Talk:How Not to Be Seen

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Noleander in topic Merge proposal

Untitled

edit

The version I posted from google video seems to be unedited, but some of the parts are slightly different, so there may be two or more versions of this sketch. Matt White 23:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)Reply


I've found that someone has made a version of this sketch using the sound from ANFSCD and combining it with video capture from Halo 2.

http://useruploads.mythica.org/cgi-bin/viewfile.cgi?f=Monty_Python_Halo_2.wmv JP Godfrey 11:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

47 or 40?

edit

The articles says "The film starts with a surreal shot of a landscape in which there are supposedly 47 people". I checked my copy of sketch and it starts with "In this picture there are 40 people, none of which can be seen." Can anybody confirm this? Konstantin Veretennicov 21:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

I saw it just the other day, and Cleese deffinatley said 47 people.203.53.167.180 02:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Gumby?

edit

I haven't yet seen the sketch, but at one point the article has a link to Gumby, while I highly suspect it's supposed to be referring to the Gumbies. Can anyone confirm this? 71.231.56.40 05:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Excess detail

edit

The blow-by-blow account in the article needs to be pared down, as it probably doesn't satisfy fair use.--Drat (Talk) 02:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sure it does. Fair use only applies to the original media. For example, a copyrighted photo might not be kosher, but a painstaking description of it would be. Comradeash (talk) 17:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

It's not encyclopedic. It is fan-site material. It is trivia. This article should be deleted-- all it amounts to is a blow-by-blow description of a sketch which is of zero importance outside a Monty Python fan site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.196.205.92 (talk) 11:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Merge proposal

edit

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Undertakers sketch for a merge proposal affecting this article. --Noleander (talk) 20:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)Reply