Talk:The Computer Wore Menace Shoes
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Computer Wore Menace Shoes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The Computer Wore Menace Shoes has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Untitled
editThe site (Mr. X's site) is obviously a blog. --Coldplayer 01:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Removed trivia comment that describing Denver as a state was an error left in. The quote on the website 'something rotten in the state of Denver' is a play on Shakespeare's Hamlet. Denver is replaced by Denmark in the original.137.138.46.155 12:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
This episode sucked. Is there any way we can work that into the article?
- This episode is better than your entire life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.229.109.65 (talk) 09:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- No, we can't work that into the article. That would be a violation of the neutral point of view rule. --The guy with the axe - aaaaaaargh!!! (talk) 20:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree anyway, it is one of my favourite episodes. --Ricardio Sentulio (talk) 20:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
- "Shut up! that's why!"69.224.222.195 (talk) 06:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Mr. X
editThe Residents have a concept album, called God in Three Persons, featuring the main character "Mr. X." Considering Matt Groening is a fan of The Residents, can it be assumed that this is a reference? --72.140.35.70 (talk) 21:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know. Can't think of much offhand, but using "Mr. X" as a pseudonym probably goes back way further than 1988. --SpyHunter29 (talk) 00:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Dancing Jesus
editI believe the Dancing Jesus image that Homer loads onto his original web page is a parody of the Dancing Baby popularized in the mid-late 1990s. Benjamin Robinson, whoever he is, seems to agree as well. --SpyHunter29 (talk) 00:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
The Prisoner pardoy
editShould it be "praising the The Prisoner parody" instead of "praising The Prisoner parody"? I don't know if there is a Wikipedia style rule about this, but the way it is right now makes it sound like critics were praising all instances of parody of The Prisoner no matter where, not just the specific parody in this episode of The Simpsons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.9.7 (talk) 21:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
- How's this look? "The episode received positive reviews from critics with most praising the parody of The Prisoner." CTJF83 21:44, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:The Computer Wore Menace Shoes/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Puffin Let's talk! 15:11, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
| Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Well-written: | ||
|
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | No problems. |
|
|
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ! |
| 2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
|
|
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ! |
|
|
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ! |
|
|
2c. it contains no original research. | ! |
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
|
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Yes. |
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Yes. |
|
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Yes. |
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
|
|
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | There is one image. Could there possible be more? If you don't have time, don't worry, it's not necessary. |
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Yes! |
|
|
7. Overall assessment. | Amazing article. I also love this episode!! |
HOLD Issues outlined need to be addressed before the article is accepted.
- I removed the word "strange". As for the other Plot issues:
- Plot summaries do not normally require citations; the television show itself is the source, as the accuracy of the plot description can be verified by watching the episode in question. An exception to this rule may be shows containing plot details that are unclear or open to interpretation, in which case the different interpretations should be sourced to reliable sources. (from WP:TVPLOT)
- Thanks for the review! :) Queenieacoustic (talk) 10:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Trivia
editRemoved the following:
--cut here--
Because the couch gag was accidentally commissioned without his approval, the animators had to apologize to showrunner Scully, however he was pleased with it and ordered the animators to "go with it".[1] At one point in the episode, Homer wins a Pulitzer Prize for his achievements in journalism. According to Kirkland, none of the animators knew what the prize looked like and had to do some research in order to make it accurate.[1]
--end--
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 06:50, 15 April 2017 (UTC).
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Computer Wore Menace Shoes. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111103131117/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/simpsons12.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/simpsons12.php
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) 21:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)