Talk:Wishbone (TV series)

Theorization?
This segment in the opening paragraph:

"The show received criticism from many in the Christian community after Joe Talbot came out as a homosexual in a controversial episode. He finds a time travel device, and promptly uses it to travel back in time and meet famous fictional characters. The show follows his time travels, as Wishbone (sometimes dressed in human clothing) acts out a famous story from literature or folklore. Only the viewers and the characters in his timetravels can hear Wishbone speak (and furthermore, they see Wishbone as whatever famous character he is currently portraying and not as a dog)."

appears to be entirely speculative. I cannot recall any plotline about a time travel device (Save for "The time machine")

I also cannot remember Joe Talbot coming out. While it may have happened, I cannot see it fitting the show or its audience and I doubt its veracity. 198.174.0.10 14:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I Watched This Show Religiously When It Was On, And Trust Me, It (Joe Talbot coming out) Never Happened. The whole thing about Joe Talbot coming out and so on and so forth is obviously vandalism Garr1984 00:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)§

What's the story wishbone?

 * UnsignedIP -->

Cast
"Ellen Talbot: Joe's widowed mother, who, like him, has dark brown hair. She works as the reference librarian at Henderson Memorial Library in Oakdale. She often refers to the death of Joe's "father" in a very casual manner, which leads many to suspect the validity of his parentage. An example of this can be seen in the episode entitled, "Bark-ules and the Golden Apples.""

Who is actually questioning Joe's parentage? as it doesn't appear to actually happen in the show, it shouldn't be here. lpmiller Oct 23 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpmiller (talk • contribs) 01:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I've removed it. Likely vandalism from the IP that added it. -- Squids ' and ' Chips  01:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Theme song
The closed-captioning for the first season erroneously gave the lyrics as "What's the story, Wishbone? What's this you're dreaming of? Such big imagination On such a little pup." In the theme song's revamped version during the second season, you can clearly see by the words on the screen that the correct words are "What's the story, Wishbone? What's this you're dreaming up? Such big imagination On such a little pup." I've seen that fixed version myself. Since the version in the article before I once again revised it was incorrect, I redid the change. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 02:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I saw the word "of"? in season 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.171.51.146 (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Who Wrote the Theme-song?

I made a short film, and I chose as my opening and closing titles song a track from a sound effects CD provided by the sound-studio, which was instrumental. It sounded the same as, or remarkably similar to the Wishbone theme. Anyone know if the theme was generic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.183.186 (talk) 01:48, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Wishbone apple.png
Image:Wishbone apple.png 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) 03:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Wishbone books.png
Image:Wishbone books.png 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) 03:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Wishbone logo.png
Image:Wishbone logo.png 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) 03:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

This article states that Wishbone lasted from 1995-2001 but the article for Soccer and this IMDB page claim the series only lasted from 1995-1998.

When was the series made?
This article states that Wishbone lasted from 1995-2001 but the article for Soccer and this IMDB page claim the series only lasted from 1995-1998.

The final episode of the show aired in 1998, however reruns continued to air til 2001, although the show has recently returned to PBS.

Unless anyone has any obejcton I am going to change the dates from 1998 to 2001. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.94.89.42 (talk) 13:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes just made
I revised some information just now, and attempted to fix misplaced modifiers, redundancies, and misinformation. It appears from a cursory read of this article that it may need some more work. Anyone who wants to take that on is more than welcome to do so. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 18:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Adan Sanchez
Adan Sanchez did indeed portray Lee Natonabah in one episode of the first season, but in the second season, he came back as "Dan Bloodgood," the postman. This will be hard to verify, but just as the wording of the lyrics was changed on this page by my stating I saw the new lyrics myself, I have also seen myself that Adan Sanchez was Dan Bloodgood in the second season. It will be very hard to source this, so all I can say for now is that I've seen it. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 03:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "I saw it" is the definition of WP:OR. I'm leaving the change in so as not to be rude, but if it's going to stay that way, it needs to be verifiably sourced. I'll check back in a few weeks; meanwhile I'm placing a tag on it. Sorry, but that's just policy.Gladys J Cortez 22:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wanda Gilmore
Someone keeps editing the description of Wanda Gilmore with added words like "disturbing" and "homicidal." In my mind, "disturbing" is an opinion, and unless there is proven justification for it and/or the inclusion of the word "homicidal," such words should be left out. I've seen just about all the Wishbone episodes there are, and in none of them do I find evidence to substantiate such claims. If I'm wrong, and I don't leave out the possibility that I might be, I'd love to be shown evidence that I'm in error. However, such changes made without a reason given appear to be more of an opinion than actual fact, especially where no evidence has been given to justify such changes. Personal feelings have little or no place on WP. If some people find Wanda "disturbing" or say that in their opinion, she appears to be homicidal, that's their right. However, when they attempt to pass off personal beliefs about a character as verified fact, not bothering to show any evidence why this is the case, they cross the line onto dangerous ground. For that reason, I suggest that no character description such as this should be added without discussion, and no change such as this should be allowed to stand until proof has been shown to justify such a change. And if such proof comes from a Wishbone "spoof" of which there are many to be found on YouTube, then it can hardly be construed as being verifiable, as it is merely a fabrication of someone's imagination. I even came upon one YouTube Wishbone link that implied an illicit relationship between Wishbone and David. However, that too is fabrication, as in the actual series no evidence of either is to be found. So, please, THINK before making a change on WP. If it's verifiable fact, state that it is. If it is not, leave it alone. Well, I've ranted long enough. I hope you all understood what I was trying to say. Thank you. Thoughts? --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Replying on your talk pg.Gladys J Cortez 21:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I would think the words homicidal, and disturbing, that keep being added refer to a wishbone fan fiction story, in which Wanda kills wishbone with a shovel for digging up her garden, and finding evidence of Wanda aborting a child. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.137.192.177 (talk) 02:05, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

A nitpick
I am starting to think this must be related to a style guideline or something, because I'm seeing it more and more, but to me it seems very wrong. In the lead paragraph, Wishbone is described as a "fictional television program."

It is not a fictional television program, it is a very real television program. The stories that it tells are fiction - its content is fictional. A fictional television program would be like the show that appears on televisions in Max Payne. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.100.83.62 (talk) 17:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Elbutler, I would love to discuss this on this discussion page rather than just being reverted as if I am a vandal. Do you have any thoughts on working toward that goal? :) 70.100.83.62 (talk) 19:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Book Series
I noticed that the "Other" portion of the article mentioned a mystery series, but neglected the other Adventures of Wishbone, Wishbone Classics series. Especially since it was earlier mentioned that there were over 50 books, I thought each series should be mentioned. Ojchase (talk) 10:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This content was removed some months ago for the old sentence. I feel that either all of the book series should be mentioned, or none of them should.  At this point I'm restoring my original sentence, but would be happy for any discussion on the matter. Ojchase (talk) 07:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

The Dog
I was disapointed that the article doesn't contain information about the star, Wishbone. I didn't realize that there was a separate link under the stars. I think a mention of the stars and a link should be placed in the main article. If this could be added, it would make a great article even better. --LF (talk) 04:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Needed Change in Airing
Wishbone has reaired on PBS stations in Arizona. I don't know how recently this happened, but I don't think that these are just reruns. These episdoes run from 2:30 to 3:00 regularly. Also, the characters (especially Joe) are a lot older. --ChristianSoldier (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Cancellation
Great show, good article. It would be worth mentioning in the article why exactly Wishbone got canceled. Could anybody help with this? 98.202.38.225 (talk) 20:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

A 'Masterpiece Theater' for Children
I recently heard that the premise of the show was supposed to be that of a children's version of Masterpiece Theater (also on PBS), as in they use stories from classic literature as the basis of the vast majority (if not all, in the case of Wishbone) of episodes. Just that they added the overall framing device of the "real world" wishbone to make it more appealing to kids. I don't have a reliable source on this, but I was wondering if anybody could verify this or not, because it could make for an interesting bit of information I feel.Cpesacreta (talk) 08:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Changes just made.
I recently revised this WP article to eliminate redundancies, run-ons, and other problems. I think the article as a whole is better for my changes, but I am willing to discuss these changes if discussion is necessary. Please post here with any comments or questions or gripes or whatever, and I will be happy to address them. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 06:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)