Talk:Springfield Mafia

Other mafia families
This article is not very clean. The two mafia families quoted at the end of the articles are making the edited article difficult to read. If they were only presented as "enemies", we will lose one part level ("=") for each part, and it will appears cleaner. What do you think about it ? It is easy, and seems to have a real formal interest, without loosing any information (also considered those two "bonus" families very rarely appears in the serie)--WithNuts 22:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I changed it, but I really can understand another point of view. Please vote here to remove this change or not... --WithNuts 22:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Merger
6 against merging 5 for merging


 * Merge. I think that if we have all the Mafia characters on the same page, it will make it much easier to keep the information on them at a high level of quality. Almost every time one Mafioso is on screen, the others are with him or close behind, so they fit the general Wikipedia definition of concepts so closely related as to be served by a common article. --M @ r ē ino 21:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose: I agree with merging the others into this article (I don't even think it needs discussing. It should be done), but I extremely against merging Fat Tony. He is a commonly occuring character and deserves his own page. He is far more major than many other characters who have their own page. -- Scorpion0422 21:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't merge. I think that there should be a a little about the members, but they shouldn't be merged from, "List of recurring characters from The Simpsons," as it's there for all of the recurring characters, reguardless of whether they are a member of the "Springfield Mafia."-- &#5024;&#5090;   4  62090  03:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't merge. I disagree, at least with Fat Tony. Fat Tony is a character of enough inmportance to continue with his own page.
 * Oppose as well. If you say Fat Tony is integral and should be merged in here it's like saying Homer Simpson should not have an own article cause he is integral to the Simpsons Family. --SoWhy Talk 16:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge but...; While Fat Tony is a regular on the show he is still the head of the mafia. I think he should be in the Springfield Mafia section.

I agree that Fat Tony is an important character and that it may be desireable for him to have a large section to himself, however he is integral to the Springfield Mafia. With that in mind I feel that a compromise that would appease both sides of this argument is merging Fat Tony into the Springfield Mafia article, and giving him a section of his own a considerable size larger than the rest of the members.

It is my opinion that the lesser members of the Springfield Mafia have not enough importance or information to have individual articles. And I agree that Fat Tony is an important character and that it may be desireable for him to have a large article to himself, however he is integral to the Springfield Mafia. With that in mind I feel that a compromise that would appease both sides of this argument is merging Fat Tony and the others members into the Springfield Mafia article, and giving Tony a section of his own a considerable size larger than the rest of the members. Does that prospect please you and if not, your reccomendations wll be taken into consideration.

How about this: We have a link on the Sprinfield Mafia page to Fat Tony? That way he is represented as a member of it, while still having his own article, which he deserves because of his integrity.
 * * I agree. That sounds like a good compromise. -- Scorpion0422 19:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge I was VERY surprised discovering two entries (one for FT, one for Springfield Mafia) when I was looking information about Tony. That's one of the reason I agree about merging, if we give Fat Tony a main role in the Springfield Mafia page. Like 1°) Fat Tony, 2°) Others. Moreover,  many elements in Fat Tony pages only refers to the mafia, and not at all to the character. All the anecdotes between Simpsons family and the mafia seems connecter to Springfield Mafia question, not to Fat Tony character (except he is part of, ah!). At least, those elements have to move ! --WithNuts 02:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge per good points made by with nuts. Rever e ndG 05:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't Merge it is a person and an orgnization, they are different with different aspects, this is like asking to merge Captain America to the Avengers, it just wont work. Phoenix741 18:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't Merge Wow that's a tough one. Tony never really exists outside of the Mafia entity, even if he is a leader.  I would suggest the same as Scorpion0422, but right now he has hardly anything not directly related to the mafia organization's activity.  To combat this there could be a mass of information on the crime syndicate(s) of Springfield (so that his personal bio data wouldn't make sense anymore in the mafia overview).  with the information currently listed, merge makes sense though. WarBaCoN 06:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

--MMSH987 19:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge. He's not a main character that he meeds a page of his own. he doesnt even have that much info.


 * Merge- per MMSH987. Fat Tony doesn't need his own article if he has very little information. Merge him here, where I think would fit best. -- Tohru  Honda 13Sign here! 23:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge - both articles are quite short, excluding Fat Tony's quotes. Cheers to   2007 !  Us  e  r:Sp3000  10:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't Merge Fat Tony is just as importatnt as some of the other characters who have their own articles. Rhino131 00:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't Merge per everone else who said don't merge. 11kowrom 13:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose in the case of Fat Tony as per above. Quadzilla99 01:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Um.. are you allowed to suggest merging twice?  C     Teng   16:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Don Vittorio DiMaggio
I think he should be mentioned, as he lead the group in a godfather kind of way in "Homey the Clown". I can't help but think back to the mafia organization's members chart laid out against Bart when he worked for them, and wish I could see if it had any useful details. WarBaCoN 06:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I have done some reading on the character, and based on him being a "Don", or "Crime Boss" - the head of a crime family, and his character being based on a Don in the movie Prizzi's Honor , I think that he probably should be given the credit. It makes sense when you think about it, otherwise Tony probably wouldn't be out on the job with the rest of his men. Besides, the mafia is supposed to be secretive and transcending generations. Also it seems unlikely that Tony is above the elderly Vittorio, especially with all characters based on stereotyped personalities (Vittorio even says he's a stereotype). Further notes are available at Homey the Clown article, stating he has made silent appearances later on. He had a voice only role in Home Sweet Homediddly-Dum-Doodily as "Mafia guy". All in all, demonstrating at least some longevity. The only reason I'm not editing immediately is because these are little known facts and references, but none the less point to Tony's role in the mafia's structure. Of course he's still a leader in the organization, especially from a Simpson's spectator viewpoint, just not technically "the" leader. WarBaCoN 04:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Frankie the Squealer.jpg
Image:Frankie the Squealer.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:JohnnyTightlips.jpg
Image:JohnnyTightlips.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Joey
Who is this guy called Joey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.228.49.45 (talk) 21:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)