Talk:Miracle on Evergreen Terrace

Christmas Vacation reference?
I could be wrong, but I wonder if the scene towards the beginning, with the family standing outside as Homer plugs in the lights, is a reference to National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. The staging is similar, as is how Homer plugs in the light. Plus - he's plugging in house lights, albeit, done in a typical half-assed Homer style! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.70.148.57 (talk) 17:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Ref 2
This article says simpsons.com, but clicking the link takes you to the BBC. Ribbet32 (talk) 02:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, the production section at the moment is incomprehensible. Ribbet32 (talk) 02:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Reception
Reception section could use a few more sources. Introduction/Lead could use some expansion, at the very least three more sentences or so. Cirt (talk) 19:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC).
 * ✅ - Added two more sources and info to the Reception section. Cirt (talk) 13:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC).

Lead
The lead paragraph could still use some expansion. Maybe one or two sentence expansion summary of the plot, and two or more sentences summarizing the remaining subsections of the article. Cirt (talk) 13:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC).
 * ✅ - Expanded the intro a bit, should be good now. Cirt (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC).

Good article nominations Good article review

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 20:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): I made a few tweaks, please make sure I didn't change any meanings. Also, could you make the Cultural References section sound a little less like an unbulleted list? Also, the second sentence of Plot (Homer and cashier) doesn't seem to make sense as written.  b (MoS):  Develop (Expand) lead a little bit more; It doesn't seem to cover enough plot details, so a little more specifics would be nice
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  I put in one cite needed tag c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): There are some things in the lead that aren't mentioned in the article. Also, is there anything about Trebek's experience as a guest star out there? b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * 1) It is stable.
 * 2) It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * 1) Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * a Pass/Fail:

Man, that was fast. Good job. I still think another copyedit would help, but I'm passing it. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 22:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The Jeopardy! rule
Just so everybody knows, you do not owe any cash if you finish Double Jeopardy! in a negative score, you just don't get to play Final Jeopardy! because your score is too low.--24.149.222.5 (talk) 19:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Chris
 * Thank you Captain Obvious for pointing out that a show like The Simpsons might make a joke about such things. -- Scorpion 0422  19:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

It should be worth mentioning that this episode received a "G" rating, even though "Craptacular", two drug references, and Lisa kicking Bart four times... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.116.101 (talk) 16:44, 19 February 2019 (UTC)