Talk:Perfect Castaway

I Never
I don't think the game "I never" is intended as a reference to the show "Lost." It's a very old game.

I'm with you, but the context was very similar. Cabez 05:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Recent deletions
The cultural references section has had some pretty hefty cuts, including items with direct citations. Does anyone agree with me that while the section needed pruning some important items have been removed? Mallanox 12:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Define "important" boffy_b 11:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hurricane RuPaul
you forgot to mention it was hurricane rupaul... "working his or her way up the coast". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.224.5.27 (talk) 19:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Joe
Is it really important to note where Joe was sitting? Lots42 (talk) 01:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The second paragraph after getting the syn. into two paragraphs.
I think it's way too long, I mean look at it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perfect_Castaway&oldid=214365576#Plot_summary

I personally think the second paragraph is WAY too long when this is only two paragraphs, I have yet to get a reason to be reverted. Either give me one or discuss this please. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 11:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I combined it into three paragraphs, how is that? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 12:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

"The"
I'm pretty sure the episode is called "The Perfect Castaway", not "Perfect Castaway." Other than the fact that the episode is called The Perfect Castaway everywhere else, consider: The Perfect Storm + Castaway = The Perfect Castaway. Makes sense, right?

Arcadiangamer (talk) 23:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Arcadiangamer

Perfect Storm ref
The production section only makes reference to the film "The Perfect Storm". However, the second half (and part of the episode's title) come from the film "Castaway". I'd suggest trying to find a ref, so it can be added. Ω pho  is  18:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Production and reception sections
Since this article has been nominated for GA, those sections REALLY need to be expanded. There's basically nothing there. Only one line of the reception section actually pertains to the episode, while everything else is a generalization of a group of episodes. A look at the sources suggests to me that the episode lacks notability. Ω pho  is  17:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC)