Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo

This is not an active discussion page but was created as a courtesy to those who would like to be able to read the discussions from 2011 and 2012 in one place and without hunting through diffs. BencherliteTalk 13:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

What will appear on the main page on 17th December 2012?
The blurb currently says this:

Discussions before and after scheduling

 * Brief discussion at WT:TFAR in December 2011 before the article was first nominated
 * Discussion about changing the 2012 nomination from 25th to 17th December
 * Today's featured article/December 17, 2012, scheduled 23:09 on 4th Dec
 * Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 17, 2012 (begun 06:37 5th Dec, closed at 12:25 same day as "speedy keep")
 * Discussion on Raul654's user talk page (begun 11:14 5th Dec); this is the diff where Raul (FA Director) says at 20:05 6th Dec that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARaul654&diff=526758461&oldid=526756801#Wikipedia:Today.27s_featured_article.2FDecember_17.2C_2012 he is "OK with letting it run on the main page on December 17."]
 * Discussion at Jimbo's user talk page (begun 17:28 6th Dec); closed by Jimbo at 10:00 7th Dec with the comment [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&curid=9870625&diff=526841826&oldid=526798923 "While I would not have chosen it, life is too short to argue over it" and now archived]

2011 nomination (nonspecific date request)
 "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" is the tenth episode of the first season of the animated television series South Park. It originally aired on Comedy Central in the United States on December 17, 1997. In the episode, the Jewish character Kyle feels excluded from the rest of town during Christmas, and is comforted by Mr. Hankey, a talking and singing Christmas poo. Mr. Hankey does not come alive in front of anyone else, so everyone begins to think Kyle is losing his mind. Meanwhile, the townspeople remove all religious aspects of Christmas from South Park in order to remain politically correct and inoffensive. The episode was written and directed by series co-founders Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and was rated TV-MA L in the United States. The Mr. Hankey character was based on an idea from Parker's childhood; when Parker and Stone first conceived the South Park series, they wanted to make Mr. Hankey the lead character. Heavily influenced by the Peanuts Christmas special A Charlie Brown Christmas, "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" was the first South Park Christmas special and first musical episode. It served as a satire of political correctness and religious sensitivity. Parker and Stone felt the episode elevated South Park to a new level of popularity and relevance. (more…)

2 points - promoted over 2 years ago. I think it would be really fun if we had this article up for TFA for sometime during the christmas season. It's probably not too appropriate for the day itself, but would be perfect for that between-christmas-and-new-year no man's land when everyone has eaten and drunk far too much for too long, lost track of what day of the week it even is and has become sick of being at home with their family. Howdy Ho! Coolug (talk) 14:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

0 points until Jan 21. + 2 for old, - 2 for collission with chanukha, another animated TV episode. --Ettrig (talk) 08:46, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support – As Coolug says, probably a bit strong for the day itself, but probably good for 29 December or thereabouts. Howdy Ho! —Cliftonianthe orangey bit 15:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support - dang, anything which convinces people to eat more fibre is a plus. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:47, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

– HonorTheKing (talk) 03:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The Mr. Hankey character was based on an idea from Parker's childhood; when Parker and Stone first conceived the South Park series, they wanted to make Mr. Hankey the lead character. Bit of a non-sequitur there. What was the idea from Parker's childhood? Jezhotwells (talk) 11:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * According to the article, the idea was Parker's father saying that if he did not flush the toilet, the poo, "Mr. Hankey", would come out of the toilet and kill him. 188.219.153.118 (talk) 10:43, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - It will be a perfect for Dec 29.


 * Oppose - I know this is probably a completely irrelevant vote, but this is really pretty low, even by WP's standards. Oppose putting it up in any connection with the holiday itself... maybe in June or something. Juliancolton (talk) 04:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose for 25th, weak support for other dates.  An  optimist on the  run!  08:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, considering this article is very likely not going to be scheduled for Dec 25th but on another date (if it is scheduled at all) should this not be counted as a support? I note the box at present shows 4 yays and 2 nays. Coolug (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support for 25th, support for other dates. If Unicode 6.0 can host poo, we can too. Fifelfoo (talk) 08:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ''' Extra Points for Christmas Day. Alarbus (talk) 09:31, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * . Alarbus (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose. I appreciate the effort that went into producing this article, but do we really have to feature such inane topics every week (TV shows, video games, and hurricanes)? It makes me slightly depressed. Kaldari (talk) 06:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support for the 25th. Nothing wrong with showing a bit of humour. Melicans (talk, contributions) 14:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose for Dec 25 or anything too close to Christmas, fine for another day, redundant to explain why. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Those sayings things like "oppose dec 25 support other days" - how should these votes be counted? In the opening I have said that I agree it isn't suitable for dec 25, this is also a non date specific nomination. It's not a nomination for christmas day. Coolug (talk) 14:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support for the 25th or any date. — Ed! (talk) 01:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Seeing as of the four opposes counted so far, only 2 are actual opposes, and the other 2 are just opposed to it being on christmas day itself, could the tally be amended to reflect that now the dec 25 tfa has been selected? Coolug (talk) 16:49, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I nominated this with the intention of it being TFA for either some time in the days leading up to christmas or the xmas-new-year no man's land of 27-30 dec when it would have been pretty appropriate. However, seeing as the tfa's slots for the rest of december have now been filled it wouldn't really be the end of the world if this wasn't stuck on the main page. I nominated it for a bit of fun, but the fun would be a bit pointless if it was tfa in january - it's a christmas poo not a new year poo! I'm not going to withdraw the nomination or anything but I won't be offended if it is removed by any other editors either. Howdy ho! Coolug (talk) 01:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Your nomination was . Alarbus (talk) 01:51, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey. It's true that it was your post that inspired me to nominate this article, but I wasn't trying to make a silly point or offend the worlds christians! I just thought that in spite of your comments, it would actually have been pretty cool to have this article on the main page sometime during the christmas season. Coolug (talk) 10:49, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Think again and maybe they'll pay you the big bucks. Alarbus (talk) 11:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Is this a riddle? I'm not very good at riddles. Coolug (talk) 14:59, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Is this article going to be on the main page sometime during the christmas season? Alarbus (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Apparently not, but there's always next year. Howdy-ho! —Cliftonian (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * shit happens... Alarbus (talk) 03:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose...the Plot section has nary a single inline cite...the subject matter is immaterial to me and I remember this episode well when it first aired, but the article itself needs help.--MONGO 11:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Though I haven't checked for exceptions in this case, as a general rule plot sections are not required to have inline cites - it's assumed that the plot is from the episode/book/movie/whatever itself. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment – this nomination should probably be taken down now, the next open date is 1 January and attempting to imply a connection to Christmas this late on seems to me a little bit tenuous. Perhaps this nomination should now wait until next year? —Cliftonian</b> <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">(talk)</b></b> 17:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - If you nominate it on December 17, next year, you could get a point for day relevance without having to nominate it on Christmas. With ancient FA status, that'd be three points if you're not ninja'd by another TV show. Emmy   Altava  04:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

2012 request (for December 25, amended to December 17)

 * Blurb as originally nominated. BencherliteTalk 17:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

<div style="width: 55%; background-color: #f5fffa; border: 1px solid #cef2e0; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix"> "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" is the ninth episode of the first season of the animated television series South Park. It originally aired on Comedy Central in the United States on December 17, 1997. In the episode, the Jewish character Kyle feels excluded from the rest of town during Christmas, and is comforted by Mr. Hankey, a talking and singing Christmas poo. Mr. Hankey does not come alive in front of anyone else, so everyone begins to think Kyle is losing his mind. Meanwhile, the townspeople remove all religious aspects of Christmas from South Park in order to remain politically correct and inoffensive. The episode was written and directed by series co-founders Trey Parker and Matt Stone. Heavily influenced by the Peanuts Christmas special A Charlie Brown Christmas, "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" was the first South Park Christmas special, the first musical episode and the only episode in season one where Kenny doesn't die. It served as a satire of political correctness and religious sensitivity. The episode has been described as one of the classic South Park episodes. In addition to Mr. Hankey himself, it introduced the popular South Park songs "A Lonely Jew on Christmas" and "Kyle's Mom is a Big Fat Bitch". (Full article ...)


 * Blurb as it ended up by the end of the discussion (mainly my copy edits, I think). BencherliteTalk 17:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

<div style="width: 55%; background-color: #f5fffa; border: 1px solid #cef2e0; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix"> "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" is the ninth episode of the first season of the animated television series South Park. The show's first Christmas special, it portrays the Jewish character Kyle feeling excluded from the town's Christmas celebrations and being comforted by Mr. Hankey, who can talk and sing. As Mr. Hankey does not come alive in the presence of other characters, they begin to think that Kyle is delusional. In another plot strand, the townspeople remove all symbols of Christmas from South Park to render the celebrations politically correct and inoffensive. When all the children start believing in him, Mr. Hankey finally reveals himself to everyone and scolds them for losing sight of the good things of Christmas and focusing on the bad. The townspeople apologize to Kyle, then sing Christmas songs and watch Mr. Hankey fly away with Santa Claus. Heavily influenced by the Peanuts Christmas special "A Charlie Brown Christmas", "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" was the first South Park musical episode and the only episode in season one in which Kenny does not die. It is a satire of political correctness and religious sensitivity and has been described as one of the classic South Park episodes. (Full article ...)

Heart-warming Christmas fare, with music and dancing. 3 points 1 point for date relevance, 2 points for being promoted over two years ago. It would be nice to be able use the image of Mr Hankey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hawkeye7 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose for same reasons as last year: we don't want to offend a sizeable amount of the population by putting it on December 25. Might consider another date. --Rschen7754 21:22, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Would not oppose for December 17. --Rschen7754 02:43, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Rschen, there is a reference below to September 17-- are you referring to that date or did you mean December? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:18, 19 November 2012 (UTC) See error below and here.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. It's a 15-year-old cartoon about a poop. I really don't think the kind of people who are going to get bent out of shape about it are the kind of people we want to pander to. GRAPPLE   X  21:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support on 17 September December (typo before), the original air date (it's still in pending requests for that date) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 02:40, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support on 17th, Oppose on 25th. There's nothing to be gained by wilfully choosing a date purely to be offensive, and (as a firm atheist) I find the attitude that Christians "aren't the kind of people we want to pander to" one of the most repellently bigoted statements I've ever seen expressed on Wikipedia - would you make the same comment towards any other ethnic, religious or political group? Mogism (talk) 02:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You'll notice I didn't say Christians, but simply specified the kind of easily-offended people who would take an article about a cartoon to be a personal affront. And yes, I would make the same comment towards anyone from any group who is so easily offended by humour they can simply ignore. But thanks for actually reading what I wrote. GRAPPLE   X  02:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Mogism, are you referring to December 17, or the orginal air date of September 17 mentioned above? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)  See error above and here.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose any time one week before or after Christmas, same as last year, no need to offend. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have reverted an inappropriate date change here; please read the instructions at the top of the page.  "1.If a requested article has at least five declarations and over 50% oppose votes (counting the nominator's declaration as a support) at least 48 hours after the request is initiated, it may be removed regardless of its point value." (Nor is it clear that there is support for Dec 17, btw.)  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Per the discussion here, I would not oppose December 17. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * continued on talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 03:34, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support for Dec 17 -- it has date relevance. Oppose for Dec 25.  Ruby  2010/  2013  03:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose per above. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 05:27, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support it running, but am indifferent as to date. Note that Christmas is just about the lowest numbers of views for the whole year so I don't think it would be that terrible if we ran it.  That being said, it may be something we don't need in a year in which Wikipedia has received plenty of publicity, not all of it good.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:48, 19 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support for 17th December: worth running on a relevant date, but no need to push buttons with big red warning signs popping up and down. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the 25th per Sandy there is no need to offend people. There must be a more suitable entry for that date.  I have no problem with running it the 17th, however.   Hot Stop     (Talk)   02:00, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the 25th, support for the 17th. ~ GabeMc  (talk 02:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Support running this on December 17th. I strongly agree with WP:NOTCENSORED, but it doesn't justify purposely offending people.  The 15th anniversary of the episode's debut is a highly relevant and appropriate day on which to schedule the article.  —David Levy 03:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Also support for December 17th and oppose for the 25th.--Chimino (talk) 16:05, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Sigh ... I'd rather not see this run on either date. The last night of Hanukkah is December 16, which, with main page changing at 00:00 UTC, puts this on the main page whilst still half the world is celebrating the end of that holiday. Sorry, and don't think this oppose will make much of a difference. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

To this point, I count nine supports for the 17th, and two opposes; it has been more than 48 hours and there is more support for the 17th than the 25th, so I'm moving this to the 17th. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 02:22, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Support my 2 cents. Nergaal (talk) 05:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, for either date, great example of comedy as a form of satire. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 01:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose What exactly does this shit teaches us? That we are idiots? --Tomcat (7) 13:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I can't believe I'm commenting on this, but I don't think the article or blurb should refer to the character as "a… poo" in Wikipedia's voice. "Poo" is both an informal word and a mass noun that shouldn't be preceded by the article "a". The entry for Mr. Hankey i the list of South Park characters refers to him as "a talking piece of feces", so I think the article (and the blurb, if it runs) should call him something like "a talking and singing piece of feces who appears around Christmas". A. Parrot (talk) 19:34, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Reworded to "...comforted by Mr. Hankey, who can talk and sing." Frankly, if people haven't worked out what the material is from which Mr. Hankey is made after reading the bold words "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" at the start of the blurb, I don't think we ought to spell it out in excessive clarity later on in the blurb. And if they have worked it out, they don't need it explained. BencherliteTalk 14:47, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose Well put, Tomcat. Hekerui (talk) 19:33, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Tomcat and comments by A. Parrot. Should be "Poo" and not "the Poo". Also, it doesn't seem like "Heart-warming Christmas fare". (From article): "He emerges from the toilet bowl on Christmas Eve and brings presents to good boys and girls whose diets have been high in fiber." MathewTownsend (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It has a song in its heart Matthew. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've got a vague recollection that this has been TFA before, to the consternation of some. Can someone check if that is the case, because re-runs (I use the word "runs" advisedly) are not a good thing. Maybe we could run something about poos in Shakespeare instead, for high-brow/dirty-sanchez balance. However, if this does get TFA, 25th is obviously the best day, you bunch of wusses. Formerip (talk) 02:10, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It was nominated last year but did not make the cut, and was taken down on 1 January 2012. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Since the subject is stupid shit for a sub-literate audience, how does it bring glory to the Wikipedia to feature this shit? Stupid bathroom humor, designed specifically to offend, and does offend, with no redeeming artistic merit. Do we not have articles on reasonable subjects available? If not, suggest leaving that part of the main page blank instead, as that would be an improvement. Herostratus (talk) 03:15, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment While I can understand the opposes for the 17th based on the timing of other holidays (even though it is designed to be a parody of commercial holiday treatments in generations), those opposing on the basis of, quoting Herostratus, being "stupid shit for a sub-literate audience" may want to review what the ethos is of Wikipedia, particularly in light of this having reached Features status. No, it's not the most thought-provoking South Park episode, but it is certainly is appropriate material for what WP wants to be. --M ASEM  (t) 04:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment This article appears to have deteriorated since it was (narrowly) promoted. Yomangani talk 13:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * On noes, sumbuddy is paying attention ! Quite narrowly promoted, and the prose is rough throughout.  Perhaps the Supporters have taken a look?  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 14:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose Poo-erile. Sasata (talk) 15:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Support It's thematically relevant. Opposition based on possible offense spits on the spirit, if not the letter of WP:NOTCENSORED. Abyssal (talk) 18:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)