Talk:Postman Pat

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Ubcule in topic Reversions

Different animation

edit

I originally owned a couple of Postman Pat videos that were themed on on numbers and letters and the animation used in those releases is ordinary 2D animation (cartoon) instead of the usual stop motion animation in the regular series. Should we mention that in the article? trainfan01 talk 20:40, February 1, 2011 (UTC)


Yes, these were directed by Ivor Wood and based, in part on books by John Cunliffe. ( Source: I am John Cunliffe, and I have copies of these videoa.) Arthur Greendale (talk) 08:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Parodies -- Postman Patrick and Boro Pat

edit

In November 2010, a parody on the series "Postman Patrick" was first seen on Youtube, uploaded by a user calling himself "Johnny Yacuntya". The videos feature footage from the original 1996 series with extremely vulgar voice overdubs, portraying the characters as low-class, angry habitants of rural Ireland. The series faces copyright claims from Classic Media Ltd, but has nevertheless achieved a widespread cult following, especially in the Republic of Ireland[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.157.1.180 (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

I removed this section from the article. The reference (claiming it was notable) was from a magazine that I'm not sure even exists, it certainly wasn't a notable enough source to have a wikipedia article of its own. The reference above (from The Socialist) is just a blog talking about the videos, which might be notable since it's about the ONLY blog which talks about the videos. The youtube videos are hard to find and have barely any views. Websites that document memes aren't even aware of its existence. Basically, I think the video author put it in. --92.26.32.81 (talk) 13:04, 16 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
addition: After searching through real postmen called patrick, I found the facebook fangroup for Postman Patrick, it has 220 likes which is barely popular. --92.26.32.81 (talk) 13:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC)NotReply
That's not Boro Pat, is it? Boro Pat is the dub-over parody set in Middlesboro. It sounds like Postman Patrick was a similar thing. It has its own facebook page where the circa 22 episodes can be seen. Am I the only one who's heard of this? --97.135.185.36 (talk) 03:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
Boro Pat stopped production due to lawsuit threats, from what I recall. Andy 'Skin' Corfield did Pat's (dubbed over) voice. About 25 episodes were created and range from 1 to 5 minutes in length. https://www.facebook.com/groups/170712746426802/ --RThompson82 (talk) 20:15, 19 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Vandalism

edit

Please can somebody remove this from the article - I can't, it's protected.

"The show was originally conceived to propagandise children as, in reality, a postman will rock up at about noon wearing a pair of shorts and his breakfast (when he's not on strike of course). A "real" Postman Pat would be rifling through birthday cards for ready cash and chucking elastic bands like confetti, or leaving peoples' valuables out on the step."

82.20.51.162 (talk) 14:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

jess never talks

edit

Like With Blue Off Blues Clues jess Never Spoke From The Plot To The Season Final Jess Never Spoke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.2.193 (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Pat's vehicles

edit

I'm new to editing Wiki articles and don't want to just change things, but in episode 20 of SDS titled "Postman Pat and the sticky situation" where Pat delivers Alf's quad bike Pat states that he has never ridden a quad bike before and Pat7 looks more like a jeep to me. So what do you think? Is pat7 a quad bike or a 4x4? Random483 (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you are right. Pat7 is not a quad bike: http://greendaletoys.co.uk/postman-pat-vehicles/pat-7/ and http://www.amazon.co.uk/Postman-Pat-SDS-Road-Vehicle/dp/B00BSW7WX2. --Carniolus (talk) 17:14, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

???

edit

will the voice of postman pat have a replacement? Dr.T.Rahman (talk) 09:17, 1 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Postman Pat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:26, 25 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Postman Pat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:09, 6 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Postman Pat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:08, 11 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Reversions

edit

I notice that EvergreenFir (talk · contribs) restored an old version in this edit. It's not clear whether the issue was with the addition of secondary/misleading fluff by anonymous editors or the changes I made (first name "John" -> surname "Cunliffe" as per standard style), but I assume it was the former.

Perhaps it might be useful if EvergreenFir could give a brief rationale for the reversion in their edit summaries?

Note that it now seems possible to undo changes made in an intermediate edit (i.e. one that wasn't the most recent), which IIRC it never used to be. This means it should be possible to not throw the baby out with the bathwater in cases like this, though I do agree that if things get too messy, it's sometimes better to revert to a "known good" version.

Ubcule (talk) 12:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply