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
the article attached to this page, help out with the
open tasks, or contribute to the
discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
pornography-related topics 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.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Park, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to South Park 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.South ParkWikipedia:WikiProject South ParkTemplate:WikiProject South ParkSouth Park articles
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 articles
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.
i just KNOW someone is going to come in and say "YOU CANT HAVE A TRIVIA SECTION" and delete it.....anyone else think these people should stay out of here? the whole show is based on trivia.
Whitey138 (
talk)
02:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Normally I would add {{Trivia}} right away, but Whitey is right. SP really is based on a lot of trivia. I actually think we should find a "special" type of trivia section that would be used in all SP articles, but not just a list. More prose.
diego_pmc (
talk)
07:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I want a trivia section. That's what I find most interesting about the whole article. I don't care if Wikipedia guidelines discourages it, I -- and many others -- want one!--
Eikern (
talk)
16:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Who the hell wants to read a whole block of text just to find the one reference they were wondering about? The plot should be just be a vague outline anyway. Adding trivia to it just makes for a large block of text containing badly formed sentences as people try to jam the trivia in. Really this whole thing is just the resule of the ongoing battle between WP inclusionists and exclusionists. See this slashdot article:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/10/0057210 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.74.194.6 (
talk)
22:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
You are all free to post trivia on IMDB! They will not censor your ability to note that the "Internet Refugee Camp" looks eerily similar to a
Japanese American internment camp from
World War II or that one of the news anchors "was probably" modeled after some local news man from your area or that Randy breaking the TV store's windows was a reference to the LA Riots! Fight on for your right and complain on a talk page that has nothing to do with Wikipedia Policy!
Strongsauce (
talk)
11:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
wikipedia sucks so much with their guidelines! sentences being deleted, sections being deleted, pages being deleted! JUST cuz is doesnt meet guide lines! Wow! What is this? The NHL! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
208.96.85.49 (
talk)
16:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I agree. It's a credit to the show that it references so many things. I think a References section is very helpful. They're separate from the plot, and it's not useful to anyone to have references integrated into the plot description.
Blakecarlile (
talk)
21:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Can we just add a "Cultural References" section, like they have for many, many other shows? The different name should appease people who complain about having a "Trivia" section. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Elfer (
talk •
contribs)
16:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Well all this here outlines pretty well why Wikipedia sucks - The real interesting background information doesn't meet some absolutely not fitting and pretty stupid "guidelines" and only the plot (which we probably just saw ourselves and which brought up the questions whe hoped to find an answer for here) may stay. This is ridiculous.
213.39.210.154 (
talk)
01:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah, to double check on the plot, seek external references, cast, cites to other news sources that discuss the episode. Not everyone reading one of these articles has just seen the show remember.
Alastairward (
talk)
11:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Professor Chaos - stop deleting well-written information from South Park pages
You just deleted a LOT of good information and cultural references. It was relevant and does not fall under the wikipedia specifications of random and irrelevant lists. The Cultural References section was particularly well done. Please put this information back and do not delete information based solely on your own notion of what does not belong on wikipedia.
Efeinberg (
talk)
07:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I typically delete the section hoping that when it comes right back there's less crap in it. Then I work it into the plot synopsis where it belongs. Trivia sections are to be avoided.
Professor Chaos (
talk)
07:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Just a quick note: I just went back to work in the trivia, and it was all there in the article already! The entire trivia and cultural reference sections, the parts that weren't irrelevant, were redundant. So they're gone again.
Professor Chaos (
talk)
07:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
While some of it should be restored, the eight days comment shouldn't be. If "eight days without internet" means that Monday is the eighth day without it, then there's no goof. I therefore think the comment made about eight days is an error.
129.67.53.232 (
talk)
08:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Consensus seems that the South Park articles should have a cultural reference section. it seems to me that lots of people don't find it useful to integrate those references into the article. Dear, DEAR Professor Chaos, Wikipedia is NOT yours. Let's not start an edit war shall we? let's see if the consensus is to integrate the references into the plot or to leave 'em in their own section. Stop bossing people around saying "what is written is crap, i'll make a better article, so shut up". Thanks.
Sickboy3883 (
talk)
19:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Looking back i agree the section was absolutely not well written. That doesn't mean you have to delete it, however. You could easily write it in a better way, if you're so good at it. I would do it but English is not my first language and they would end up to be maybe worst than the one we already had. Well, before you deleted it all out.
Sickboy3883 (
talk)
19:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Close Encounter of the Third Kind
Communicating with it digitally was a direct spoof of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. The paragraph should be reworded to mention this. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
129.21.114.210 (
talk)
08:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
An Allusion to the status of Gasoline
Wasnt this episode sort of like an allusion to how people would react if they was not Gas left or something. Thats what I thought it was.
Rio de oro (
talk)
12:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Well I thought it was. Kept saying "not enough to go around", and also in the end "over using". I thought it was refering to how the USA is a large cousmer of OIL(Gasoline Usage). I thought that what it was refering. I thought this episode was just a illusion to the current situation the
United States has with oil consumption. --
Rio de oro (
talk)
22:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Or (IMHO) about Energy Consumption [tm] -- not oil specifically, but our dependency on electrical/electronic gadgetry to do pretty much ANYTHING nowadays, including having fun (and finding out the weather -- guilty!)
199.214.26.9 (
talk)
00:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Bahir... Amir. The ending seems kind of close to the same. I think it was an illusion to Bahir. Also that guy look he was Arab. --
Rio de oro (
talk)
22:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Not EVERYTHING that seems vaguely similar is an allusion. Other than that they are both (seemingly) Muslim, the two characters have nothing in common, so there's really nothing to indicate that there is an allusion. -
76.16.71.212 (
talk)
05:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Isn't this entire episode a reference to that country recently that was left without internet for like 3 days. I forget whether it was Japan or China, maybe even part of Russia.
Jay794 (
talk)
13:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I remember hearing about the entire continent of
Asia being without internet for a little bit recently. I don't remember the exact details, even though it was just a month or two ago.
76.105.205.97 (
talk)
07:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Yeah, maybe we should mention something about that in the article? cos even if it isn't based on that it is the same.
Jay794 (
talk)
13:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Of course you can't, unless there's a statement from someone in an official capacity at South Park Studios or Comedy Central, who says that that is the basis.
Professor Chaos (
talk)
01:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)reply
The reason for that stipulation for the internet outage is because it's so ambiguous. Is it a direct parody of Asia's outage? Is it a deeper allegory for overuse of resources? If so, is it specifically oil or another resource? Or is it a parody of something else altogether? It's not like Major Boobage, which was no doubt parodying Heavy Metal. In that case, a link to
Heavy Metal is sufficient; in this case it would take Matt or Trey answering a question or something to definitely state what the influence was in this case. There may not have been an influence for the internet plotline, maybe it was an original idea.
Professor Chaos (
talk)
01:27, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
So you're saying that Major Boobage does not need citations for Heavy Metal because it is no doubt parodying? In that case, this page should be able to refer to Grapes of Wrath, which it is no doubt parodying. Dialogue copied, stuff lashed unto the car, side characters with identical clothing in transient camps... Note that I am not talking about what type of shortage there is, I am talking about how the shortage is handled, portrayed and responded to by characters.
Stijndon (
talk)
14:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)reply
Does anyone know that the episode is a reference to "The Grapes of Wrath"?
Jericho
The opening to the episode with the whole town standing around realizing no one has internet anywhere is without-a-doubt a reference to Jericho. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
130.127.140.203 (
talk)
01:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I have deleted the mention that Randy getting slimed with ectoplasm is a reference to Ghostbusters. Ectoplasm pre-dates Ghostbusters by some time, and I fail to see a connection. Perhaps put it back if you can find a reference?
DanTheShrew (
talk)
12:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
You were right to remove the statement. My opinion is that it probably is a reference to Ghostbusters, but it's not noteworthy and only belongs here with a reference.
Professor Chaos (
talk)
18:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)reply
There was an edit for Brazilian fart porn being a spoof on 2girls1cup. This is not correct. Brazilian Fart Porn is a site where you see videos of girls smelling each others farts... DON'T CHANGE IT BACK! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
80.221.40.27 (
talk)
09:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)reply
If you ask me, I think the whole "Japanese Girls Puking in Each Other's Mouths" thing is more of a spoof on 2girls1cup.
~
Samrikku (
talk) 04:41pm, 18 September 2008
I came in here to see what movie/or event the ending in this episode spoofed. This appearently was removed in an edit, so I had to check the history to get the reference. Who is to blame for this? I want the references.--
Eikern (
talk)
15:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)reply
Yeah, all the stuff that you actually want to read gets cut away. We cannot interpret references. The only interpretation that is allowed is his.
Stijndon (
talk)
14:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)reply
Wrong; the only interpretation allowed is one allowed by Wikipedia policy. To echo Eikern's words (although I'm sure he meant this differently), "I want the references": the references that prove any so-called 'spoofs'. ≈
The Haunted Angel14:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)reply
The Router
The article currently says:
"a gigantic
Linksys-like wireless router that has stopped functioning for an unknown reason."
However, the episode is solved by Kyle plugging the router back in. The cord is seen in the episode as coming from behind the router, which makes this presumably a wired router.
98.221.236.202 (
talk)
05:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)reply
"Added references. Quoting the FAQ: "If you type in 'parody' in the search bar, you may be pleasantly surprised as well." If you wish to challenge - don't remove, discuss"
This edit summary is not terribly
civil. Remembering the
burden of proof on the editor adding the material, you should really discuss the addition first if you think it controversial.
I am challenging, reverting and discussing. The video tags have been quoted as not being linked to the Southparkstudios.com FAQ, they are there to aid searches if anything.
Alastairward (
talk)
22:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Still open for discussion.
These episode pages used to be an interesting source for finding out cultural references made in South Park and some of the thinking that went into the episodes. Now they're just enormous plot summaries. I believe I'm making a valid point when I say this can't possibly be the intended structure of Wikipedia, a plot summary that's too long to read and NOTHING else? It seems that certain obsessive editors (I've seen the name 'Alastairward' like a million times) are patrolling them and destroying anything that doesn't fit their personal view of what Wiki 'should' be. I'm only a casual user/ editor, but this kind of militaristic approach annoys me. To me, this kind of editing is as bad as vandalism. It annoys just as many people, and takes the fun out a series that is supposed to be about just that, fun. Perhaps we should move for a variety of editors on these pages, people who know the rules of Wikipedia well but don't put their enforcing over other people's interest and enjoyment of the show. Let me know what you think before this post is removed as well, or I get a condescending citation of 'the rules' with a link Wiki:how to or something, or get told to use the sandbox... I think this is a constructive post for freedom of speech.
Joncheetham88 (
talk)
01:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)reply
Also go get cites for the notion that the "internet machine" would be a router. That's completely unsourced and should stay out of the article to avoid confusion. Either cite it or leave it out.
Stijndon (
talk)
09:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)reply
I couldn't find your cites or references, so in the meantime I put the article in safe-mode by scrubbing the blatant original research. There should only be cold hard facts, not opinions of private editors.
Stijndon (
talk)
07:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)reply
In the morning they discover that there is no internet, Shelley and Kyle state they need to get online before school. Yet, 8 days later it is Monday.
173.73.76.113 (
talk)
15:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)reply