Talk:Roseanne/Archive 1

Archive 1

Theme song

I heard a version of the Roseanne theme song by Blues Traveler and it had lyrics. Does the original theme have lyrics? --98.70.57.207 (talk) 23:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

From the 'Blues Traveler' article on Wikipedia: "[Blues Traveler was] featured in an episode of the sitcom Roseanne, and later recorded the show's theme song for its final season." --74.179.113.193 (talk) 16:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Cast/Character sections

Is there a better way to organize these parts? We have a cast section, then two sections down we have the character section, then we have another page dedicated to just the characters. Can't we move them around or combine them in some way that would make it simpler and more logical? Ospinad 22:04, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Who played Gary in Season Three? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.214.149.110 (talk) 20:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Main Character Section Was Erased

What happened to the main character section? It has been erased and it contained a lot of great information abou the characters on the show.

It was moved to Characters in the Roseanne television series. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Why isn't there a link for the character Mark, the actor's name was Glenn Quinn, he also played on Angel and died of an overdose. His family is irsh they moved to california.

He's linked in the main characters article (accessible via the link directly under the heading for the characters section, or the one two comments above this). - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Sal Barone

Sal Barone was in a single episode so I don't think he really needs to be in the box under "Starring." He's already mentioned in the main article. Garfield226 19:59, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

This is interesting "Sal Barone was casted as DJ Conner on the new show Roseanne, however, due to problems with cast member Sara Gilbert, who played Darlene Conner, his mother took him off the cast. He was replaced with Michael Fishman." One wonders what this might have been. 67.5.157.183 05:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Eh. He was eight, Gilbert was 13. Sometimes kids don't get along. I don't read much into it. Garfield226 18:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Class

Can Roseanne's family really be considered lower middle class, and not working class or lower class altogether? I understand the desire for those in the working classes not to want to call themselves lower or working class, but, objectively, the Conner family is a working class family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocap8 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 19 March 2005 (UTC)

Sometimes lower middle class and working-class are used interchangeably actually. Lower class and working class refer to different groups most of the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.251.26.48 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that lower class and working class refer to different groups, in fact I don't think that "lower class" means anything at all really. In any case, a search for "lower class" redirects to "working class," so I figure they're interchangeable as far as Wikipedia is concerned.

-I believe that working class and middle class belong on two different scales. Middle class refers to wealthy, not rich, people, and it is over lower and below higher class. Middle class refers to most people in the US. Working class means people who have to work for a living, and usually includes people of lower middle, and upper class, but can incled people of higher calss. Working calss belongs on a scale with people who sit on their asses all day and get a steady flow of income from their businesses class, which is mostly upper class.

Lower-Upper-Middle/\Working-Not working —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.189.211 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Move to Subpage

Since the comedienne/star has been known as "Roseanne" for the lion's share of her career, I think it's more likely visitors will look up that word expecting to find a biography rather than a blurb about her sitcom. I think the Roseanne Barr article should be moved here; and the current article should be moved to a subpage, Roseanne_(TV_show) (or some such designation). Anyone agree/disagree?

• I agree...but I think instead i'll add a little title at the top. --FlareNUKE 02:30, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Kevin/David

When we first meet David, he introduces himself as Kevin, Mark's brother. Darlene recognizes him from detention. After that he is called David. Roseanne explains much later that "David isn't even his real name - [Darlene] just made that up!" - Laszlo Panaflex 06:47, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I remember that. I'll add it into the article. bob rulz 07:36, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Whoa, I added it in there, why was it removed? bob rulz 04:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Now it gives the full back story, mentions the line, but does not say what the line is!

• The reason for the change from Kevin to David is because the actor of David/Kevin, was also going to be in a show along side Roseanne and in that show his character was to be named Kevin, so to make sure there weren't confusion or cross-over hopes, the Directors of Roseanne renamed the Character from Kevin to David. However when the other show (the one with "Kevin") didn't take off, they didn't switch back because the name "David" was used to such great lengths that they decided not to switch back because it would confuse the audience even further, beyond going from Kevin to David.98.163.120.145 (talk) 05:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Final Season

The article says that the lottery plot of the show's final season was the result of writing control being taken away from Roseanne. I remember the news back in the mid-90s when she might have lost some creative control over the show, but she's made it pretty clear in interviews (most notably the cast reunion on Larry King Live this past October) that the Conners' winning the lottery was her idea, or at least she completely supported it. --relaxathon 06:12, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, found the Larry King transcript. Roseanne completely contradicts the Wikipedia article as far as losing creative control and who was responsible for the final season:

KING: All right. The show declined in its last year when you won a lottery and got rich. Was that a mistake Roseanne?

BARR: What?

KING: The winning the lottery and changing the...

BARR: That's what I wanted to do. The debate rages on.

GOODMAN: There you go.

BARR: It's like people are going (INAUDIBLE) but hey that's what I wanted to do and I did it and, you know, I had the power to do what I wanted to do...

KING: I know.

BARR: ...which no artist in television has anymore the power to do what they want to do and to say what they want to say and I had it and I did it and I'm proud of it and, yes, I won the lottery in my real life and since the show is about my real family, it was only fitting to me that they did win the lottery.

I'll alter the ending section to reflect that.

Theme song?

I think I just heard it in a Honda comercial.--Gbleem 01:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought I heard it in a car commercial too, but let's wait to see if this is confirmed.

-alakazam9891

EDIT: I confirm that, I was wondering that, was mad at it too :-|.

Two Issues

"Fisher (played by Matt Roth) Fisher dated Jackie. Dan beat him up after it was found out that he abused Jackie while they were dating. Matt Roth was once in a long-term relationship with Laurie Metcalf (Jackie Harris)." -- is this a real life dating relationship, or a dating relationship in the show? I assume because the actor's real names are used, it was a real-life dating relationship. However, this should be made clearer.

Its also implied (although nowhere explicitly stated) that Roseanne, as a good mother, attempted to install morals in her children. There are several occassions, however, when Roseanne attempts to do the wrong thing, and is caught by the children and continues to do the wrong thing. One such example is when she was working at the diner, the factory accidentally sent two extra stoves, one of which was sold for profit. DJ asked Roseanne about this, and Roseanne ended up not selling the last extra stove as planned and returned it to the factory, giving the impression that this was the right thing to do. She also cut Leon in the ill-conceived gainings, upon DJ's complaining (she was not planning on doing this to begin with). This is just one of a few examples. Perhaps the "Roseanne" character paragraph should be reworded to reflect these changes? --Jpawloski 18:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah but at the end of the episode she gives in to DJ's wishes and stops that.

Matt Roth and Laurie Metcalf were dating in real life(or had just started to) around the time of the 2-part episode you're mentioning. This relationship is how Laurie (and Jackie) got pregnant later on in the show's run. As for the second issue, Roseanne, like most people, walks a fine line between doing the "right" thing and the "convenient" thing. Not only, though, do parents have kids watching their actions, but, in this episode, D.J. was actually passing judgement against his mother. --Ericdn (talk) 03:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Parents in Moline

In the episode "An Officer and a Gentleman" in season two, Roseanne goes to visit her parents who live in Moline, Illinois. I think this would be a good addition to the extended family section, but I'm not quite sure where to add it, considering each parent has its own bulleted paragraph. Should it be mentioned that they lived in Moline for each?

I also find it interesting that they started a loose-meat sandwich restaurant. There is a popular chain of Maid-Rite restaurants in and around Moline that may have influenced this. For some reason I remember hearing that they got the idea from visiting her parents in Moline, but I can't verify it. Maybe someone else can?

--Bdmathias (3-2-2006)

Actually, I'm pretty sure Jackie came up with the idea for the restaurant. I believe she said she stopped at the restaurant while on one of her truck routes, and even mentions a specific place name (state or city), although I can't recall it at the moment. Nor can I recall where her parents lived, but Moline does ring a bell. Garfield226 04:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Trivia Section?

Should there be a trivia section added to the main article? I don't know what the policy is in other TV show articles (Cheers doesn't have one...Full House does, etc.). Example: Fictional Lanford, IL is located in real Fulton County (thus when DJ and his girlfriend skipped school and caught the bus to Chicago, it was probably about a 200-mile trip!). Garfield226 04:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I think that's a great idea. It'd be a nice place to add the fact about Roseanne's parents being from Moline, Illinois.

--Bdmathias 06:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

No there is no guideline, it's just that nobody has yet to add one or there is no trivia. --FlareNUKE 04:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it trivia worthy that a young big-haired George Clooney was in the pilot episode (8801) as Roseanne's boss? Probably not, maybe more for a Clooney page. TotalTommyTerror 08:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Series Finale Fantasies

"Becky with David and Darlene with Mark" So was this saying that some of the major occurances like in season three, of Becky dating Mark were entirely not an actual part of the story as revised from the end episode? or did Becky actually date Mark all that time and Darlene David, but when they separated they 'switched' and actually married the opposite brother? This would explain more why Roseanne would switch it around in fantasy. 67.5.157.183 05:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)]

In the series finale, at the end, Roseanne says "When Darlene brought home Mark, I thought he would go much better with Becky. And when Becky brought David, I thought he was more Darlene's type. So, I did what any good mother does; I fixed." Or something along those lines. So, in reality (as in, not the book Roseanne was writing in the show, but the reality in the show), Mark and David were going out with the opposite sister than they were in the "fiction" of the show (when Roseanne is making a story of it.)'

Didn't the final episode reveal that the last season was a fantasy...not the entire series? I thought that was quite clear. After Dan died, she began writing the story from that point. Everything before that event was as it actually happened. So, in the last season, she wrote of Dan's infidelity because she felt like his death was a betrayal. Also, she wrote about Becky having a relationship with David and Darlen with Mark because she had always thought this is how things should have been. Did I miss something? Didn't she explain this quite clearly in the last scene?

Actually she wrote about Becky dating Mark and Darlene dating David. Which is how we saw it during the series. What we saw during the series (from about the beginning of the 3rd season on) was parts of her book. In reality, David was with Becky and Mark with Darlene. The way I understood it was that the entire last season was completely fictional while only some of the events that we saw on the show from the 3rd to 8th season were fictional like which guys her daughters went out with. Ospinad 22:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Harris Moved to the Main Character Section

As a die hard Roseanne fan and having watched the show for many years I felt that Jackie was one of the main characters in the show seeing how she played Roseanne's Sister. I moved her material to the main character section!

Excellent! To me, she pretty much was Roseanne's other half!

A LITTLE EDIT: Even though I'm only 13, I love Roseanne, just like you, a diehard :-D. I just though I'd add this. Oh, and I'm glad that you moved it to the main characters! She should be like the 4th in the credits :-).

Petition

Please place all discussion regarding whether to include the petition here. (sorry for the delay. I realize now I put my comments on the talk page for Roseanne rather than this one.) -- Garfield226 22:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the petition should stay because if it does then it will get alot of signatures. -- Heegoop 19:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read What Wikipedia is not: Wikipedia is not a soapbox. This is not the place for advocacy. -- Garfield226 00:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Charlotte

I just saw a show with Charlotte and Molly. Who are they? Were they just in that one episode? --Gbleem 06:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

No, they were in a few episodes...I think those two characters only lasted one season though. No more than two seasons. bob rulz 08:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Final Episode

I'm thinking that it might be a good idea to make a separate page for the Final Episode that the TV page can point to. I only breach the subject because the last season was obviously a complete departure from the series, but the last episode in particular was so significant, and had so many reversals and changes, and just plain turned everything on it's ear. I'm considering creating one, if youall think it would be wise. What say you, fellow Wikipedians? :) LLBBooks 08:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

From what I saw on the Larry King Live Show, Roseanne revealed that while the ninth and final season was fictional, the first eight seasons of the show were "factual," but with some minor differences. According to her, she said that the youngest child Jerry Garcia Connor was not "officially" born in the show's timeline, Becky and Darlene did date the boys they dated in the show, but they supposedly "switched" at some point (probably the 8th or 9th season). Also, Dan had really died from his heart attack. Therefore, every moment from the scene where Dan's eyes open is pure fiction in Roseanne's book. Hope it helps. --Jonathan.Bruce 12:07, May 21 2007 (UTC)

faber

who played faber? was it that DA guy from Law & Order (something dalton i think his name is) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.16.29 (talk • contribs) 04:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Fred Thompson, the actor and former Presidential candidate, played Faber. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.85.67 (talk) 09:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Mark's Season Three Debut

I am not clear on how Mark's debut in Season Three demonstrates that "many parts of the series from seasons three through nine were just fantasy and a part of her book that she had started to write in the end of season two," as stated in the "Series Finale" section of the article. Please advise, Thanks!

I assume this is based on teh fact that in the finale, it is revealed that Becky actually brough home David, not Mark. So when we see Mark debut in season 3, this is apparently part of the book, not reality. TheHYPO 04:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

No character information?

We've got to fix this ... I came to the article looking to refresh my memory on which of Jackie's boyfriends was the abusive one, but there's no information on the characters at all. Even the history discussion and the discussion of the final season assumes we know what the hell the article's talking about, even though there was no background on different characters and storylines. So yes, I'll be bold, but let's all get on with fixing this article, which is seriously underweight given the impact of the show. Lawikitejana 02:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

As mentioned above, this information was moved to Characters in the Roseanne television series, although the current link to the article isn't immediately obvious. -- SmokeDetector47^{( TALK )} 02:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I added the link back onto the main page in the cast section Ospinad 20:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It was Fisher.

David was Kevin

In his first appearence, during the end credits of an episode, David is named Kevin and he is older than Darlene. His personality is also more rebelious. Should that be in trivia?

Actually, this was mentioned later in the series, when Roseanne and Dan were arguing over Darlene controlling David. She said something along the lines of "David's not even his real name, that's just what Darlene named him." Or something like that. Emo777 (talk) 08:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Becky Conner.jpg

Image:Becky Conner.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:John Goodman2.jpg

Image:John Goodman2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Becky, Darlene, Mark, and David

Is there some way to work in the fact that the brother sister switcheroo is smokin' hot? Probably not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.127 (talk) 07:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Editing the following section:

"It was also revealed that, despite actually happening, Becky and Darlene eventually ended up with the opposite Healy brother (Becky with David, and Darlene with Mark)."

Firstly, it's confusing. Secondly, it says Becky and Darlene "eventually" ended up with opposite brothers. In "real life," Becky originally brought David home, and Darlene then got together with Mark, and it stayed this way. It was only in Roseanne's writings that Darlene and David, and Becky and Mark were together. Roseanne explains this in the monologue at the end of the series finale:

"When Becky brought David home a few years ago, I thought, 'This is wrong; he's much more Darlene's type.' ... When Darlene met Mark, I thought he went better with Becky. ... I guess I was wrong. But, I still think they'd be more compatible the other way around; so, in my writing, I did what any good mother would do: I fixed it."

Now, on the Larry King Live interview, Roseanne supposedly said that Becky originally dated Mark and Darlene dated David, and they, at some point later on, switched. I have not seen the episode so cannot say for sure. Either way, it contradicts the in-story canon, which I believe takes "priority"... But, if I'm wrong, let me know.

Don't mind if the wording is changed or anything... just wanted to get accurate information in there. --Somnilocus 17:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Major Article Revision In Process

Just to let everyone know what's going on: I'm making some significant changes to this article in an effort to bring it closer to featured article quality. I am modelling the changes on other television show articles that have attained featured article status, such as Arrested Development and The Office. Among the changes that are in process:

• shortening the character descriptions (more detailed inforamtion is already available in Characters in the Roseanne television series
• re-organizing much of the plot synopsis scattered throughout the article into the "Season synopses" sections
• moving the information in the "Trivia" section into the rest of the article so that section can be deleted
• adding more production and casting inforamation into their own sections

I welcome everyone's help in this endeavor and of course any suggestions for improvement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryan H Bell (talk • contribs) 02:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry. Bryan H Bell 05:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The synopses need to be changed - at the moment it looks like they were just copied from the blurb on the back of the DVDs. Needs to be formal, but I'm unfamiliar with the material. Moopet (talk) 00:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Someone added synopses copied from the US DVD cases for all of the seasons shortly after I added the season headings. I've been gradually replacing the DVD box text with synopses I'm writing from scratch. So far I've completed seasons 1-4. I hope to complete the remaining seasons soon. Bryan H Bell (talk) 10:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Great ideas. I'm a huge fan and know a lot about the show but never wanted to take on that challenge. But if you everyone need any questions answered about Roseanne come to me! HoosierState 15:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Working on last half season synopses

I agree with the "fansite" notation, so I'm working everything from Season 5 on. Take a look when I'm finished. Garfield226 (talk) 04:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for picking that up. :) I don't know enough to do it myself. On second glance, I think the final season synopsis is pretty much okay as far as sounding like an advert goes, so really it's just 6-8 now. Nice work! --Masamage ♫ 07:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Masamage and Farfield226! After getting through the seasons 1-4 sysnopses, I had a major computer meltdown which kept me away. When I got back, I ended up getting distracted working on other articles. I sure appreciate the work you're doing to pick up from where I left off. I hope to step in and help out again soon. I'm continuing to watch this article, so if you have any questions about what I did (or didn't) do here, ask away. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 08:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Two Beckies

Was the "Two Beckies" section meant to list all mentions of the two Beckies? Because in the last season, I believe in the last episode, Goranson (the original actress) plays Becky, but a woman (played by Chalke) with two children knocks on the door of the wrong house, and says "Oh, you look like such a nice family, I wish we could have been part of it!" Then they slam the door on her, and say that they think she's nuts. It was very clever, and not subtle. Hollielol (talk) 03:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Character summaries

User Sottolacqua recently removed all the information in the section "Characters" giving the reason that the info is unnecessary since there is a separate article Characters in the Roseanne television series that contains character descriptions. I have restored the information because I feel that, as WP:SS suggests, short character descriptions are appropriate to this article for those readers that don't wish to delve deeply into details about each character. Those that do want more detail, of course, may follow the {{main}} link to the above mentioned article. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 20:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

There's no need to have duplicate content. The characters article adequately covers the characters, and isn't very long to warrant small versions of its summaries. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. I think that WP:SS suggests that summary content, even if it duplicates some material in sub-articles, is a feature of Wikipedia articles that readers find useful. I find the length of the "Characters" article and its exhuastive detail to be quite cumbersome and I imagine my level of interest to be higher than the average casual reader of this article. Perhaps that means the concentration should be on trimming the "Characters" article instead, but what about restoring the character descriptions to this article but in a briefer form? --Bryan H Bell (talk) 02:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

That's okay. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Tenth season

Despite vigorous searches, I could find absolutely no evidence that the series is returning for a tenth season. Therefore, unless and until there is an official announcement, I've removed the section. --24.144.146.167 (talk) 01:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

RC2/PAL DVDs - more available

Hi there. The RC2/PAL version is earlier evailable than listed. On german Amazon you can get DVDs up to 6th season at the moment, 7th+8th you can preorder for early 2009. The package is only in german, but the original english sound is still there... The bonus (if there is a) is the same interview with one actor than on RC1 version i assmue. Only english without any subtitles on Bonus.

Complete List:

Season 1: 15. October 2007 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Die-komplette-Staffel-DVDs/dp/B000UF3F0C

Season 2: 26. November 2007 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Die-komplette-Staffel-DVDs/dp/B000VCVRP4

Season 3: 11. February 2008 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Die-komplette-Staffel-DVDs/dp/B0010RDYZU

Season 4: 12. May 2008 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Die-komplette-Staffel-DVDs/dp/B0012OVEAI

Season 5: 11. August 2008 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Die-komplette-Staffel-DVDs/dp/B00194WZG8

Season 6: 10. November 2008 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Die-komplette-Staffel-DVDs/dp/B001C05M82

And next releases:

Season 7: 12. January 2009 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Die-komplette-Staffel-DVDs/dp/B001KC70O6

Season 8: 3. April 2009 http://www.amazon.de/Roseanne-Staffel-8-Barr/dp/B001O4VV9K

Season 9: Not listed yet, but i think about June/July/August 2009...

Is this information good enough to correct the PAL releases? Or are only UK versions allowed? ;-)

Best regards, David. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.75.225.98 (talk) 22:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Article project: Dan Conner.

If any of you are interested, I'm trying to build this article up. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The last season

Okay, seriously, did the lottery stuff (in canon) happen or was that Roseanne's imaginings? Lots42 (talk) 04:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The entire last season (along with some of the stuff in seasons 1-8; such as Darlene with David and Beckey with Mark) were part of Roseanne's imaginings. It was very confusing really? I did not see it coming, but yeah. Emo777 (talk) 08:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

The entire series, everything we saw when we watched the show, was a semi-autobiographical novel written by the character Roseanne Conner. It was based on her life, but some things were fictionalized. In the earlier parts of the story, there were some important changes (Becky was with David and Darlene was with Mark; Jackie was a lesbian), but after Dan died of a heart attack, she began making bigger changes as a way to cope with his death. Dan surviving the heart attack, Dan cheating, and the family winning the lottery were all only in the fictionalized version in the "novel." She was changing things from the "real" story the entire time, but the really radical ones (particularly winning the lottery, which is understandably what people get hung up on) happened in the last season.

Interestingly, Lynn Johnston did something similar in her comic strip For Better or for Worse, but in reality instead of as a fictional framing device. The strip was based on her life and followed it pretty closely, but toward the end veered significantly from reality and took on a life of its own. It was even for similar reasons of trying to deal with traumatic events in her life. MrBook (talk) 16:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Lanford's Location

How far did the show ever go to give away where in Illinois, Lanford is located? Did they state Lanford as being a Chicago suburb? Kenallen (talk) 07:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's implied that Chicago is pretty far away from Lanford; DJ and the bully girlfriend took a bus there, and Darlene doesn't visit enough to really have it be close. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 08:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

There are several communities in North Western Illinois that fit the look and feel, as well as the descriptions and discussions of other actual communities on the show, and could be the insperation for "Langford". Rockford, Elgin, Aurora, and Moline were all mentioned as destinations and the homes of friends and family, so that would eliminate them. Some good guesses would be the small working class towns along I 88 or US 20. Winnebago, Pecatonica, Freeport, Dixon, Sterling, Rock Falls, or Morrison are good possibilities, or perhaps Langford is a composite of all or several of them. Dekalb is probabaly not in the mix, becuse as far as I know, there was never a mention of langford being a college town. The towns along I 90 between Chicagio and Rockford, don't seem to have that "Langford" feel to them. Cosand (talk) 17:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Season synopses

As much as I hate to say it, the "Season synopses" section is not exactly thrilling writing. While it promises to give a description of story arcs spanning multiple episodes, in practice it ends up being one-sentence descriptions of various events in specific episodes, particularly in the middle seasons. For example, Roseanne's smoking pot is not a multi-episode story arc. I believe this section either needs a complete rewrite, or, I suspect more, just needs to be removed entirely and defer to List of Roseanne episodes. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree the article needs rewritting but we still need additional sources to support the article here are a few I think would be useful. [1] [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] Dwanyewest (talk) 02:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

For the record, I think the pot-smoking episode is noteable (because of the time period in which it aired) and deserves some sort of mention. Lots42 (talk) 06:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

This section can easily be condensed into a few paragraphs instead of nine separate headers. The List of Roseanne episodes is where detailed descriptions of episodes are and should be. Sottolacqua (talk) 13:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Production history

It's weird that there's zero information about the behind the scenes production of this show, considering how well documented it is. I'd humbly asked that some editors start creating one. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 10:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand why there is a list "Main Crew" which is just a list of names. It doesn't even indicate in what season they worked. Angry bee (talk) 18:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Children never introduced in article

The premise section does not list the children and as a result the characters of the children and the actors who played them are never introduced. This article should at least also mention the Becky cast replacement, regardless of what is in any other article. Robert K S (talk) 23:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

John Goodman's heart attack real?

I remember hearing somewhere, when "The Wedding" was being filmed, that Goodman really did have a heart attack on the set of the show, and the producers worked it into the story somehow. I remember that being the reason I decided to watch that episode. Seeing that there is no mention of this anywhere on Wiki (and I'm right now too lazy to go looking for a source that I'll never get Google to understand what I'm actually searching for (Google's been real good about doing that to me lately). I might've remembered this wrong, but if anyone knows the story behind the decision to go with that storyline, please add it. Darkpower (talk) 11:32, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Embarrassing Episodes

Little attempt seems to have been made to appraise the marked decline in quality in the later series. I think there would be general agreement that Roseanne was at its best up to, say, Series 6. Some of the episodes in the later series are frankly embarrassing. Purely at random, for example, there was the ghastly Jerry Garcia episode, any number of the chaotic Halloween episodes, and that appallingly politically-correct Thanksgiving episode where DJ's Red Indian teacher rewrites history. I accept that, being English, I probably miss some of the nuances of American culture, but that particular episode's one-dimensional portrayal of Indians as noble savages and Whites as violent landgrabbers just made me want to puke. About as subtle as a brick, and miles away from the sensitivity of some of the earlier episodes. I'd be interested to know if any American contributors to Wikipedia had similar reactions.

I have made a start by panning Series 9 in the intro paragraph, but we really need a thoughtful paragraph somewhere in this article charting Roseanne's decline and the reasons for it. Personally, I think the star got too big for her boots, but others may disagree.

Djwilms (talk) 08:34, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

First, the the lead is intended to summarize the most important aspects of the body of the article. Rarely should there be anything in the lead that is not present in the body. Second, if we were to state that there was a drop in quality in season 9, it would have to be reliably sourced. If you're correct that there is "general agreement" on this issue, then sources should be available to support your opinion. At the moment, we have only one statement in the body about the "ranking" of season 9, and it's not properly sourced. I will revert your change, and I will remove the TV Guide statement as unsourced. Also, just as an aside, Americans use the word "season", not "series".--Bbb23 (talk) 12:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Editing

This page needs some serious editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.16.113.255 (talk) 05:57, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Primary topic?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was withdrawn. If it stayed longer, it would result "not moved". Fortunately, I will uncontroversially request making Roseanne (name) primary. --George Ho (talk) 03:05, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

---

Roseanne (TV series) → Roseanne – This proposed name is primarily associated with the television series. Also, Roseanne Barr does not apply, and there are no other topics associated with "Roseanne". --George Ho (talk) 06:24, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose Who is Roseanne Barr? What TV series? (reverted the Roseanne redirect back to Anthony Appleyard's edit to Roseanne (name) because seems a bit premature to do that before the RM) some of us are totally un ..no matter how popular this show was in USA, en.wikipedia users in the rest of the world won't think of the TV series and the girl's name did exist before. Still does. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose I question if the TV show really is the primary meaning as I am not sure if it ever became widely known outside the USA, there are other significant meanings, we should avoid systemic bias. PatGallacher (talk) 20:20, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose Systemic bias in my opinion is a plague on Wikipedia, it is one of my missions to stop it. This would constitute bias I believe. Would someone living in Belarus know Roseanne Barr, or a different Roseanne? Oakley77 (talk) 00:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose the comedian, Roseanne Barr is more likely to be known by the mononym than her TV show. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 05:46, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Although I find the nightmarish awfullness of this show almost too painful to recall, that is no reason to deny it WP:PRIMARYTOPIC status. The Google results Roseanne -wikipedia are all for this subject or for the actress. The actress doesn't need this lemma, so it should be used for this article. Roseanne (name) is currently primary, which doesn't make much sense. Kauffner (talk) 06:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose As a French user regularly using the en.WP to check for worldwide information and sometimes specific US-related information, I can tell you I don't known this TV series Roseanne. And I don't understand why the disambiguation page should be replaced by a particular occurrence i.e. this specific TV show. It only aired for 9 years through the 80's & 90's (might be considered longer that many more contemporary shows but probably quite common at that time) and only in the US, in Canada and Australia. Maxxyme (talk) 09:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

• As much as I hate to agree with the above "I never heard of it" arguments, I also Oppose this move, but mainly because Ms. Barr herself was, for a time, known only as "Roseanne" and thus is competitive for topic primacy. Powers ^T 02:37, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Roseanne. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.roseanneworld.com/blog/2009/12/reunion-show.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Matt Williams controversy

The article asserts that first-season showrunner Matt Williams opposed making the character of Nancy gay. However, this assertion -- which is not supported by the footnote -- makes no sense, because Williams departed the show in 1990, after the first season -- and Nancy didn't enter the show until 1991. There are dozens of websites that also make this claim, but they all seem to circle back to the Wikipedia article. So I've removed the claim.128.59.195.246 (talk) 18:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Roseanne (season 10)

Should some of the content here be forked over to Roseanne (season 10)? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:59, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

DJ Actor Addition to the Cast Section

I see that in the cast section there are the two actresses who played Becky. Should the actor who played DJ in the pilot episode be added to the table? Jeanlovecomputers (talk) 05:49, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Cast section: which <censored> is so infatuated with prose over tables?

See above. Seriously, who added that box? And why? How would prose be better in *PRESENTING* this *INFORMATION*? I call that the "prose is better" dogma. And as all WP dogmas, it's crap. --jae (talk) 02:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

That would be WP:TVCAST, which says "Generally, information about cast and characters should be presented in one of two ways:

• Cast list: In a section labeled "Cast" or "Cast and characters", indicate the name of the cast member and his or her noteworthy role(s), followed by a brief description of the character. Example: Fringe (TV series); see also Jonny Lee Miller example below
• Characters list: In a section labeled "Characters" or "List of characters", indicate noteworthy characters, including the name of their portrayer, followed by a brief description of the character. Example: Mutant X (TV series);"

Note that one of the two ways is not a table. Normally we only use cast tables in character articles, like List of Roseanne characters. There is no need to duplicate content in the characters article here, so all that is really needed is a brief, bulleted list of the main characters. On the subject of duplication, the table in the characters article and the table here are inconsistent with each other. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

A clarification

From what I've seen of TVLine and Deadline's coverage of the cancellation, it seems that there indeed anti-Semitic remarks during the same Twitter session that produced the comments about Jarrett. These comments were Soros-related and Chelsea Clinton-targeted, so do with them what you may, since general consensus seems to be that the Jarrett remarks were what pushed the executives to decide--Harmony944 (talk) 20:53, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/389766-donald-trump-jr-retweets-roseannes-conspiracy-theory-about

An update right after ABC had ended Roseanne Donald Trump Jr ran with Roseanne's Chelsea Clinton rants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:640:C600:8270:0:0:0:9425 (talk) 21:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

"Islamophobic"

The opening lead states that Roseanne's comment was "Islamophobic" of some sort, but the allegation is unsourced.

The tweet was awful, but I think we need better sources for such a strong accusation. It would arguably fall under racism anyway. GrHaQt (talk) 22:11, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Although, what about the "Islam is not a race" part? ViperSnake151  Talk  22:18, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Viper, Islam is a religion. Its like saying all christians are a race whenever someone tries to argue Islam is a race. 68.3.197.108 (talk) 13:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

If you are reading what we're saying, multiple people have already stated that Wikipedia shouldn't label it as Islamophobic in the opening paragraphs. Are you disputing anything in the *current version?* DapperAond (talk) 18:06, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

"Bias"

obvious bias in the article. "Soros was wanting to "[overthrow the] U.S. constitutional republic" by backing district attorney candidates that would "ignore US law & favor 'feelings' instead-and call everyone who is alarmed by that 'racist'", and falsely accusing Soros of being a Nazi during his youth" its true though if you actually research the guy... he really did help nazis as a kid, is a socialist known for influencing elections, and really does not like republics. Also, it is not needed, so removed. 68.3.197.108 (talk) 13:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

There's a problem with your statement: Soros was 9 years old at the time, wasn't a SS officer, and is personally Jewish. (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/george-soros-ss-nazi-germany/) DapperAond (talk) 14:06, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

There are also problems with your statement, @DapperAond, which is that Soros was 9 years old when the war started in 1939, but by 1945 was more than old enough -- not to be a Nazi or in the SS (the latter of which I have never heard) -- but certainly a profiteer and/or factotum. I am not sure why he has garnered this reputation, perhaps because of his anti-Israeli stances and his attempts at regime change in Israel (and elsewhere), and his general nature and his actions. Quis separabit? 02:51, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

This article is becoming an OR/SYNTHESIS magnet (see [18]). Note that Barr's Twitter comments (OK, rants), including those described above on this thread, come from information which is out there, which you come across on Facebook, Twitter, news media. This information comes from sources that many would immediately disregard as biased or unreliable (or worse) but are read and followed by many millions of people around the world, including the U.S. and this should be made clear in this article. Quis separabit? 02:51, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

NPOV

"However, she would later retweet posts defending her, as well as another concerning the conspiracy theory of Soros being a Nazi collaborator."

This last sentence is kinda leaning away from NPOV, no? You don't need to make a point of implying Roseanne's apology was insincere, and her retweet of a conspiracy theory involving Soros is completely irrelevant to the rest of the article. Valjeanlafitte (talk) 11:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)