Talk:Mister Rogers' Neighborhood

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Television Portal

This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Assessment comments

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mister Rogers' Neighborhood article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Is the trolley a character? Mr. Rogers talks to it, and it tinkles back at him... --Uncle Ed

I think tinkling is qualification enough for trolley to be a character. Plus, trolley's magical. :) Atorpen

The Fred Rogers article contains a section on this show. Should it be moved here? -- Kimiko 14:30, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Definitely, especially considering that his biography article has more information about the show than the article about the show itself. The current article about the program doesn't do nearly enough justice to the show that influenced more children's lives (mine included) than any other. :) Kakashi-sensei 05:03, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

"The series was divided into two halves. The first half aired from 1968 to 1976 (pre-79). The second half aired from 1979 to 2002 (modern series). Episodes of the first half are no longer shown on television."

What about 76-79? or should it read 1968-79 03:49, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment by Jcr13 17:39, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I am working on expanding this article a bit. I talked to FCI on the phone today. Here is an email that I am about to send them:

First, you can take a look at the current article here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mister_Rogers%27_Neighborhood

In my opinion, the article is still a bit lean (only one picture... only five sections). The largest section is currently "Mister Rogers in popular culture," which simply lists pop culture references to the show.

I recently expanded the "About the Show" section quite a bit. I would like to add a new section called "Show Topics" that would focus on the types of issues that Mister Rogers discussed. One amazing thing about the show was that it dealt with "difficult" topics (issues that other childrens' programming avoided). I am aware, from other articles about the show, that the topics included divorce, death, and war. I also recall, from my personal exposure to the show, that Mister Rogers talked quite a bit about anger and how to deal with it in peaceful ways (such as pounding clay).

In the "Show Topics" section, I plan to give a general list of topics discussed and then give more detailed descriptions of particualarly interesting episodes as highlights.

So far, I am interested in writing a summary of the "Conflict" series (1983, season 14, episodes 651 through 655). All that I know about this series now is that there is some kind of "arms race" in Make-Believe between the Neighborhood and Southwood, and that the conflict ends in a peaceful manner.

Are these particular episodes available from your archives?

I am interested in samples of other episodes that covered other "difficult" topics as well.

Also, some sort of list of the topics covered by all 895 episodes (e.g., an archive index) would be helpful when I compose the general list of topics covered. For this list, I want to give a good overview of all the topics covered (including Grandparents, Sharing, Be Yourself, etc.), and not just the difficult topics.

Also, while I've got your attention, two more things...

Here is a quote from the current article:

>>>> Pittsburgh-area native Michael Keaton got his first major acting break as a "Neighborhood of Make-Believe" character in 1975. >>>>

Is this accurate? If so, what character did Keaton play?

Are the very early episodes (from the CBC or NET shows) available in your archives? If so, I would be interested in writing a bit about those to highlight how the show changed over the years. For example, it would be great to have something in the article about the first-ever MisteRogers show (episode 1, if you will). According to the current article, the CBC broadcasts were only 15 minutes long.

Thank you for your time, Jason Rohrer

[edit] Re: Michael Keaton

According to IMDB, 1968 was the first instance of him on TV--and yes, it really was on Mr. Roger's show (he is credited as the "stage man".)

-- JFB 07:26, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Jcr13 17:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC) Okay, got a nice letter back from FCI and made a lot of changes. Here is a dump of source material for you:

Dear Jason,

Thanks for being in touch with us. I�m glad to help with your questions. Let me know if there�s any other information you still need after you�ve read this.

Michael Keaton was on the production crew in 1975. Part of his responsibility was running the Trolley for us. He was on-camera twice: once in a group of �circus acrobats� who parodied circus acts � called themselves �The Flying Zookeenies.� They did their �tricks� as a gift for King Friday�s birthday. He also appeared as a phone answerer, along with others who were helping with the Museum-Go-Round TV auction that was similar to the PBS auctions that public stations used to have as fund-raisers.

I think we have somewhere here only a few of the early programs from the CBC�We also have the early NET programs. You might like to know they are available for students at our archives at the University of Pittsburgh School of Library and Information sciences. A number of tapes are also at the NY Museum of Radio and Television. What�s on the air now starts with the programs made from 1979 on. Actually, the program didn�t change much over the years! Fred Rogers used to say that �While the outsides of children�s lives may have changed, their insides haven�t changed at all�evolution doesn�t happen that quickly!� One thing that was new � from 1979 on, each year he wrote the programs as Theme weeks � with a theme across a whole week. (In the earlier years, the theme sometimes carried over to the next week�or lasted only a few days. He may have picked up his pace just a bit from the ones we did in the late 60�s and early 70�s�and he showed more factory videos. But other than that, the pacing and tone and format matched what helps children learn -- then and now!

We don�t show the Conflict week any more. King Friday misunderstood about the small parts that were ordered by a neighboring community � thought they were building bombs. It turned out they were making record players. That week was written during the time when bomb threats weren�t real�today they are!

To get a good look at the topics, why don�t you go to our website and click on the newsletter www.fci.org/newsletter on the lefthand side, you�ll see the words Broadcast Schedule � click on the year at a glance. That�ll give you the calendar for the year. You can see on the schedule the theme for each week. In fact, maybe you�ll tell people to go to our two websites: www.fci.org and www.pbs.org/rogers

What other difficult things did we deal with? Here�s my list:

Divorce, death, adoption, scary things on TV, anger, when parents are at work, going away & coming back (hard issue for young children when their loved ones go away�until they trust they�ll come back!), competition, jealousy, concerns about the new baby, going to the emergency room � x-rays and stitches, the pediatrician�s office for an exam, getting an immunization, what�s in an ambulance, nighttime fears, scary dreams, fear of going down the drain, sharing, when adults get angry, feeling shy, going to the dentist, going to the eye doctor, feeling more comfortable with people who have disabilities.

And yes, Fred Rogers also wrote a lot of programs that are joyful! The operas, the parties, the festivals, Celebrating the Arts, celebrating the little moments in life�celebrating children�s growing (especially their �inside� growing), helping children feel good about who they are � and appreciating others.

I found a number of things in your writeup that I felt weren�t quite right or accurate. Is there a chance you�d consider a few minor revisions? Here�s one: we didn�t refer to Mister Rogers� Neighborhood as a show�we called it a program. There is a difference (a show is more for entertainment�this is entertainment, but it�s also about life lessons�a show is more one-sided, but this is more interactive). I see that you have a lot of references to �show� � any chance you�d change them to the word program?

The first paragraph refers to the program in the past. We are currently being broadcast on almost all PBS stations. Can you please change it to :Mister Rogers� Neighborhood is a children�s television program created and hosted by Fred Rogers, which was produced in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania by Rogers� non-profit company, Family Communications., Inc.

(actually, in the late 1960�s for a few years it was produced by WQED, but after Fred formed his own production company, we just used their studios � and our offices are housed at WQED).

8) Under History�the end of the second paragraph is more accurate if you say on most PBS stations.

It�s also more accurate in the third paragraph under History to say that: The first half was produced from 1968 to 1979. The second half was produced from 1979 � 2001. (In the broadcast schedule, we had to mix the old ones with the new for a number of yeras, until we had enough new ones to fill a whole year).

It�s also more accurate to say the program was produced at WQED, rather than originated.

9) Under About the Show (Program), in the paragraph that starts� This reality/fantasy distinction�it�s more accurate to end it by saying Sesame Street, which freely mixed realistic and fantasy elements. (I guess you were trying to balance realistic with fantastic, but fantastic makes it sound super-wonderful!)

When you write about the music � Fred composed all the songs (the melodies and the lyrics!) There are over 200 of them! John Costa arranged and played them, along with the other members of his trio, but he didn�t compose them. And he wasn�t Fred�s brother-in-law. That�s the first time we heard that one! Wonder where you found it!

10) Under Characters on the program, can you list Bob Trow (Bob Dog, Robert Troll) up there with the real people? Now he�s listed after the puppets.

Also in that paragraph, it�s more accurate to say that the puppet characters were developed by Rogers years earlier for The Children�s Corner, the educational children�s program he co-produced with Josie Carey.

On the last paragraph in that section of Characters, I wouldn�t refer to Fred as a character. He was himself on the program, not a character. I would just eliminate the beginning phrase. Or you could say Host and creator of the program Fred Rogers passed away�

11) For the latest addition under Mister Rogers in popular culture -- did you hear the news last week, that the CD called Songs from the Neighborhood � Fred Rogers� songs sung by such great musical artists as Roberta Flack, Amy Grant, Jon Secada, etc., and produced by Dennis Scott � won the Grammy for best children�s music? You can find out more about it on www.songsfromtheneighborhood.com

Jason, hope this has been helpful. Let me know if you have any questions�or need anything more. I�ve been here almost 40 years�and I know a lot of history.

Hedda Sharapan sharapan@fci.org

[edit] Origin

If the show was aired on CBC first, why does it say that the country of origin is the 'United States'? - IstvanWolf 17:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prank edit...?

I noticed in the About the show section of this article, in the 4th paragraph down, it says:

"Once, a crew member managed to sneak onto the set, and Mr. Rogers reportedly cried, "Snakes on a plane." This episode was taken off the air and was never aired again."

Considering the whole viral internet meme going around about the soon-to-be-released (and already cult) movie Snakes On A Plane, I think that this is obviously put in the article as a prank... misternuvistor 04:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crowd Control

"When Fred Rogers died in 2003, PBS was forced to do some crowd control via their website to make children not to be scared about Mr. Rogers recent death and addressed parents on what to say to them about Mr. Rogers and how to approach a child who asks about him. PBS stated that the parents would have to say that although Mr. Rogers is no longer with us, he shall live on in the television show."

What kind of crowd control keeps kids from being scared? --Gbleem 06:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I noticed this too, and I revised it. I think they meant to say "damage control", but even that isn't quite the appropriate phrase (though I get what they were trying to say). NickBurns 19:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

" It is noted for having the longest run of any American series that is not a news program or a soap opera."

I'm not sure I like these kinds of statistics. Why not the longest running TV show staring a guy named Fred? The longest running show with a toy trolly? --Gbleem 01:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

It is an awkward way to say that....But it is true that the only shows on TV that have run longer than MRN are either news programs or soaps - I think that a handful of the soaps have been on 40+ years, with "Guiding Light" turning 70 in 2007 (if you factor radio time in as well) and I believe either "Meet the Press" or "Face the Nation" - or both - have both hit 50-60 years. NickBurns 19:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] apartment building

does anyone have a cap of the building they used in place of the NET building in early 70s model neighborhood? Also, when did they switch th the building that they used for the rest of the show's run?

74.115.226.191 23:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The article says it's the same building repainted. --Gbleem 23:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Urban legend/vandalism

I removed the following from the article:

"However, this gentleness was a cover-up of the dark and violent past of Fred Rogers. As a sniper in Vietnam, Mr. Rogers had at least 41 confirmed kills. This figure does not include women and children. Mister Rogers' trademark sweaters began as a method to cover up his tattoos. Though not confirmed, it is rumored that his left arm features a graphic image of Satan stabbing Abraham Lincoln with a trident."

Come on, people. That's just tacky. I get that it's supposed to be humorous, but draw the line somewhere. --Matt S. 16:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References in popular culture

I keep looking at the pop culture section and trying to weed it out some; it's too big, and I think the single-line references to Mr. Rogers in things like The Simpsons need to go. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 04:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Specials

While this section lacks citation, it is important to keep this section up and available for editors to review and research. I agree that we should tag this section for "sources", but we must give it more than a few hours before removing the section. Why? Well, for one, it gives editors a chance to find sources. These episodes were taped prior to the advent of the web. As a result, sources may not simply be a Google search away. For another, I've e-mailed the good folks at FCI and asked them to review this section. It's Friday, and I would expect it will take them a week or two to get to it. If this section is removed, they won't be able to review it, and I doubt they're versed in the esoterica associated with scanning article histories for prior versions. Sure, we could send them a copy of the section, but by leaving it up, they can review the whole article - something they have done for us in the past. As a minimum, though, except in cases of blatant vandalism, it's only polite to give more than a few hours to find sources after sources are requested. Rklawton 00:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

The section remains in the history. But I will try to compromise by moving the selection here:

The other special was a more updated version of the famous 1968 Robert F. Kennedy episode that aired in 1981 due to Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II's assassination attempts. The reason behind this was the continuous airing of the shootings in the television media. The story has Rogers discussing the recent tragedies including John Lennon's murder from 1980. But it mostly deals in the Neighborhood of Make Believe where a character named Walking Talking Tree was found dead and believed murdered. On Lady Elaine's TV station MGR-TV, Lady Elaine and a male human co-anchor did continuous coverage of her co-anchor sadly carrying the dead Walking Talking Tree. He gets annoyed with Elaine because she keeps showing him carrying the dead tree. After a moment of fear, the killer turned itself in, which was another walking talking tree. This special was aired for only 3 months in 1981 and was never shown again. Rogers was asked about this particular special during an interview for the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences Foundation but stated that he couldn't remember.^{[citations needed]}

If anyone wants to further research this, they may. But I am very seriously calling it into question, so this does not belong in the article until it is verified. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 00:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

In that case, you are the first editor I've found who has marked something as unsourced and removed it in the same day without a shred of evidence - and without giving other editors a chance to research the matter. That shoot-first approach isn't typical of experienced editors. Rklawton 02:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

That's fine. I do like to be bold. And the guidelines guide my actions: from WP:CITE: Don't be inappropriately cautious about removing unsourced material...If it is doubtful and harmful, you should remove it from the article; you may want to move it to the talk page and ask for a source, unless you regard it is as very harmful or absurd, in which case it shouldn't be posted to a talk page either. Use your common sense. This section very much seems inappropriate, and so I have removed it from the article. It is that simple. Wikipedia:Verifiability dictates that we do not add unverifiable material to articles, and currently, this is unverifiable. As you have pointed out, there is no trace of this special online, but the offline work I have done has turned up nothing either. The only thing that will merit this selection's return to the article is a published reliable source. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 04:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I watched Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood when the special about the Walking Talking Tree aired, and remember parts of it vividly. I don't remember the scenes with Lady Elaine and the TV coverage, but do have a clear memory that a walking talking tree appeared as a character in that episode, and then later a larger walking talking tree showed up. Near the end, one of the regular characters (it may have been Daniel) told another character that the big WTT had killed the little WTT. No violence was shown on screen.

I believe the deleted entry describes a real episode and is not a hoax. There are no solid sources on the Web, but there must be film or documentation somewhere. Does anyone else remember this episode, or know of someone still living who might have a script or other record of it?

Cephal-odd 16:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FCI e-mails

I just noticed these above. These are not reliable sources. Please do not treat them as such. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 00:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, why is an e-mail from FCI not considered a reliable source? I would have thought it would be the most reliable source possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.64.197 (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Popular culture

Since this article is about Fred Rogers, it seems to make sense to limit this section to Mr. Rogers' involvement in popular culture - rather than the other way around. That is, if Mr. Rogers made a guest appearance on another show, at an event, etc, then it belongs here. If some other show referenced Mr. Rogers without his actual involvement, then this reference belongs in that article's show and not here - as Mr. Rogers had nothing personally to do with it. If an editor would like to include a sourced paragraph on Mr. Rogers' impact on popular culture, that would be great. However, many of the examples currently provided demonstrating this impact actually comprise original research regarding his impact on popular culture and are therefore not appropriate for Wikipedia. Thoughts? Rklawton 19:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hanahkah

How was it spelled on his banner? --Gbleem 10:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too much trivia

The pop culture section really needs to be trimmed. Too much trivia, really. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 08:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Rogers and Mr. McFeely

They both feature in a song by "BloodHound Gang", album "One Fierce Beer Coaster, song "Your Only Friends Are Make Believe". After the joke at the start of the song, it coninues with; "Knock, knock Mr Rogers. It's Mr McFeely. I brought you a letter, speedy delivery. Well Mr Mcfeely, if there's postage due, you can go f-yourself like Captain Cangaroo...". The song continues on a seemingly negative direction, but the end is not bad - "...Your best friend is you, I'm my best friend too, I share the same views and hardly ever argue..."

AliceD 168.209.97.34 14:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Fred Rogers and Yo Yo Ma.jpg

Image:Fred Rogers and Yo Yo Ma.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The image is saved -- because I created a fair use rationale. Jonghyunchung 23:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Vandalism"

After I did a reversion edit to this article, which I labeled as being due to vandalism, I realized that the article probably ended up looking like it did due to some editing errors by 74.34.203.11. I wanted to be sure I didn't falsely accuse someone of vandalism. Nonetheless, the revision was warranted. Thanks! Kyhiking 14:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Show cancellation

I was shocked to read in this article that the show was being eliminated from PBS as part of the new fall line-up; however consulting my local affiliate, the show will still air at 6:30am. I looked for a more definitive source, but couldn't find anything. I changed it to 'some PBS affiliates', which I hope is more accurate.

Signless 09:20, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Kingstewie.jpg

Image:Kingstewie.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Verb in introductory sentence (is vs. was)

The show's last episode was in 2001. There have been so many is/was changes to the verb in the introductory sentence and I can't find any discussion in this talk page. Georgia guy 17:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The proper form is to use "is", as per Wikipedia convention. (You're not alone in asking about this - it comes up all the time.) Basically, the show still exists as a creative work, as the the episodes have not been destroyed. Therefore, it "is" a television series. It "was" in production (as that has ceased); the trick is to structure the lead so as to allow for the different tenses. Hope this helps. --Ckatz^chat_spy 18:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trolley specs

I'm trying to dig up my old 1987 issue of Model Railroader that featured an article about the two trolleys. The big one was G scale, the little one was HO scale, kitbashed by the author in 1982, and pulled through the set with a fishing line. Although, Mr. Rogers had a motto of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," he was delighted by the results. MMetro 20:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Johnson&Johnson

Talk has added "Baby Products Company" to Johnson&Johnson in the funding list. This seems superfluous. Is there any reason why it should stay?Cstaffa (talk) 06:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. I've never heard the company referred to by that name. I've only heard it called "Johnson & Johnson." The change was made without an explanation by a unregistered user listed only by an IP address. Due to these circumstances, I would suggest reverting the change unless the individual in question produces a concrete reason as to why the change was made and why it should remain. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 23:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Conflict week

The article currently says "Almost all of the 1979–2001 episodes are in active rotation on PBS. The only exception is the week-long "Conflict" series (episodes #1521–#1525), first aired in November of 1983 to coincide with ABC's airing of the television film The Day After, and designed for children to cope with the aftereffects of that film. The series/story arc covered the topics of war, bombs, and an arms race. The "Conflict" series was last aired starting April 1, 1996, due to the bombing in Oklahoma City in 1995 and again during the week November 12, 2001 due to 9/11."

I don't think that is entirely true. First of all, although Conflict did air the week of April 1-5, 1996, I don't think that airing had anything to do with the Oklahoma City bombing, since at the time, Conflict week (and all other post-1976 weeks) aired every year. As far as I know, that was just its regular airing for the year. Is there any source that says Conflict aired then because of Ohlahoma? If not, then that comment should be removed, and it should just say that it's last airing was the week of April 1-5, 1996.

Secondly, I've never heard anywhere that Conflict aired Nov. 12-16, 2001. Everything I've ever heard says that Conflict last aired April 1-5, 1996. Can anyone provide a source saying that Conflict aired Nov. 12-16, 2001? Or, at a minimum, does anyone specifically remember watching Conflict week airing that week? If not, then that should be removed.

If nobody comments or updates those comments, I'm going to go ahead and update them, but I want to give others a chance, and not delete something that could possibly be correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.64.197 (talk) 19:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What happened in the missing years?

What? Not a WORD about why the show went away between '76 and '79???? Inquiring minds want to know! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.111.20 (talk) 11:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The show didn't "go away" during those years. In the in-between times, episodes made before '76 were reaired while the newer version of the series was in production for three years. Then, after the newer episodes started to be aired in '79, the older episodes were taken off the air, never to be seen again unless you get the DVD version of the show. However, all this, I believe (unless I'm mistaken) is detailed in the article itself. For more information, visit the Mister Rogers' page on fci.org, the official Mister Rogers site which is independent of PBS. Does that help? --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

That was not entirely true that the older episodes were taken off the air when the newer episodes started in 1979. From 1979-1995, the schedule each year would be a mix of older and newer episodes. It was not until 1996 that there were enough new episodes to fill a full year schedule. There were only about 3 weeks of new episodes each year. August 11, 1995 was the last time that a pre-1979 episode aired.

I do not know what Fred did during the hiatus. In fact, I saw an interview where he was asked, and he said tha the had no memory of there being a break in production. I wonder if he really forgot about it, or if he just didn't want to talk about it for whatever reason.

[edit] Dates and date formatting

I have changed the date formats to U.S. usage, and eliminated repetition in the date ranges. I think this is justified by Wikipedia:DATE#Dates, specifically the points beginning "Date ranges are preferably given with minimal repetition" and "Strong national ties to a topic." I further removed autoformatting-linking from a date in a quotation according to "Consistency within articles...except...dates within quotations and titles...." Cstaffa (talk) 23:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Reverted, for now - some of the changes don't appear necessary. Why did you remove wiki formatting; that prevents the preferences settings from working. --Ckatz^chat_spy 23:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The links unnecessarily highlight the dates. The links which I removed don't seem to add anything to understanding; they only reduce readability. As this article is about a U.S. television program, readers should not be bothered if the dates appear in U.S. format. Did you bother to read the sections of Wikipedia:DATE#Dates which I referenced? And why revert me if only *some* of the changes "don't appear necessary"? Cstaffa (talk) 01:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)