Talk:World War Zimmerman

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.

Who is Jack Cashill?
and why is he relevant? He writes for a page thats considered white nationalist by some and very conservative but I never heard of him.. So idk, whether that person is relevant enough but it would be interesting to have a qualifier because its good to know whether the person you quote is basically a racist or has racist opinions which he verbalized about media that deals with race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:2C0:15BC:2D69:709C:5905:F65A (talk) 08:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Why don't you click on his wikilink and find out? If you did, you'd see that both he and the publication he writes for having Wikipedia articles, and are therefore notable. Including them, therefore, is not unreasonable. Nightscream (talk) 16:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

"Critically Acclaimed" - Really? How was that decided?
In the "World War Zimmerman" article's header paragraph, it is contented that "The episode was critically acclaimed, with some critics considering it one of the best episodes in the more recent seasons."

Who decides these accolades?

Searching for a review of the instant South Park episode fails to find any support to "critically acclaimed" nor that is is "one of the best episodes" recently.

I found "And what results is one of the better episodes of the show tackling a Controversy in a long time." but, is that "critical acclaim"? Further on in this "review", a conclusion that "it’s not a perfect episode' is made. Clearly no "critical acclaim". And in the final sentence, "one of the harshest (in a “good” way?) episodes of the show in a long time". Nope, not "critical acclaim".

Perhaps the most damning evidence that this episode was not even acclaimed with slight praise is that the website gamesradar.com (how is that for a credible source?), in the article "The 25 best South Park episodes, mmkay" By Vikki Blake August 29, 2019, the "World War Zimmerman" episode fails to make the list.

So, the empty accolade of "critically acclaimed" is not accurate; and being "considered one of the best" is nonsense.

Rather than trying to place this episode in any ranking of the South Park catalog, I'll simply delete this empty acclaim.

Osomite (talk) 20:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)