Talk:Funday PawPet Show

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Funday PawPet Show is within the scope of WikiProject Furry, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to furry fandom. For more information, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Articles for deletion
This page was previously nominated for deletion. Please see prior discussion(s) before considering re-nomination:

Contents

[edit] Laundry list cleanup

The list of characters is rather lengthy. Perhaps it should be truncated to incldue only the core characters, shortening the list to 10 or less. The entries on the resulting list should be wikilinked to their respective WikiFur page.

Furthermore, the retired and irregular character lists should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.242.19 (talk • contribs)

[edit] External links

I've removed the personal livejournal links per WP:EL. While I should not have removed the "offical" livejouranl of the Show (even if I still think it's iffy) the others are the journals of people involved in the Show. Since the article is about the show itself and these accounts can be accesed from the central live journal show anyway they are superfluous and inappropriate. NeoFreak 02:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Try some reading comprehension. WP:EL says those links "should" not be used. WP:SPS says "Self-published material, whether published online or as a book or pamphlet, may be used as a primary source of information about the author or the material itself, so long as there is no reasonable doubt who wrote the material". The links are valid primary sources. Nardman1 03:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
On the question of wether or not having related people's personal livejournal's linked is appropriate please see the clause Self-published material may be used as a primary source of information about the author or the material itself, so long as there is no reasonable doubt who wrote the material, and so long as it is: about the subject only and not about third parties or events not directly related to the subject in WP:SPS. This is not a biographical article about Todd and who ever. It's an article about the "Funday PawPet Show". NeoFreak 03:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
    • The concern in WP:SPS is about people pushing POV material they write about third parties. That's hardly the case here where the show's creators write about their creations. Nardman1 03:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Is this a biographical article called Tod and Poink? No. Since this is not an article about Tod and Poink they are third parties and their personal live journal pages are self-promotion and inappropriate. NeoFreak 03:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
You do realize Tod and Poink are fictional characters, right? Nardman1 03:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Nope. I do realize that I'm an idiot though. While it's still excessive and they both still link off of the main journal I'm so morified that I'm going to just leave this alone now. NeoFreak 03:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wow

This is really badly sourced, and that makes me sad. Imma gonna try to do somethin' about that-K@ngiemeep! 05:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for pointing out the unsourced stuff, that gives us a good to-do list to work with. I'm afraid that some of this stuff will have be sourced by referring to specific episode numbers, which will be a pain to do. The recurring show activities can be found in nearly every episode, including the current one. (With the exception of the match game, which doesn't happen very often nowadays.) More information might be found in blackfoot's timelines or on usenet.

Googling hasn't turned up a source for "the 'Net's first and only regularly scheduled four hour puppet show". This phrase seems to be a relic from the very first version of this article. [1] I myself can't think of an earlier example of an internet puppet show, but just the same, Wikipedia frowns on statements that can't be backed up. JohnWallaby 17:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I think that quote is quite a good one, but it lacks a source :(. I'd encourage numerous sources to be found, as writing an article that is derived from one source is generally frowned upon. But the recurring themes and activities etc. could very well be sourced from one source (even a primary source would be cool). I'm hoping to get some time off from IRL, which I'll spend finding some third party sources for this article-K@ngiemeep! 11:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Memorable Shows

Hmm, this is a problem section. Is it possible to get a description of these shows from, say, the show's website? Some of these are really unencyclopedic, with lines like "you either love it or hate it" sneaking into a number of the show descriptions. Sounds a little too ORy to me. Any thoughts?-K@ngiemeep! 06:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Weak sources?

We don't really have many sources here that are cast-iron third-party verifiable. The Orlando Sentinel one is fine, though it would be even better if it weren't on the PawPet website. And the ones that refer to specific parts of the show that can be easily verified (eg the Art Jam requests) are okay too. But the rest still seems to be teetering on the edge of blog/fansite material. Yes, as mentioned above, self-published material is okay, but I don't think it looks good — especially from the point of view of assessing notability — when the sources are overwhelmingly self-published material. Oh, and this quote — "the 'Net's first and only regularly scheduled four hour puppet show" — really cannot stay indefinitely, even tagged as needing citation, if no source can be found for it. It's remained there a while now, probably too long. Loganberry (Talk) 01:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)