Talk:Obama Wins!

Please do not add mention of pop cultural references, continuity notes, trivia, or who the targets of a given episode's parody are, without accompanying such material with an inline citation of a reliable, published, secondary source. Adding such material without such sources violates Wikipedia's policies pertaining to Verifiability, No Original Research, and Synthesis.

While a primary source (such as the episode itself, or a screencap or clip from it at South Park Studios) is acceptable for material that is merely descriptive, such as the synopsis, it is not enough to cite a primary source for material that constitutes analytic, evaluative or interpretative claims, such as cultural references in works of satire or parody, because in such cases, such claims are being made by the editor. This is called synthesis, which is a form of original research, and is not permitted on Wikipedia, regardless of whether one thinks the meaning of the reference is "obvious". Sources for such claims must be secondary sources in which reliable persons, such as TV critics or reviewers, explicitly mention the reference.

In addition, trivial information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, per WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE and WP:TRIVIA, and this includes the plot summary. As indicated by WP:TVPLOT, the plot summary is an overview of a work's main events, so avoid any minutiae that is not needed for a reader's understanding of the story's three fundamental elements: plot, characterization and theme. This includes such minutiae as scene-by-scene breakdowns, technical information or detailed explanations of individual gags or lines of dialogue.

If you're new to Wikipedia, please click on the wikilinked policy pages above to familiarize yourself with this site's policies and guidelines.

Where to Discuss
The recent decline in value of the episode articles? I added a section about this before, but now it's gone. O. long johnson (talk) 00:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * You are more than welcome to discuss the quality of articles on their talk pages, so long as it is actually your intent to do so, and not to vandalize the pages, level false accusations at other editors or otherwise attack them. Nightscream (talk) 20:37, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

yeah but the cultural references and stuff are all gone, how come you did that?? value sux now!O. long johnson (talk) 02:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Which article are you referring to? Are you sure you're on the right article's talk page? The Lead and Plot sections of this article mentions the cultural references in the context of their place in the plot. Nightscream (talk) 03:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)