Talk:Animaniacs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Featured article star Animaniacs is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.

Contents

[edit] Availability

Does anyone know if Animaniacs is being shown on any cable channels? drop me a line--

mikey@dragonhunters.net http://www.dragonhunters.net

Might try a TiVo search. Otherwise, no idea. - knoodelhed 06:10, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

coming soon on DVD I think - m410 3 May 04

NTOON..... has it 11:30 pm 9 am 9 pm. Woo hoo!

[edit] Wheel of Morality

I'd insert a note about the common ending with "Wheel of Morality", but I'm not sure where, the article doesn't seem to well organized to me... --Shallot 12:58, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Agree. Instead of a list of characters, should we have a list of segments instead? Both?
I was just looking over the article and considering something along the same lines. I think that there should be a section describing common segments, such as "Mime Time", "Wheel of Morality", as well as shorter gags, like the escape-from/return-to-water-tower "bumps", the changing last line of the theme song and the hidden jokes in the credits. -DynSkeet (talk) 12:29, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
Don't forget "Good Idea Bad Idea" 208.190.38.145 00:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that I wrote a whole bit to the Wheel of Morality a while ago, but it would appear that it has been deleated. Wild ste 14:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Band and songs

From Talk:Yakko, Wakko, and Dot:

Hey again. I have a question about the "band" you keep referring to, of which Yakko Wakko and Dot are members of. Is this from a particular episode or is a recurring element? I've also posted this on your talk page, please respond or these edits will have to be reverted like your other ones. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:10, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Please answer this before inserting material. Also, if not does merit inclusion, then all it merits is probably a brief reference (maybe one short sentence). It's not significant enough relative to the show to include a whole list of songs. If there's been a CD or something released, say so (and that's probably all that needs to be said). [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 17:28, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "indeterminate children"

Hmmm... I've never seen the cartoons, but I'm a bit doubtful that the characters are indeterminate children. The ears and noses in the logo look distinctly dog-like. Many animals share these characteristics, such as raccoons, bears, badgers and even some animated mice (although not real ones). But children? Hmmm.... Andrewa 16:24, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

They are most definately children (not necessarily human ones, obviously, but certainly the young of some species). And 'indeterminite' as good a word as any. There was, in fact, an entire song in which Dr. Scratchnsniff tried to learn what species they are. The song finally ends with the Warners claiming they're not any particular species, but simply "What we are, dear doctor, is cute!" MrItty 18:06, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The trio are indeterminate because they are inkblot characters. They are derived from a process like bulletism, but are refined to meet production or creative standards. Cartoonists have been doing this for quite a while because it adds greatly to the fantastic facet of cartooning.

[edit] Theme Songs

The article claims that the Hip Hippos and Pinky and the Brain had their own "full" theme songs. What qualifies as a full theme song? I seem to recall that almost every segment had a theme of some sort:

  • She's Katie Kaboom, Katie Kaboom, lives in a house with a garden in bloom. Her family knows that any time soon, their little lady Katie, goes Kaboom!
  • Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man, you're a chicken, Boo.
  • The crankiest of creatures in the whole-wide world, our next cartoon features Slappy the Squirrel!
  • Like Abbott and Costello, Like Sonny and Cher, Like Martin and Lewis, They're a perfect pair. Like Laurel and Hardy, Like Fontanne and Lunt, They're perfectly mismatched, They're Rita and Runt!
  • (etc)

MrItty 18:12, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Good point; i wonder if Pinky and the Brain get special treatment because their spin-off show had a theme song with multiple verses... but you're right, the distinction is slim. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:51, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)\

On the subject of theme songs, I have just made some edits to the presented lyrics of the Animaniacs main theme. If there is any dispute as to whether the changes I've made are correct, please note that I am using as reference the printed lyrics from the liner notes of the first Animaniacs album, which opens and closes with the theme song. -- -- Pennyforth 21:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I removed the song lyrics. Song lyrics are copyrighted by the music publishing company the composer(s) work for, and are not allowed to be posted in Wikipedia articles without the express permission of said company. You can quote (very) small passages for use in text which discusses meaning, significance, etc., but the lyrics cannot be reprinted here for their own sake without permission. --FuriousFreddy 21:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I restored the text concerning the altered lyrics for the theme song that accompanied the theme lyrics. On the same subject, wasn't there a third version of the line that started as "While Bill Clinton plays the sax" and then became "We pay tons of income tax"? I can't remember what the lyric was, but I believe it was set to a clip of the Warners dancing on a table from the episode "The Taming of the Screwy". If anyone remembers this lyric, please add it to the article. -- Pennyforth 20:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tiny Toons

Why does half of the intro to the animaniacs talks about Tiny Toons??? - Highwind

Because Tiny Toon Adventures was the precursor to Animaniacs; without the one, there never would have been the other. The introduction notes that after Tiny Toons, the animators used their experience to create brand-new characters instead of just "kiddie" versions of the classic Warner Bros. cartoon stars. --Modemac 12:34, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I get your point.. but i think it's too much.. can't we just say "Animaniacs was the second animated series produced by the collaboration of Steven Spielberg and Warner Bros. Animation during the animation renaissance of the 1990s. The modern Warner Bros. writers and animators used the experience gained from its first series, Tiny Toon Adventures, to create brand new animated characters that were cast in the mold of Tex Avery's creations." and put all that information on the Tiny Toons article? Also, "but were not slavish imitations" is this comment necessary?. Highwind 14:05, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Most Popular"

I've removed a reference calling Mighty Morpin' Power Rangers the "most popular" series of the 90s. This seems like wishful thinking to Rangers fans. If you want to make such a bold claim, you need to provide some kind of reference. -- MrItty 14:07, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Done -- Gak Blimby 07 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parodies

I grouped the existing bit about the "Power Rangers" in with the new one about "Rugrats" and added a short bit about "Barney". They all were based on kids' shows, so it seemed natural. If anyone wants to expand this section with a parody that wasn't based on a rival kids' show, it would be a welcome addition. -DynSkeet (talk) 12:32, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Animaniacs on DVD

The Animaniacs are comming to DVD in the summer of '06. At long last, one of the greatest animated shows of the'90s will be available in its entirety.

http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/newsitem.cfm?NewsID=4475


This is bogus! I found out that the animaniacs DVD is in a format only compatible with american DVD players. Is this true? Anyone know?

[edit] Appropriateness

Is it necessary to say that the duck theme for characters was done to Death in the last paragraph of the first section? I changed that. 71.250.51.234 19:32, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Tom Ruegger was quoted in a 1993 Animation Magazine saying that "ducks have been done to death". There's no reason why that shouldn't be in the article.

-Anniemaniac.

[edit] Detail on Popularity

At the end of the section, could someone describe what people did at these informal get togethers?71.250.51.234 19:32, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed this. I'll add a description, having been to a few. Jay Maynard 01:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV dispute tag

Is the NPOV of this article really in question? The demiurge 06:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Movie

I've seen an Animaniacs feature-length musical on the cartoon network, a couple of times, title something like "Yakko's Wish". It had story arcs for most of the characters from the show built in. Has anyone else seen this? --Measure 22:36, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

You're thinking of Wakko's Wish. It's mentioned. Jay Maynard 17:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Please Please Please Get a Life Foundation"

This is commonly misprinted as "Please Please Pleese", based on a title in the cartoon. This is incorrect. The official title, as recorded in WB TV Animation production materials, is "Please Please Please". I'm reluctant to change it without discussing it here, since it's probably been the subject of a prior edit war. Comments? Jay Maynard 18:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Where are the materials that it is in? If you can provide a copy or link, that pretty much destroys any argument against it. That said, I'm updating the copy until someone provides evidence that it should be spelled "Pleese". EVula 18:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
The primary evidence in favor of "pleese" comes from the cartoon itself, which intentionally misspells the title. At the very end, in fact, the fat Animaniacs fanboy (which is why we like this episode! Narf!) pops up and points it out, saying, "Notice how they misspelled this with two E's? I think that was INTENTIONAL!" :) --Modemac 18:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
That's a very intentionally layered joke. There's also an error in the material it quotes from the alt.tv.animaniacs FAQ (actually, the Cultural Reference Guide to Animaniacs), and when I pointed it out to Hastings (I was at the gathering at WB TV Animation in 1995), Hastings all but said that was intentional. I'll dig up the source materials to settle it once and for all. Jay Maynard 18:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I can't lay hands on any of the links I used to have pointing to this. I will note, however, that the references in the links section all say "Please". I've got some indirect contact with Hastings and Ruegger; I'll try to get a final answer from one of them. Jay Maynard 18:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't realize there was discussion on this when I did a driveby correction. All I can really add to the discussion is that this is definitive proof that the cartoon has not, despite everything, had any effect at all. --Darksasami 17:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Jay, if you're going to jealously guard it that way, and knowing you, you are, at least change the misleading comment. I took the comment to mean "Keep it saying 'Pleese'" and inferred that someone had edited it anyway. If you replace it with a "There is discussion on the Talk page," that'll help prevent things like this from happening.--Darksasami 17:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Done. I agree that a comment is needed there to direct editors here; I thought I'd done that, but evidently I hadn't. Jay Maynard 17:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fact?

>>Tiny Toon Adventures had drawn heavily from the classic Termite Terrace cartoons of old for inspiration, as well as plots and characterization.

Is that a fact that is cited somewhere? I would put a fact tag on it, but I don't know enough about this stuff to know if that's a generally accepted fact... otherwise, I'd add a fact tag to it.

Similarly, the entire Bosco reference and origin story is uncited, which would be nice to confirm at least any portion of the story... TheHYPO 23:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External link warning

Hello there. There are just too many external links in the article. If some are being used as references, please create a References section and move the references there. This will be both useful as to easily catch spam, and to know which links were used to build the article. Finally, if possible use inline citations, so that it is possible to know where each reference was used. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 12:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disney References

I've been hoping to see some in depth looks at the disney references on this page...is there a reason none of them are on here? Or did I miss them somewhere. Some of them are quite entertaining, direct (and numerous!) references to disney cartoon shows and movies. Even some nods (Slappy saying Huey Duey and Luey!) etc. Sorry, I know this isn't professionally written. Was wondering if there's a reason?

[edit] What does this mean?

From Animaniacs#Animaniacs on DVD:

If this pattern continues, volume 3 will contain the next 25 episodes, which will include the final 15 episodes of the first season, all four episodes of the second season, and the first six episodes of the third season.

Uh, so the first season had 65 episodes, the second season had 4 episodes, and the third season had 7 or more episodes? Huh? EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes - the number of eps in the latter seasons are widely varied (due to the transition from Fox to WB networks). Thus, instead of doing season sets, they are doing 25 eps a box, and effectively ignoring the season 'boundaries'. -Masem 00:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
As such, it should be noted that these are "Volumes" not "Seasons"; i.e.v1, v2, etc. -- which all really stinks because I have to get Vol. 2 just for the "Hot, Bothered, and Bedeviled" (Ep. #30). OH, the horror!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.190.73.68 (talk) 00:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Episode list really necessary (or move to own page)?

That episode list isn't really anything new for wikipedia (plenty of the external links have that information), but since other TV shows have such lists, I recommend that if that list is to be kept, it be moved to "List of Animaniacs Episodes" to be consistent with other TV shows.

Also, I don't think every episode should be wikilinked. the TV show WikiProject says that only notable episodes should get a wikipage of themselves, and given that we have the various episode guides already in the external links, it would be prudent to not imply a wikipage to prevent kruft. --Masem 17:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Move it to its own page. If we don't, someone else will either do so or else delete it entirely. -- Jay Maynard 18:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Done, though the tables could be formated better to meet the preferred episode list structure --Masem 18:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Old English

12-May-05
Shakespeare wrote in Modern English, so the line about Dot mistranslating his plays is inaccurate. 67.189.176.55 03:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)John P.

Um, no, it's not. They did two "translations" of Shakespeare in the show, if memory serves. One had Yakko reading Puck's soliloquy from A Midsummer Night's Dream with Dot providing interpretation; the other had Dot, Slappy, and Hello Nurse doing the Witches' incantation from Hamlet, with Yakko providing interpretation. Rdfox 76 04:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

-I'm guessing that you mean Macbeth there, chief—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Yes, I did. Thanks for correcting me, even though everyone else knew what I meant. Rdfox 76 23:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

There were THREE Shakespeare segments in the show's run. Puck's soliloquy from A Midsummer Night's Dream, the Witches' incantation from Macbeth, and "A Scene from William Shakespeare's Hamlet" entitled "Alas Poor Skullhead." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.138.99.129 (talk) 19:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image to be replaced

The Animaniacs image in the infobox, Image:Animaniacs.jpg, has neither a fair use rationale nor a source. The image therefore violates Wikipedia's image policy and must be deleted or replaced. I can upload a new image, with a proper source, tag, and fair use rationale, but I want to make sure it's OK with everyone first. Bear in mind that with a proper image, Animaniacs is one step closer to good article status. Thanks, -- Gak Blimby 07 June 2007 (UTC)

Uh, why not just write a Fair Use rationale for the image we do have? Much easier than having it deleted and then uploading a new one. EVula // talk // ☯ // 03:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Because the image has no source, and the wikipedia image policy is that on the image description page "should be documented the source, author, and copyright status of the image." I contacted Modemac, the one who placed the image, for a source, but I recieved no response. So, because the image has no source nor can one be attained, we must replace the image.-- Gak Blimby 08 June 2007 (UTC)
The key word there is "should", it's not "must". I think it's very obvious that the image at some point originated from Warner Bros., and very likely copyright (and trademark) them, but where it was actually pulled from is unknown. So I'd fill in whatever details that you can, saying "unknown" for the rest, and provide the fair use rational. As EVula said, no point in pulling this down and putting up another. --Masem 17:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Not true, this project page says that editors must "Always state the source of the image". Do you think it's OK if we write the source as unknown? I'm not sure if they'll let it pass the good article review.-- Gak Blimby 08 June 2007 (UTC)
Given that the original author that put it there did not cite the source (that would have been his requirement), the best we can state is "unknown". I would make sure to have a backup picture to put up if that fails a test, but otherwise, I'd not change it until we're forced to. --Masem 03:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'll get started on the fair use rationale for the current image.-- Gak Blimby 09 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Animaniacs for Wikipedia's Good Article Review

I believe that the Animaniacs article is now ready to undergo the process for Wikipedia's Good Article Nomination. Everything seems to be cited, everything looks well organized, and the article seems to measure up to Wikipedia's Good Article criteria. Because I don't want to rush into this, if you have any concerns about the article's quality, please write it below, and we'll try to work things out. (Bear in mind that editors that contribute heavilly to the article may not review the article in question.) Thanks very much, Gak Blimby 01:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Because there have been no objections, I'm going to nominate the article. Gak Blimby 00:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evaluation for GA

Animaniacs
SCORES IN KEY AREAS
Legality A A A A
Neutrality A A A A
Writing A A A A
Sources A A A A
Citations A A A A
01:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


All the pictures are good. The article is neutral, professional, and is clearly written. There are enough sources, as well as minor paragraphs which are lacking citations. Overall this is a good article, and will probably be passed.◙◙◙ I M Kmarinas86 U O 2¢ ◙◙◙ 01:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Animaniacs passed. Congratulations!◙◙◙ I M Kmarinas86 U O 2¢ ◙◙◙ 00:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Animaniacs for Wikipedia's Featured Article Candidacy

I think the Animaniacs article is almost ready to undergo the process for Wikipedia's Featured Article Nomination. Everything seems to be cited, everything looks well organized, and the article seems to measure up to Wikipedia's Featured Article criteria. Because I don't want to rush into this, if you have any concerns about the article's quality, please write it below, and we'll try to work things out. In the meantime, I'm putting the article up for peer review. Thanks very much, Gak Blimby 19:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The first thing I'm going to fix is the very long table of contents by merging the info from 'Media information' to 'History' because it's mostly the same information written twice. Gak Blimby 04:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC) Y Done
Alright, there have been no objections, so I'm going to nominate the article. 18:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gak Blimby (talk • contribs)
Everyone, Animaniacs was just promoted to featured status! Congratulations to everyone who contributed to the article! Gak Blimby (talk) 19:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)