Talk:Peanut Butter Jelly Time
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Web Animation WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Web Animation. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
Contents |
[edit] Suggestion:Animate the image
Perhaps someone could go ahead and change the image of the bannana so it is dancing?
[edit] Suggestion: Meaning
How about what it means? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.136.235.62 (talk • contribs) 00:01, November 27, 2005 (UTC).
isnt it obvious? it means ITS PEANUT BUTTER JELLY TIME!
[edit] Comedy website?
I changed it a bit; the old writer referred to Newgrounds as simply a "comedy website" when that isn't really what it's about at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.250.215.252 (talk • contribs) 02:44, December 6, 2005 (UTC).
[edit] resolved?
funny
can someone clarify this comment, or provide a link to the exact momemnt it was resolved if it was in fact resolved within that thread. SA is full of whiney douchebags as much as any other forum, and I couldn't find a damned helpful comment in the first three pages, just lots of yelling, trolling, and armchair lawyers
"The controversy had been resolved as of December 2005"
- Last post of the 11th page, but he doesn't seem to have recieved the "goodies" yet? Oh well, it's close enough to resolved.
- I see what you mean about their forums, my eyes are sore just from wading through twoish pages of the thread (backwards from page 13). --AySz88^-^ 22:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- I can't even find the thread - the page referred to seems to be subscriber-only.
[edit] Suggestion: Grammar & Spelling
Moving past the fact that there is an entry for "Peanut Butter Jelly Time," if we're going to post about it, the least we could do is use correct grammar and spelling. Because even "Peanut Butter Jelly Time" deserves so much. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.223.59.66 (talk • contribs) 18:08, January 31, 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Suggestion: Editorializing
I agree with the comment about correct grammar and spelling. I would like to add a reminder to preserve a neutral point of view. While you may not like Kevin Federline or his new single, your opinion does not belong in an encyclopedia entry. Especially since some of us happen to think he's really cute. And just because you think the Peanut Butter Jelly Time animation is funny doens't mean it is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.167.10.254 (talk • contribs) 18:14, January 31, 2006 (UTC).
- By the way, it might be better to leave these messages on the specific offending users' talk pages. It's a confusing to other editors if you're addressing one person in particular. In this case, if you look at the article's history (article tab, then history tab), the contributor of the biased material was User:147.10.236.156. You can click on that IP address and then the "Talk" link, and there you can leave a message just for that person.
- Especially with spelling or grammar mistakes, please be bold and fix the problems! Thanks. --AySz88^-^ 00:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Internet controversy"
Although it probably isn't relevant as an "Internet controversy" (more like a "small dispute", I guess?), I think the dispute by the creators of the flash is probably notable enough to be noted in the article. --AySz88^-^ 04:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC) But it wasn't even a dispute, he just claimed on the forum's he would have liked some freebies and wish they'd have asked him if it was "ok" (like comedy shows have some kind of responsibility to tell everybody they make fun of they're making fun of them!). There was never a question of taking it to a court or anything. And it was on an internet forum, not an official statement or anything. I see no need to put it in the article.--Mackan 08:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not a meme
I'm not sure why this was described as a "meme." It clearly is not. It doesn't pass on any sort of tradition from one generation to another through imitation.
Response to above: The popular meaning of meme has become synonymous with "internet fad" or "internet trend." The word is overused here and elsewhere on Wikipedia and often replaces words that would help people to understand the subject being described more accurately. I disagree that this is not a meme; I think this internet fad is a meme. However, calling it a meme is like pointing out that it is an idea. If we preceded every article with, "The following is an idea," there would be no hesitation by the community to edit the redundancy out. But if someone says, "the X meme is related to the Y meme" rather than "X is related to Y" then everyone is mezmerized by this ambiguous new word and leaves the redundancy there to obfuscate the article.
Because of meme's lack of use by experts and scientists, and its prominent use to describe internet fads, I am betting that in a few years we will see the generally understood meaning of the word by most people to mean fad or trend, with a few people here and there trying to educate everyone on its "real" meaning to no avail, whatever that meaning is. Thus, the new theory of information and cultural units which I think many want memes to become will never be realized or crtiqued unless we stop the general use of meme as a replacement for otherwise descriptive words which pertain to the subjects being discussed. Serialized 21:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Meaning and origin of lyrics
No dan't listen to this the song is really funny Are the song's lyrics made for the song only? I could imagine it is sampled from a commercial or something similar. By the way, what does it mean to do the peanut butter jelly with a baseball bat? --Abdull 19:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
The lyrics are not sampled and they don't mean anything in particular. They're just calling out dance moves.
[edit] Info about the song
I was wondering why all the information about the song's formal qualities and place in black Florida were removed. Without it, this entry is very one-sided.
By having the entry be entirely about some internet trend and mentioning the song only as a minor footnote, we completely trivialize the creation of a great song that is broadly enjoyed outside of the context of cynical internet humour.
By completely removing perfectly good information, rather than moving it or otherwise improving it, one would be acting in a manner completely backwards to the entire Wikipedia philosophy.
[edit] comment
this song is simply die laughing funny. my four-year-old sister likes it, my parents love it, and even the numanuma song wasn't as popular as this for a while!Fyboy flyguy waterver he is a retard
[edit] Lyrics
Do we really need to put them in? It just seems every day people vandilise them or the article. Immature vandilists. Cocopopz2005 04:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Links to Versions
I added the links back to the external sites with the different versions of the animation. They did not have a talk article or a reason listed for removal.-Bryan 70.149.247.38 00:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] dancing banana
Does this dancing banana predate this animation or is this the origin of the dancing bananer
[edit] metal
can i put this in the article?24.144.137.244 21:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKlbvqIGMnM<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mKlbvqIGMnM"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mKlbvqIGMnM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
Sorry, there are tons of parodies on PBJT. It wouldn't be appropriate to put one on there without putting the rest on, and putting all on Wikipedia would be impractical.--LocrialTheSequel 00:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
Peanut Butter Jelly Time and Dancing Banana are so similar, there is no good reason that they shouldn't be in a single page. They use the same images, links, and much of the same information. Generally speaking, one does not reference one without referencing the other. I'm not 100% sure which one should house the merged article, but my vote would go to Peanut Butter Jelly Time. Any thoughts? -Platypus Man | Talk 15:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Which one was first, the emoticon or the flash animation? I think it was the banana. In any case, I think the scope of the Dancing Banana article is broader than the one of the Peanut Butter Jelly Time article (which deals with just one instance of the famous emoticon, and probably not its first instance), so I think the merge, if done, should go into Dancing Banana. 213.37.6.65 02:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- It seems that PBJT was based off of the Banana Man emoticon. Unless anyone objects, I'll be merging this article into Banana Man sometime soon. -Platypus Man | Talk 20:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I think that he two should Be merged. Their about as similar to each other as God and Jesus
God and Jesus arent the same, but are closely related, so are these subjects. Don't merge!
194.151.209.116 13:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Cerberi13:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Why exactly do you want this merged with the Banana instead of the other way around? Isn't this more notable and popular? The "Google Test" shows three times the results for this compared to the Banana. Nemu 10:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- My thoughts were that the Dancing Banana article has more scope. The Dancing Banana is in PBJT. Whenever PBJT appears, Dancing Banana appears. It is possible for the Dancing Banana to exist without PBJT, but not the other way around. However, it's not set in stone, so we could still do it either way. -Platypus Man | Talk 11:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
