Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Simpsons

The Simpsons and Portland, Oregon
Here's a new entry about the relationship between the show and Portland, Oregon: The Simpsons and Portland, Oregon. I invite project members to help expand, thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:31, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Amount of pages for the episodes
Is there really a page for every single Simpsons episode? 68.50.116.194 (talk) 19:14, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Wendy Sage


The article Wendy Sage has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Character seemingly only had a major role in one episode, since all sources are about a single attribute of her character, I would say this is a case of WP:ONEEVENT. Can be recreated if needed later on. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:29, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Wendy Sage for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wendy Sage is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Wendy Sage until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

The Longest Marge needs a standalone page.
Right now it has no standalone page, and I think we can make one. 2604:3D09:17F:EAB0:48CC:DDE3:F158:208E (talk) 16:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Ok, i'm gonna make one. 2604:3D09:17F:EAB0:71ED:4A14:EBB9:EFB9 (talk) 22:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Censorship of an episode without a currently existing article
One episode from the latest season which does not yet have its own article, "One Angry Lisa", was recently pulled from Disney+ in Hong Kong. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 09:21, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a class parameter to WikiProject banner shell, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to WikiProject banner shell, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass WPBannerMeta a new custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposal regarding season article naming
There is a proposal to change the naming conventions of TV season articles from the current practice of  to   or. As such a change would affect a substantial number of articles, you are invited to participate in the discussion at . Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:22, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Update: Please see . Thanks. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for History of The Simpsons
History of The Simpsons has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Maggie Simpson
It looks like nobody replied to the previous GAR notice, but note that Maggie Simpson has a GAR at Good article reassessment/Maggie Simpson/1. If someone has one of those books on The Simpsons, that would likely be the best and most useful source, as some published media is probably required to replace weak listicle references. SnowFire (talk) 09:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)