Talk:Got a Nut

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Got a Nut article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Animation: American / South Park Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the South Park task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Things to keep in mind when editing South Park articles

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 (although running gags that serve as as recurring motif or theme may be included if they form a signficant aspect of the plot or theme, and can be incorporated into the synopsis in a manner that isn't extraneous).

If you're new to Wikipedia, please click on the wikilinked policy pages above to familiarize yourself with this site's policies and guidelines.

Template:Notability

Latest comment: 11 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

User:Alex 21 added the notability tag. This was reverted with a lengthy summary by User:Nightscream. Alex 21 reverted this, with no summary. I removed it after looking at the quality of the page, and it was added back by User:IzzySwag.

I'm not going to edit-war anything but I don't see the relevance of having the tag up. There were already 13 sources on the article retrieved in August, so the initial reaction to the episode, rather than post the killing of Kirk. I don't know a specific guideline for TV, but that surely passes WP:GNG. I rewatched South Park from the start earlier this year, and some of the articles on the first ten seasons are really shoddy, only sourced to DVD commentaries. Even if there was not the precedent of a page for every episode, this one would still pass it, due to its sources on real-life reaction like on Bloody Mary (South Park) or Hell on Earth 2006.

Per the notes on Template:Notability, I invite discussion on whether the page is in a condition to remove the tag. Unknown Temptation (talk) 18:46, 11 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

See the discussion at Talk:Wok Is Dead as to why the notability of this article is up for debate. There is no need to have the same discussion in two locations. -- Alex_21_TALK 21:53, 11 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Charlie Kirk Sidebar

Latest comment: 11 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Can the usage of a Charlie Kirk sidebar on this article really be justified? I don't know the exact guidelines, but I believe sidebars usually have alot of articles that are very closely linked to the subject at hand, to the point where they could be in one enormous article. This episode released over a month ago, only has a parody of Charlie Kirk, and it isn't even the main focus, which is ICE. It's also the only listing under "cultural depictions", which I believe is more of an issue with the template itself. 2600:4040:2C2F:4F00:304F:8041:8303:8D95 (talk) 18:53, 13 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

I removed it as not-bidirectional and obtrusive (WP:BIDIRECTIONAL). 206.248.143.75 (talk) 04:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Dora the Explorer stage show

The plot section says that ICE detains people dressed in costumes at a Dora the Explorer stage show. I think they are just detaining the actual Dora the Explorer. Wich is absurd, but so is them being able to detain people in Heaven and they also do that.