see List of The Simpsons media." I think should become "Main article: List of The Simpsons media" And the lede should be altered to say: "This is a list of The Simpsons episodes. For other Simpsons related media see List of The Simpsons media." Or how about "For a list of the shorts, television advertisements, and music videos see Main article: List of The Simpsons media." Discordance 19:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Well I don't really care what it says at the top, as long as the episodes have a separate page. So if you want go ahead and change it. --DChiuch 07:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

which episode was it
when bart kept lying so who wouldn't do a test?

Pece Kocovski 08:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, he's lied lots of times, but I think the one you mean is "Bart Gets an F", from season 2. --DVD Smith 11:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

no exactly, but the one i ask, was when he was attacked by a alaskan timber wolf in class, then groundskeeper willie wrestled the wolf.

Pece Kocovski 02:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah right - that was Marge Gets a Job, Season 4. --DVD Smith 21:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

The french list of the Simpsons episodes
I find this page hard to read, relating to the french version. I think it's easier to read a simple list without to much informations and links to complete description. 84.103.210.43 22:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC) Gael

Firefox Image Problem
I'm a user a Firefox, and I've noticed that the picture for Flaming Moe's doesn't work. Instead it just has a link to the image page. In Internet Explorer there is no problem. Has anyone else encountered this problem? If so, can anyone think of a solution? --DChiuch 06:24, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I'm also using Firefox (and the original uploader) and it seems to work fine for me. Is this a persistent problem you've had, or a one-time occurrence? --Mcmillin24 15:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

This is a persistent problem, its happened since we re-did all the images. What version of Firefox are you using? I'm using 1.5.0.1, so I don't see why there should be a problem. --DChiuch 06:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm using 1.5.0.1 and I don't seem to have any problems. Have you tried refreshing the page. Theshibboleth 04:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Just use Internet Explorer. That's what I do. 206.47.141.21 16:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Of course i've tried refreshing the page, lol, i've tried a lot more than that. And no, i'm not just going to change to Internet Explorer, Firefox is clearly better. Anyway the problem seems to have cleared up, i suspect it was just a problem in my brower's cache. --DChiuch 09:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

In Australia
Is there any particular reason as to why this list was added? As of right now it seems a bit out of place, perhaps each date would be better off on the page of each individual episde? KDLarsen 23:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Upcoming Episodes
I'm not sure this section is required. While I'm an inclusionist, upcoming episodes of a show really isn't encyclopedic, requires a lot of maintenance, and can be found elsewhere on the Internet. I'd argue against its inclusion.

And if it is kept, Sky One schedules should also be listed under UK. - W e zzo (talk) (ubx) 14:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

does any1 no when the new simpsons episodes will air in Australia??


 * I vote against this section. It will require too many updates that people will end up not doing.  Wikipedia is not TVGuide.  Also, it contains errors: Last Updated on Monday, April 10, 2006 at 4:27am (London Time), 11:27pm (New York Time).  How can this be updated at 11:27 pm New York time when it's now only 9:33 am New York time???  Also, who calls this New York time?  It's called eastern time. 206.47.141.21 13:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. Not only does it now have a detailed (though soon out of date) section, but there is now The Simpsons Upcoming Episodes and four subpages linked to it. I was going to mark them for deletion, but I didn't want to bite the newbie. I'm going to delete the section from this page anyway, as it's big enough, and leave the link to the pages. If anyone has an opinion on whether they should be marked for deletion, say so. Iorek85 23:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Someones already beaten me to marking them for deletion. Iorek85 23:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Australia
can any1 plz tell me when the new simpsons episodes will air in Australia?

Airdates
(Posted this on the WikiProject talk page, and got nothing, so I'm posting it here):

Recently people have been adding episode airdates from other countries- Simpsons Christmas Stories and We're on the Road to D'ohwhere have UK airdates, and Bonfire of the Manatees has an Australian airdate. I haven't found any others, though.

Should the episode articles contain US airdates only, or should they all have airdates from other countries? IMDb has a complete listing of all UK Simpsons airdates from mid-1995 onward (and several from 1993-4) added by myself, but finding ones for other countries may be tricky. Plus, what if people start adding French, Spanish, Outer Mongolian airdates - do we allow them, or just ones for English-speaking countries? BillyH 17:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Any thoughts on this yet? It's starting to get a bit out of hand now - people are adding multiple airdates for single episodes (The Call of the Simpsons now has four US dates). BillyH 07:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I think we should keep the orignal airdates for english-speaking countries only (perhaps only USA, UK and Australia). --DChiuch 11:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me, though it's gonna take a heck of a lot of editing, going through almost 400 pages. I'll need some help! BillyH 14:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Cut the Quotes
I'd like to make a proposal. I've noticed that in recent episodes (such as "Kiss Kiss, Bang Bangalore") the episode will be composed primarily of quotes. Although quotes are undeniably useful in giving a feeling for the episode, we've got too much of a good thing. I'd like to make a proposal, and put it to a vote: henceforth, no new episode recap should be more than 1/4 quotes. How does that sound? -Litefantastic 23:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

New format
I think the new format is really stupid, it's so much harder now to search for an episode. If it has to be done, then hey, I undersstand, just saying that it's crappy. My two cents... AMac2002 08:28, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I think that there should be a smaller, less detailed list of episodes with only number and name, and then a different, more expansive page for every season. See the Lost episode guide for what I'm talking about. - RikkyC 11:35, 18 April 2006 (PST)

All the episodes should be on the same page. Otherwise, what's the point of this article? Having them all together is much more useful for search purposes. If people are concerned about the size of the page, I would recommend cutting the screenshots. They can be found on the individual episode pages and are not crucial to the short summaries. Keit 04:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Can we still keep a description on this page? I don't remember every episode's name by heart (I'm trying to) so how can I search for an episode without a brief description?
 * You can bookmark this page: hereIt's the best version of the article in the history. It's dated April 14. 206.47.141.21 16:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I like that. I say we have 2 episode lists. This one, which will be the one that is automatically linked to, then a 2nd one which has the all the episodes on one page. That way people can choose which they they like. What do ya'll think? If no one has any objections I'm gong to do that.--Ted87 17:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Kaizersoze's edits
I'd like to say that Kaizersoze has a good idea going. Having a list of just the episodes, with no description is much better than just the list of season numbers. If we really can't continue with the old complete list, it's a good compromise. Continue with your good work. 206.47.141.21 11:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Backlinks from season pages
Because I linked to the season 7 page directly I added this:


 * For list of all seasons of The Simpsons, go to List of The Simpsons episodes.

It is a kind of a proof and I don't feel emotionally attached to it. Srx 23:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

time zone
Can someone please add the correct time zones to the upcoming episodes for US, Canada and Australia? Thanks. WP 04:10, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

WOW
I cannot believe there is such a big project about the simpsons!! Anyway, I was just wondering... this is one of the longest page in wikipedia. And it will likely be the longest when it will be finished. I saw you have already introduced subarticles. Any other idea? gala.martin ( what? ) 04:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The Simpsons season X vs List of The Simpsons episodes (Season X)
Why is this page changing in such a fast rate without any rationale behind? Why do we have both The Simpsons season 7 (linked from this page) and List of The Simpsons episodes (Season 7) (linked from everywhere else)? Why it has duplicated content? I am tired of this... --Srx 10:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a problem with this page and many others on Wikipedia. People make major changes to articles without discussing it first on the talk pages so we end up with ugly results like that.  It sucks but there's nothing we can do about that except revert the edits, which I will not do.  206.47.141.21 16:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Downloadable episodes?
Is that site that 'Downloadable Episodes' links to even legal...?
 * well it looks like someone deleted it. please sign comments.216.222.255.113 19:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

i think we should return this article to its previous view?
Because i cant tell which episode im looking for, and besides, like Family guy or American Dad!, the list of episodes are easy to find. Who's with me?

Pece Kocovski 10:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * No need. The individual season lists still have the pictures. Example: The Simpsons season 1 --SeizureDog 08:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The Family Guy and American Dad! lists are easier to read, because they don't have as many episodes as The Simpsons. When or if they reach 378 episodes they can't be on one page. Even if the average image is 3KB, then the whole page would be over 1MB to load, which is too much. --Maitch 13:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough.

Pece Kocovski 12:00, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Redirects from Production-Codes
Is it ok to create redirects from production codes, just like DABF10 would content  #REDIRECT Blame It on Lisa?--217.233.238.211 15:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

What episode is this quote from?
Willie: "Brothers and sisters are natural born enemies! Like Englishmen and Scots! Or Welshmen and Scots! Or Japanese and Scots! Or Scots and other Scots! Damned Scots! They ruined Scotland..." Skinner: "You Scots sure are a contentious people." Willie: "You just made an enemy for life!" Jlaforteza 17:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Milhouse Doesn't Live Here Anymore --Ted87 06:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Dvd covers
Over in List of Lost episodes tehre is currently something of an edit war going on with teh dvd covers. A lot of peopel are saying that the fair use claim is invalid. I took the liberty of changing the fair use rationale for hte images to match the one used here, but its still getting removed without much of an explanation. Can someone explain whether the dvd covers are or are not valid? --larsinio ( poke )( prod ) 18:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I recall a minor objection in this page's featured list candidacy to the DVD covers for not being low-resolution. The fair use laws only extend to low-resolution DVD covers.  As long as proper fair use rationale is used, I don't think this page has the same problem. --McMillin24 contribstalk 13:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * You need to write something about the DVDs in the lead. That way you can claim that they are used to illustrate the text. --Maitch 15:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Or, note in the lead that this article overs the topic of multiple episodes as well as DVD release info, rather than just being a simple "list". -- Ned Scott 19:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Screenshots as fair use
In order to resolve the long standing debate over fair use of screenshots on List of Lost episodes, I am now trying to resolve the issue under the belief that the issue is an opinionated matter and not a matter of policy. Talk:List of Lost episodes. I ask that people share their comments, but please try to keep the conversation in this section focused.

One thing that works against us is that the conversation tries to defend too many points at once. Try not to respond to comments about other aspects of the debate, and just take this one step at a time. Basically, respond if you think this is an opinionated matter regarding policy point 8 of WP:FUC or not.

I believe if we can break through on the issue of point 8, the rest will fall into place. -- Ned Scott 08:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Blood Feud
Does anybody have anything from 1991 that shows the original airdate of the season 2 episode Blood Feud? SNPP.com(the most trustworthy unofficial Simpsons website) and here lists July 11th, 1991 but thesimpsons.com(the official website) lists August 11th, 1991. So does anybody have something like an old TV Guide to see what the airdate really was? TJ Spyke 21:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I have checked multiple sources:
 * Thesimpsons.com: August 11
 * Season 2 DVD: August 11
 * IMDb: August 11
 * SNPP: July 11
 * Tv.com: July 11
 * While it seems strange, I would probably go with the official sources for now. --Maitch 16:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It couldn't have aired on August 11 because that was a Sunday. If it had aired on a "special night" outside of the normal schedule, it surely would've been mentioned here. Also, SNPP says it aired as lead-in for the 2nd season premiere of Beverly Hills 90210, which did indeed air on that date. -Kaizersoze 20:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

TV-14
Can Someone give me a list featuring all the Simpsons episodes rated TV-14? &#39;sed 00:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Can someone at least acknowledge my plea and help me find out?&#39;sed 04:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Family picture
Using a generic Simpsons image/logo everytime they are mentioned is decorative and prohibited under WP:FUC. Yes it provides visual identification, but they are not the subject of this article, and therefore illustrating them is non-essential. ed g2s • talk 21:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Lead image
Handling discussions in edit summaries is bad, I am copying them here: Circeus 22:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * what is a decorative image and whether it is permissible is in dispute. Ed g2s knows this. Besides, this removal creates an orphaned image —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Will2k (talk • contribs).
 * Don't be ridiculous. This image is not even illustrating the elements of the list. The family is not the subject of this article at all, nor is their appearance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ed g2s (talk • contribs).
 * if the image was that inecessary, I am sure it would have been removed at the time of it's featuring candidacy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by circeus (talk • contribs).

WP:FUC "3. The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible." - seeing as the only reason the image is here is to make the page look nice and aid "visual identification" (although how one wouldn't understand what the list was about by reading "The Simpsons"...) by including it we are hardly trying to keep copyrighted work to a minimum on this page. ed g2s • talk 22:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ed g2s, it is you who is being ridiculous. Despite the fact that what identifies an image as decorative or not on an article page is in question, you have unilaterally chosen to enforce your own opinion before reaching acceptance from others. Bad form. Until a resolution is reached, it is necessary to hold off on any edits of this nature. Circeus is absolutely correct. If the image had no place here, it would have been removed before passing featured article candidacy. If you are not ready to wait for a resolution on the discussion, you can recommend this article for former featured list status on account of unnecessary imagery. Under no circumstance should you make an edit for an opinion that is in dispute. All related articles should be "frozen" until a resolution is reached.--Will2k 15:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed with Will2k, disputed images of this nature simply shouldn't be changed until a resolution is reached. Though I don't know how much good stating this will do because, as much as I don't want to fling insults about, it seems that Ed is either a troll or simply doesn't care about others opinions.  Taking a look at Ed's contribution page it seems he does nothing other than go through dozens of pages taking out ever image which in his opinion doesn't belong.  He has even gone so far as to propose an amendment to the FUC to make it more restrictive to his opinion since he has been shot down so many times before elsewhere. Mikya 04:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ed is an admin. He isn't a troll. I trust his opinions are well-intended, though I have found his actions poorly executed.--Will2k 03:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

More on the family picture
While I can see how it is perceived as non-fair use, dissenters should also see how it can be considered something more than just decorative. What irks me the most is the unilateral deletions while the subject is still under heavy discussion. Leave the image the way it was before the dispute until said dispute is resolved here. Otherwise you are just being rude and inconsiderate. --Will2k 03:45, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * There is not rationale for a use this page. You can claim one on the image talk page, but I will contest it. The amendment is a clarification of what is already meant by our policy, that is we only use fair use when we have to i.e. when the family is the subject of the article. In the case of copyright disputes, content should always be ommitted until it is cleared. This is also policy. ed g2s &bull; talk 16:47, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Season articles
After I've removed the 18 season articles into List of the Simpsons episodes the season articles could be deleted. --Xls 21:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, if you're going to do this, it would be much wiser to make the individual season articles template pages and include them in here that way. --Kaizersoze 21:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

"List of vehicles in The Simpsons" currently up for deletion
List of vehicles in The Simpsons is currently an AfD candidate. You are invited to partake in this discussion. --Czj 04:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Merging season articles
I've reverted the merging of the season articles. On this talk page in the section "Far too long" we agreed that the article gets far too long and I still agree with that.--Maitch 12:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The episode list is --Xls 12:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't care that you are not done. I don't want you to merge the season articles. --Maitch 12:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The major problem is loading time. We can't have a page where the user should download over one MB in order to see it. --Maitch 12:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Width in tables, UK air dates
My edit was not vandalism... I cannot see a compelling reason why the tables in this list need to be set to 700px, which looks poor in 800x600 screens. Yes, I understand it keeps the tables uniform widths, but I don't consider that compelling. And perhaps UK air dates on Season 18 should be dumped... the Simpsons is an American show and other airdates are of little importance. - RoyBoy 800 16:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that the UK air dates should be removed - so I've removed them. The tables should have an uniform width. If you think you can make it look good with a shorter width, then you could try that. --Maitch 19:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Well some seasons won't look good (episode title will take two lines), but my point is there should be no width at all so that the tables can adapt to a given resolution and even a floating browser window (not maximized) without forcing a horizontal bar. - RoyBoy 800 22:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I would prefer two lines for some episodes and an uniform width to no width at all. --Maitch 23:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Should we change the Season 9 color for the episodes
Okay, now that we have the Season 9 DVD cover, should we change the color for the Season 9 episode template?

Proposal for updates to Season 18 pages for evaluating bot list generation
I'd like to add some templates to the pages of all the episodes (so far) in Season 18. These will have no visible effect, but are used by the bot ListGenBot to read data from the pages and compile lists.

This bot is currently approved for testing, so I am only proposing changing Season 18. The bot will generate pages containing the data on the episode pages, ordered by section or alphabetically - see User:ListGenBot/Details for full details.

I'm aware that many of the data items on these pages already have list pages, but I propose generating independent list pages from the bot and evaluate the worth of adding some of those lists (dynamically updated) to other pages.

My proposal is to make invisible updates to the Season 18 episode pages but the bot will only read these pages, it will make no updates, so there is no risk of corrupting existing episode data. I'll add the templates with HTML comments to explain their use.

I'll create list pages that the bot will maintain (probably as subpages of this page) until their worth is evaluated and there's a consensus to integrate them into other pages. If there is that consensus, I'll add the templates to all the other episode pages.

Please let me know if anyone has concern or wants clarification with this exercise --Mortice 18:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * If you're interested in this, there's minor discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Simpsons --Mortice 20:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Infobox pictures
Is it possible to replace the pictures in the infoboxes of each episode with the episode's own promo card (if, of course, there is one)? Some of the images in the infoboxes are of low resolution, and in my opinion, it would be good to use the official card Fox released for the episode. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dan m90 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

Production Codes
Why do some of the episodes have the production code 3Gxx? It doesn't appear in the key on the top. (One of the episodes in question was 'Lisa's Sax')141.156.231.174 19:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

This appears to be only two episodes, both in season 9, so I've put the code in there. Anthrcer (click to talk to me) 11:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Half the list
What happened to, like, half the list? &mdash;Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 03:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

what about including writer and director in the tables. That kind of comparative information is useful to recognize their style within the series.--T-man, the wise 02:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Administrators'_noticeboard
There is a discussion concerning the images on the individual season article of this show at Administrators'_noticeboard. They are removing all fair use images. - Gman124 19:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

DVD covers
What happened to the images of the DVD covers in the table of contents? I think the images add significantly to the quality of the article. --Hotdoglives 00:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Removed per fair use policy change. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maitch (talk • contribs) 15:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Lame. This used to be one of the best-looking Wikipedia articles before the image removal, IMO. Hope this isn't permanent. --Hotdoglives 03:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Links between seasons
If you look at the page for ANY South Park episode, on the far right there is a list of all the episdoes in that season. This is in the simpsons too, but in the South Park version there are two arrows at the bottom of the list that link to the preivious season and the next season. I think this should be included in the simpsons pages because it makes navigation extremely easy.

Colors
What do the colors next to the seasons mean on the list of seasons at the top? --Wack'd Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! 16:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The colour of the season's DVD box. Gran2 17:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Than why are seasons 11-19, which are yet to be realeased on DVD (or even have an announced date), listed as having yellow boxes? --Wack'd Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! 17:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Because the Simpsons are yellow, and that's better than plain white. Gran2 17:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

US Copyright Data
Those three sources for the US Copyright links, the go no where, just to let you know. I mean, they go to a generic page that doesn't mention The Simpsons.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  21:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * We know, the copyright database, doesn;t allow specific links. Gran2 21:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion
Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here. Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia, including this one. --User: (talk) 19:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've checked it out. Boy, do I have a lot to read up on. thanks for the HU. Eaglestorm (talk) 02:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Searching the copyright database
How does one search the U.S. Copyright Records database? I want to find titles of the fourth season of Lost. An actor confirmed that episode 7 is titled "Ji Yeon". Maybe you could search for that and tell me how you found it. – thedemonhog   talk •  edits  22:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * the copyright database is more efficient for shows with a lengthy production process such as animation shows, which take about 9 months to produce an episode, as compared to weeks for a show like lost. Some shows also don't submit things in advance to the database, or dont submit all the details.  I believe if you go here  http://lostseason3.blogspot.com/  they list the season 4 titles for the first 8 eps, with some other spoilerish info. Grande13 (talk) 22:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I know about lostseason3.blogspot.com, but it is not considered a reliable source. Thanks, – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  23:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I took a look for you and didn't find anything. I searched for Ji Yeon, and there is nothing. I also tried a search for the word Lost, which got a LOT of results, but nothing relating to the show. -- Scorpion0422 23:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * All right, thanks. For future reference, how did you come across "Double, Double, Boy in Trouble"?  – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  00:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I searched for "Simpsons", then rearranged the results so that they were sorted by the date they were added in descending order. -- Scorpion0422 00:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

simpsons episode articles
How come every episode article has been completly cut inhalf?--76.230.146.131 (talk) 18:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you elaborate? Are you perhaps wondering why all of the unsourced trivia and cultural references have gone from some pages? Gran2 18:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I've seen the same thing. (Only in this article, tough). The list at the top of the article has lost half its entries. It is as if the entries of the last seasons have all been moved down, replacing the entries of the previous seasons. This is quite bad. - GeiwTeol 13:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

TOC
dear Scorpion, I personally found the toc a bit more convenient to click, plus you can hide those anyway, but ymmv. Xaver David (talk) 18:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Half of top Seasons List Missing (or broken)
I don'f know if its just me, bit the top half of the Seasons list at the top seems to be missing. I looked at the source, it seemed to be all there, but when displayed, the top half is missing again. Maybe its an issue with the way pages are rendered? GeiwTeol 14:06, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you mean, everything is working fine for me. Maybe if you took a screenshot? Gran2 14:23, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Season 21
Several IPs have added this, but I have removed it, but I'm starting to wonder if it should just be included, Al Jean has confirmed a 21st season and said Treehouse of Horror XX would be one of the episodes. THOHXX is also now in the copyright database. Thoughts? -- Scorpion 0422  15:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we need more than one episode, especially just a THOH episode. Everyone knows it, and all future seasons will have a THOH episode.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 19:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. -- MISTER ALCOHOL  TC 05:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Table of Contents
Apparently the seasons section is the table of contents? This isn't very obvious, and personally I think it's bad design, but maybe this is something that can be fixed amicably. 71.17.5.245 (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Production code
After being involved in an edit war, I have realized this. Our productions codes, which currently go under the name LABF??, should not be called that. We assume that it is LABF, but we don't actually have any proof or sources for this. It might as well be an episode from the next production season or it could be some kind of special episode, which has a whole different code scheme. I am therefore going to change these to TBA.--Maitch (talk) 11:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Links to U.S. Copyright Records database
The as yet unreleased episodes near the bottom are referenced with a link to the U.S. Copyright Records database e.g. "Reg. # PAu003362813 in the U.S. Copyright Records database Retrieved on September 12, 2008." None of these actually link to the relevent place in the database but only to the home page and it is actually not obvious how to get there from that page. Should these links be modified to jump to the actual database entry for each episode? Jubilee♫ clipman 18:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that direct links don't work properly. Anyway, it's fairly simple, from that link: click search the catalog, enter the code, select registration number and it should come up. Gran2 19:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A direct link works for me  C T J F 8 3 Talk 19:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I, too, was able to link up directly to each record. In fact, I just finished an experimental run wherin I changed all 6 records as of April 10, 2010, titled them with the name of the site and their individual refernce #, and was able (from a preview edit-no permanent changes) to link directly to each reference page and return.  With all due respect to Gran2, your 3-step way may be "simple", but not as simple as click-and-go.-- KnownAlias   contact  20:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry are you accusing me of something? Did I say "direct links don't work so this potential solution must be enforced"? No I said my "understanding" was that they didn't, because the last time I looked they didn't work, and I offered a solution. The fact is, that direct links do work, and I was mistaken. If direct links work then please go ahead and change them. Gran2 20:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry (sincere), I was not accusing you of anything. I was merely noting that one click was easier than click, enter, and select (it was the quotation marks, wasn't it?).  Especially when trying to remember the actual reference # after you've left the Wiki page.  If it's cool, as you say, I saved the data from my experiment, and I'll go ahead and give it a try.  And I'll take any notes anyone (including your vastly more experienced self, Gran2) has on content or format changes in presentation or titles.  I'm still a noob in here, and I'm learning, which is why I didn't know where my authority lie on just doing it, or I probably would have.-- KnownAlias   contact  21:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it, we're all still learning! You've done better than me by remembering to see if it works now. And yes, please, go ahead. If you see anything that needs doing, especially something to make stuff easier, then WP:BE BOLD. Happy editing! Gran2 21:30, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * And the plot thickens. It appears the U.S. Copyright Records database operates in "sessions", and the code for each session appears as part of the link.  My sessions had apparently expired, and would no longer allow me access to the pages in question.  The page only read, "Your Session Timed Out".  When I did link back to the pages through the original link on the Wiki page, the "session" data in the web address was completely different from the data in the one I'd done earlier.  So from now on, to all who ask, that is why we don't link directly.  For the rest, I apologize again.  All hail the Grand Gran2, who knew better.  I'm just grateful I'm insecure enough to check my work first.-- KnownAlias   contact  21:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * After watching it for a few days, I'm happy to report that the recent edit I made to bypass the home page and skip straight to the search page was successful. Unlike the information page, the search page is like the home page; a permanent link.  You now only need to enter the appropriate PAu reference #, then click the appropriate search parameter.  I think this is as good as it's going to get, unless the Copyright office updates their operating system (good luck with that).  KnownAlias   contact  16:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I would just like to get people's attention Why isn't there a caption for the episode "four great women and a manicure"
Why Why isn't there a caption for the episode "four great women and a manicure" season 20 episode 20.--A9l8e7n (talk) 00:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What exactly are you talking about? Caption?? C T J F 8 3  chat 01:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The caption meaning the picture, every article under the list of episodes has a picture expect that episode.--A9l8e7n (talk) 01:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It was deleted for lack of rational. C T J F 8 3  chat 07:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Can you replace it?--A9l8e7n (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no idea where they got it from, sorry. C T J F 8 3  chat 00:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The same picture that used to be there is on google, just google the episode name and youll find hundreds. Just please add a caption it is really bugging me.--A9l8e7n (talk) 20:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * An image isn't needed in that article anyway. See WP:NFCC.  The left orium  20:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Why not--A9l8e7n (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you read the page? As quoted "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.". Not having an image isn't detrimental to understanding the episode. C T J F 8 3  chat 21:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, but tell me this, why should any article of the all the episodes have a picture if it doesn't "incresase readers' understanding of the topic". About 99 percent of the articles have pictures, am i right?.--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make it right, I think Wikipedia is a whole is trying to get away from that. I don't like it, but that's policy C T J F 8 3  chat 22:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Haha ok, back to my point, don't you think the article would be way better off with an image?--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. If it was up to me, we'd have tons of pictures. Believe me, i've been in plenty of fights on the side of adding pictures. But official policy doesn't allow for that. Being this is a free encyclopedia, it is suppose to be mostly made up of free content. C T J F 8 3  chat 22:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand, but i don't see the consistency in it. Whg isn't this article allowed pictures, if i see pictures in all the rest of the articles.--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well this is a newer article, to be honest, we probably should go and remove all the picture from the other episode pages. Plus many of the images now are added by people who don't know the policy that I pointed out to you C T J F 8 3  chat 22:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but we can easily remove those images that are uploaded, why don't we?--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We personally, like I said, I personally think images enhance the pages, so I don't feel it necessary to remove them. Eventhough policy technically says we shouldn't have them. Now on newer GAs and FAs, we are removing the images, so they will pass. C T J F 8 3  chat 22:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

so as of right now we should get someone to upload a image, and you should just look the other way on it, please--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Aren't you able to upload one? I said I don't like removing them, I also didn't say I'm going to contribute to the problem by adding more unneeded images. C T J F 8 3  chat 22:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

my problem is i don't know where to get it, can i just upload it from google, i thought that was illegal copyrighting--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * just list where you got it from. Look at another proper episode image for help. C T J F 8 3  chat 22:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

ok, but i need to upload the image, but i will definitly get caught by wiki for the violation of copyrighting--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

We need to add a Specials column
There should be a column for specials for The Simpsons 20th Anniversary Special – In 3-D! On Ice!. If seen other articles have specials column as well such as list of family guy episodes.--A9l8e7n (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * What else is there besides this one special? none. C T J F 8 3  chat 02:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not an episode of the show, and it's linked in the template at the bottom, so why should it be mentioned here? -- Scorpion 0422  02:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

It is an episode of the show, its a special OF THE SHOW. Like i said, every other list of "whatever" episodes have a column for specials.--A9l8e7n (talk) 06:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not an episode, it's a special. It doesn't really matter what other shows do. If The Simpsons regularily had specials (like Lost), then a section might not hurt, but this is one special, which can more than easily be linked in the lead or see also section. -- Scorpion 0422  16:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

TOC again
Toc is needed for a better accessibility. There is no reason to remove it. Almost any article on Wikipedia has got the index, and this is a pretty long page. -- Basilicofresco  (msg) 06:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There is an index, it's the "seasons" table, which has links to every seasons section. The two were merged because it made little sense to have two long index tables one after the other. Also, why did you split the lead into sections? The lead summarizes the article and having an "introduction" section that just contains a bit of the lead, and not an actual introduction that contains basic show info seems useless. -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 12:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Well any non-standard designs, in order to be an improvment, has to be much better than the ordinary solution. As you can see above 1 2, I'm not the only one to think it is not a good and intuitive design. The lead section seemed to be pretty long and the article is not about "Simpsons", it is about the episode list: so I splitted the introduction in a more specific lead section for the episode list and a brief (less important) introduction to the show. -- Basilicofresco  (msg) 17:48, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There's nothing wrong with the design of the template. Some users, such as yourself, are confused because it's different from the majority of the other articles. But, how is having a long ToC, then a long table much better? There is a potential solution in the form of a compact ToC, like this one. As for splitting the lead into sections, that's pretty pointless because this is a list of episodes. All essential introduction information should be in the lead, not in an individual section. -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 18:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Not sure why we need a TOC at all, since, as Scorpion pointed out, the seasons summary functions as a TOC.  C T J F 8 3  chat 18:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. The ToC is only neccesary to find a particular section, such as if you looked up the main Simpsons page looking specifically for information on the voice actors; then the ToC is a nice shortcut to keep you from having to hunt through the whole article.  But when all you're doing is scrolling down from season 1 to season 12, it seems redundant.  I've personally never used it for any of the episode guides. Most to all information not related to the list itself is located at the top of the page before the ToC, anyway.  KnownAlias   contact  18:41, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Ratings
I found valuable sources for some of the ratings for the early episodes of The Simpsons, namely 1x12 & 1x13, and 2x03 & 2x04. On the other pages for the episodes, people have guessed an approximation of what the viewers will be based on the neilson ratings. These need to be taken off, because there was a guess of the viewers for 2x03 and 2x04 and they were completely off. For example, someone said 2x04 was "estimated to have been watched by at least 14 million viewers", when in fact, it was viewed by 26.1 million. The estimations are completely wrong, and need to be taken off. Thank you. Codywarren08 (talk) 17:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you provide the "valuable sources" in question, so they can be verified? Thanks Gran2 17:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * (ec) Reliable sources? C T J F 8 3  chat 17:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Codywarren08, there's a difference between "viewers" and "homes"/"households". One home can contain many viewers. Theleftorium (talk) 18:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have put the sources on the episode pages of 1x12, 1x13, 2x03 and 2x04, in which they all had been guessed to have been about 14 million viewers, when in fact they were way off. Regardless, no estimations should be made on wikipedia unless the information can be verified. I'd remove the estimations myself but there are a lot of Simpsons episode pages with guesses rather than facts. Codywarren08 (talk) 15:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You do realize that Nielsen ratings are already essentially estimations, right? We're just including the information that helped them calculate that rating. I'll use an example: Homer vs. Lisa and the 8th Commandment. According to the cited article, the episode had a 15.2 rating, and "Each ratings point represents 931,000 homes." So, to calculate the number of households that viewed the episode, you do 15.2x0.931, which gives you 14.15. Nielsen does also calculate the approximate number of viewers, but that usually involves a lot more guesswork, so including just the households is more reliable. -- Scorpion 0422  00:30, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Season 20 color
I noticed that the seasons' colors are changed to match those of their DVD box sets, and those seasons that have not been released on DVD yet are colored yellow. However, the box set for season 20 has come out already, but the article still has its color as yellow. Shouldn't that be changed? --SpongeSebastian (talk) 22:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I Agree, and why are the box sizes different from 1-19, to 20-22 seasons.--A9l8e7n (talk) 00:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Flaming Moe
Why is this listed as "not aired" ? I know I've seen it once. 69.196.139.73 (talk) 17:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You are probably thinking of "Flaming Moes". "Flaming Moe" is an unaired episode using a virtually identical title to the Season 3 classic, because the writers have no original or good ideas whatsoever anymore. Gran2 18:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Number of episodes per production code
A user has added the number of episodes in a production code to the "seasons" table. 

And I have removed it. Firstly, it is complete trivia, especially here. I've never understood why some fans are obsessed with production codes, it's just something the producers use to differentiate between episode a and episode b. We basically note them for completeness, and because it also provides insight into the order episodes were produced. We already note the number of episodes per season, the number of episodes in a production run is overkill, and something better suited for a fansite like The Simpsons Archive or WikiSimpsons.

The table also doesn't look that great with the numbers in brackets. -- Scorpion 0422  04:20, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * As I can tell from your tone towards production codes, it seems you've come across a lot of people who are interested in them, and for good reason. A lot of DVD sets (especially in Europe) for certain shows (ex. Futurama), are not released in broadcast order. To many people overseas, broadcast order in the USA means nothing. Most shows, especially ones that have plotlines that carry over should have been broadcast in production order, but networks decided to air them as they see fit and not the way most producers intended. I especially do not understand your comment about it being "trivia", since it's just another bit of information that can be useful to certain people. I especially do not see how it's overkill seeing as how there are DVD release dates for 3 different regions included in the table. Everyone notes the episode code or number on their wiki episodes page, the Simpsons one isn't special in doing so. The only thing I agree with is that the number of episodes produced per season should be in a separate column, in order to have a cleaner look. Goldeneyed (talk) 02:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC) Goldeneyed
 * Actually, no I haven't, at least, not on Wikipedia. However, there is a thread at a Simpsons forum I frequent where they treat production codes as being as important as plot information. It's funny that you bring you say production codes are needed for those overseas, then you say including the DVD release info for other regions is trivia. Okay, it's not vital, but the majority of other episode lists do include such information. But, that doesn't have a lot to do with the topic. A line has to be drawn somewhere on what is and isn't included and what is and isn't trivial. As you say, it "can be useful to certain people". The table should only include information that is useful to most users. Otherwise, why not also note how many episodes aired in a certain calendar year (to use your logic: "it's just another bit of information that can be useful to certain people")? -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 03:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * By certain people I didn't mean minority or majority. Why should you be the one to decide to how big a proportion of wiki readers it's important to? You don't know who it's useful to at all. Second of all, the Futurama (which is a similar show) page goes by production order first. So does Batman the Animated Series. So if you're going to follow what the majority of episode lists are doing, then production codes should be included. Episodes in a calendar year is useless as NO ONE follows that order. It's a ridiculous argument. Your arguments for keeping DVD release dates are because everyone is doing it, despite the fact that you agree that it's trivial like production codes. And yet you feel that those should not be included despite the fact that everyone else is doing it. The logic simply is not there. 69.157.200.186 (talk) 16:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)Goldeneyed
 * I think we've gotten our arguments very mixed up here, so lets start over. I'm not saying production codes should be removed. I'm saying there's no point in including the number episodes per code in the main summary table. No other list I've seen does that, and I'll cite some (I'm just limiting it to shows where there were holdovers from season to season, very non-animated shows do that): List of Family Guy episodes, List of American Dad! episodes, List of The Cleveland Show episodes. And your Futurama example isn't very good, because the airing of those episodes got very spread out and convoluted that it made sense to list them by DVD release. -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 23:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Not even List of Futurama episodes does this. Get rid of it. -- Dorsal  Axe  10:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Futon air dates
We just touched on this on Talk:List of Medium episodes (season 7); The Futon Critic is considered a reliable source that goes by official information; The "N/A" in the date spaces means they have no title for that date, but the dates have been confirmed for them by the network and if they were, as you say, guessing, the title space would say "(projected date)" as it all too typically does (check out House's future listings for examples of "guesswork"; they have confirmed dates through episode 15, and 9 projected dates for 7 remaining epiosdes all marked "(projected date)". It's even a good example that shows that most of Fox's shows are scheduled through February sweeps). Even the two week gap seen on January 30 and February 6 are perfectly coinciding with the NFL championship games and Superbowl respectively. Seems they did some kind of homework. If you still want to revert it go ahead (I ain't going to live here arguing about it), but there's nothing wrong with the source. KnownAlias  contact  14:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * If Futon goes by official information, why is there absolutely nothing at FoxFlash about those dates? The standard on most pages is to not include dates without an episode. -- Scorpion 0422  15:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I concur with Scropion, no title, not need for airdate. C T J F 8 3  chat 21:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)