Talk:Peter Griffin/Archive 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Peter's age
Someone switched Peter's age to 46, when in reality he's around 42 or 43. Stewie stated that Peter was 42 on "Brian Does Hollywood". Based on the fact it only appears a year has passed during the course of the series I think it's safe to say he's still around 42 or 43. Jam
- As with Homer Simpson and Ned Flanders, some editors like to take a stated age and add real time to it, as if each real year counts on the show too. Obviously they don't, because the kids never age that much. Prometheus-X303- 04:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
It was mentioned in a recent episode. It was either 42 or 43. Or possible 41.
In the "The Tan Aquatic with Steve Zissou", Lois says that he is 43, so HE IS 43!!!--BrianGriffin-FG 20:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- 42 and 43 are the two numbers that have been explicitly mentioned in the dialogue. Any number based on calculations from the flashbacks is to be taken with a grain of salt if it's Peter who's telling the story, since his memory is very unreliable. Cromulent Kwyjibo 21:37, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Peter age messup in "Meet the Quagmires"
In the controversial episode Meet the Quagmires, Peter said he was 18 in 1984. He cannot be 18 in 1984 since he was 23 back then. He was already 18 by 1980. You cannot be 18 two times. 1984 and the age of 18 (as well as the episode I mentioned) sucks. 206.255.186.75 14:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I know it's very confusing, that's why it's best to just have Early 40's as his age. TheBlazikenMaster 15:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
We don't need info about when Peter was born that's why I reverted that.
See this, there should be info that will be valid for decades to come. I find it unnecessary to add when a fictional character is born. As fictional characters age at unusual rate than real people, and (most often) not at all. Also imagine if ALL editors of Peter Griffin quitted, or nobody cares about changing his birth age anymore. Then this info would be invalid. This info would be useless after fifteen years. We should try to avoid things that can be out of date after few decades. TheBlazikenMaster 20:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Besides, we already have the age of Peter in the box, that's all we need. TheBlazikenMaster 20:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Peter's age keeps on changing from Early 40's into something else.
Is there anything that can be done? I'm sick of reverting this, since it's being changed too often. I tried hidden message, but no, a lot of people ignore these things, so tell me what can be done about this? TheBlazikenMaster 20:36, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Peter's Father
I added a bit of information stating that Peter's real father is Peter McFinnigan as shown in the latest episode. Glotnot 02:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- It seems Family Guy has introduced yet another plothole by stating Francis is not Peter's father. How could Peter be related to all of the ancestor Griffins (most of which look very similar to him) if he is not a Griffin? And I'm not talking about the throwaways; I'm referring to established ones like Nate Griffin. And by the way, it's Mickey McFinnigan, not Peter :p The S 05:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- I read the article, and the sentence "Peter Griffin was born in Quahog, Rhode Island, 43 years ago, to Mickey McFinnegan and Thelma Griffin" makes it sound like they were married (or at least dating), not that they had a one-night stand in Ireland. I would change it, but I can't think of another way to put it.--BrianGriffin-FG 20:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I think we can agree that this is a plot hole and we should address it as such until there is verification in this predicament. And by the way, BrianGriffin-FG, you owe me a million dollars cause I corrected your spelling in that comment. - Jumpmansbro 5:02 P.M., October 1 2007 (MDT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.20.70.173 (talk) 23:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Peter's Name
I'm not entirely sure we should have the McFinnigan name in - after all, while he may be McFinnigan's son, his name is still Griffin, and I don't remember any move to make it double-barrelled. mattbuck 00:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Hand Choice?
In the episode Petarded Peter writes with his left hand during the test despite being raised Catholic(to my knowledge, to Catholics lefthandedness is a sign of Satanism, so they bring up Children as right handed) I do not kow Where this could belong or if it does belong. Can somebody help me? I'm new here so I don't know how to do everything. Bluebrody7 22:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
presumably he wasn't brought up by catholics in the 18th century so it's ok to be lefthanded
but where should this go? religion, personality? Bluebrody7 10:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
in the episode The Cleveland-Loretta Quagmire he plays guitar right handed, but in the latest episode(It Takes a Village Idiot, and I Married One) he plays guitar left handed.--Numberwang 12:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Peter's Occupation
When was he fired from the Pautucket Brewery? I remember that he lost his job (along with anyone who worked there) in Hell Comes to Quahog, but wouldn't everyone get there jobs back when it re-opened. Also, I remember in the commentary for Jungle Love, somebody says that this job has given them more material than any other of his jobs. Why would they get rid of it?--BrianGriffin-FG 19:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I want this article featured.
There are no POV tags, no cleanup tags. I think it MIGHT be ready. Check top of the page for more details. TheBlazikenMaster 20:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- It now got a tag. I suppose it won't be featured after all. TheBlazikenMaster 21:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Man, that's some trifling hating! Another Slappywag Among Petorians 22:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I should've known that it's not ready yet to be featured. When the voting closes, we shouldn't nominated it again until many months have passed, and possibly protect it to keep it clean from vandals. TheBlazikenMaster 23:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Personally I can see from just glancing over the page that it lacks images which is enough to get it rejected. This article needs images! JameiLei 16:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well, we can update it. What this article needs is what this character is based on. Images would be good, we also need a lot of references. TheBlazikenMaster 16:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- True. We need some inline citations. If you think it can't be done, look at Bulbasaur - 847 words of references about a single Pokémon. JameiLei 23:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Nonsense, everything can be done. One of my wishes is this article to be featured, and with help from wikipedians from all around the world, I know the wish will come true. I know it's VERY hard, but I don't care. If it can never be featured, at least it should be good enough. Nothing is impossible if we all work together. Google search might help us get more references. I know we can do it. I also know it isn't gonna be easy. TheBlazikenMaster 00:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- True. We need some inline citations. If you think it can't be done, look at Bulbasaur - 847 words of references about a single Pokémon. JameiLei 23:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well, we can update it. What this article needs is what this character is based on. Images would be good, we also need a lot of references. TheBlazikenMaster 16:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Personally I can see from just glancing over the page that it lacks images which is enough to get it rejected. This article needs images! JameiLei 16:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I should've known that it's not ready yet to be featured. When the voting closes, we shouldn't nominated it again until many months have passed, and possibly protect it to keep it clean from vandals. TheBlazikenMaster 23:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Man, that's some trifling hating! Another Slappywag Among Petorians 22:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Evil Twin Thaddeus
From edit summary for removing it from article: Evil twin huh? It isn't that I don't believe you, but we need some source. Something that apears in one episode doesn't count.
I personally believe it should be left in. MOST things in Family Guy appear only once. All peter's occupations apart from fisherman, toy inspector and brewery worker in fact. Heck, I'm not sure I consider Peter's McFinnegan ancestry anything but a throwaway. Keep it, it's citeable. mattbuck 18:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Can you at least refresh our memories and tell us the title of the episode in which Thaddeus appeared? Another Slappywag Among Petorians 23:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- True, but it has been discussed that things that appear only once aren't necessery true. It's been confirmed that Peter can't tell difference between a dream and his life history. Sometimes he talks about Griffins that don't exist, and never did, in other words makes them up. So, what's your proof? TheBlazikenMaster 18:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Other things in Family Guy that have appeared more than once: that Lois is the daughter of the snooty Pewterschimdts, that Joe had his accident at Christmas, that Meg does birdcalls, that Chris has artistic talent, ... feel free to stop me anytime here. Another Slappywag Among Petorians 23:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- I know that. Writers of this article should know the difference between what Peter is thinking, and what happens in his real life. I bet this guy does, but it would be nice if the guy that posted it will specificy which episode. After all, like said in the failed candidate, we need a lot of references. TheBlazikenMaster 23:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- A quick Google search reveals the episode is "Mother Tucker." However, Thaddeus appears so briefly and just for the sake of one joke that I don't think it's worth mentioning in the Peter Griffin article (Thaddeus is and should be mentioned in the appropriate episode article). Compared to, say, Nate Griffin, Thaddeus Griffin is barely relevant in a general overview of Peter's life. Anton Mravcek 21:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- I know that. Writers of this article should know the difference between what Peter is thinking, and what happens in his real life. I bet this guy does, but it would be nice if the guy that posted it will specificy which episode. After all, like said in the failed candidate, we need a lot of references. TheBlazikenMaster 23:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Other things in Family Guy that have appeared more than once: that Lois is the daughter of the snooty Pewterschimdts, that Joe had his accident at Christmas, that Meg does birdcalls, that Chris has artistic talent, ... feel free to stop me anytime here. Another Slappywag Among Petorians 23:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
-
Thick as chowder?
Just a query as to what one of the phrases in the first few sentences means? Maybe the language should be changed or a relevent wikilink could be inserted?
- His voice, which has a thick-as-chowder Rhode Island accent, is produced by the show's creator and lead writer, Seth MacFarlane.
Is it a common phrase or just in America? Cheers, Jack 22:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
New image.
We need new image. The older one was removed as it wasn't a fair use. Discuss. TheBlazikenMaster 16:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- I added the best one we already have. I hope someone will upload fair-use image of Peter Griffin as he is in the cartoons. TheBlazikenMaster 16:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Me too. As it stands now, the picture of Peter when things "got too real" is duplicated. Another Slappywag Among Petorians 19:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Could we not use the chicken one? At least that shows peter as he is in the cartoon. mattbuck 19:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe, I don't know. Anyway, we need a picture of him alone. If you feel like it's necessery to have him fighting the chicken, I wouldn't care, I really don't know wether or not you should. TheBlazikenMaster 09:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Could we not use the chicken one? At least that shows peter as he is in the cartoon. mattbuck 19:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Problem solved, thanks to Ayokimmie. TheBlazikenMaster 22:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- That's a nice picture, and it shows him engaged in one of his favorite activities. Well done. ShutterBugTrekker 17:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
WikiProject
C'mon, there must be SOME WikiProject Peter can be part of, but the problem is I can't figure out what. WikiProject Fox doesn't seem to exist..... TheBlazikenMaster 09:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I added it to a WikiProject. TheBlazikenMaster 19:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Meg's relationship?????
Why is Meg listed as a step-daughter? I don't seem to recall this being in any show, especially as Lois doesn't have any children in any of the flashbacks in any episode. Meg's page says that Peter is her father. Its really not a big deal, but looking through the article it just nagged at the back of my mind. Chibimech 12:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- See Screwed the Pooch#Notes, or watch that episode again. Whether this was just a one-off joke that the writers will never reference again or an actual canon fact, I couldn't tell you. Cromulent Kwyjibo 22:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'd love to see that episode. But if it's a thought/flashback then it wouldn't be real. But if it's actually in the episode outside Peter's and other characters' mind, then it could be real. I don't have volume 2 on DVD. Well, I guess we just have to wait and see. TheBlazikenMaster 22:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
"Incest!?."
the article states that Peter's interest in Babs is evidence of incest fantasy. This is ridiculous as Babs is not blood related to him. Also, it is also mentioned that he had (or faked) intercourse with Lois's father, yet this is not considered incest. I propose we change that whole section, as his Babs fantasy is not incest, nor does it belong with discussion about bisexuality or homosexuality (Theglobeismyeye 14:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC))
- I agree. It's not incest if they aren't related by blood to you, which neither Lois' Mother or Father are. If Lois died or divorced Peter, he could freely marry Babs with complete legal consent, it shouldn't be any different when they are married. It isn't incest when Lois and Peter have sex, so why should it be when the family member is another degree seperate? There is a reference to incest in Airport '07 when Peter becomes a redneck however, making advances towards meg, but this may not be an indication that he is actually interested in that, it may just be that he is being a stereotypical redneck. Chibimech 09:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- However, there is a possibility that both Lois and Peter are related by ancestry when you think about the episode, Untitled Griffin Family History. - Jumpmansbro 5:44, October 1 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.20.70.173 (talk) 23:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, but that episode was mainly stuff coming from Peter's mouth. How can we tell if he didn't make all that up? TheBlazikenMaster 16:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
We need footnotes.
There are no foodnotes at all. That's what makes this article unable to become featured. Peter is a famous character. Let's make this article good article before making it features. I can't make any footnotes, but someone should do it. I'm bringing it to attention here because most articles have them. Yeah, who is with me? TheBlazikenMaster 22:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Larry.
I added a sentence about that Peter is based on Larry, but that's not enough. We need a whole section about what Peter is based on. Common, Peter deserves one. And also add some footnotes. TheBlazikenMaster 15:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Peter's appearance outside family guy section.
I think section like that is needed, as he did have some appearances outside Family Guy.
Look into my sandbox for an example.
So what do you guys think? Of course it isn't worded correctly, I haven't seen any of the episdoes listed.
But this is the section I'm talking about. I will have it on the article tomorrow, if there won't be any opposers. TheBlazikenMaster 17:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, since there aren't any objections, I will add it. It's just a little section, so I don't think it's necessery to have a poll on this. I just made this discussion so people can discuss the section. TheBlazikenMaster 21:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Date of Birth
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vvhNCAGElfY - at 2:50 it's implied he was born in July. 212.108.17.165 12:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well, yeah, but there's a whole range of 20 days in July that could be. Or 10 days, I forget. Still doesn't narrow it down enough. Another Slappywag Among Petorians 21:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Peter's Charisma
There should be a reference to Peter's superhuman charisma. This is manifested both as sex appeal and his ability to get people to do things. Both of these traits have been exibited through the entire series. Examples of the sex appeal are how easily he attracted Jennifer Love Hewitt, Molly Ringwold and Lois' mother. He regularly misdirects people to react a certain way even when there is evidence to the contray such as convincing the other male characters that Dr. Hartman violated them during thier prostate exams, convinced a mob that his teenage daughter was injured in Vietnam when she wasn't even born at the time. He even leads an entire stadium of people in a musical number in the middle of a football game. This happens often enough that it is more a charater trait of Peter than just a plot device. Vismaior 12:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The Helpers
HEY! ARE YOU A FAN OF Family Guy! DO YOU WANNA GET ALL THERE DVDs! DO YOU WANNA SLEEP WITH MEG! IF YOUR ANSWERES ARE YES YES YES, than why, she's ugly. IF YOUR ANSWERES ARE YES YES NO, THAN JOIN THE FAMILY GUY HEPERS! JOIN NOW! JOIN NOW! JOIN NOW!--BrianGriffin-FG 18:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, can we discuss this?
I really wanna know why you guys keep reverting me? I mean, aren't all appearance cameo? Just explain why you keep reverting me, and please correct me, explain to me WHY do you keep reverting me on the outside family Guy session? TheBlazikenMaster 18:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you're talking about. You simplified race in the infobox to just "Irish American" and it's stayed that way, no one's reverted that. Another Slappywag Among Petorians 22:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- i did bother it, and i also referenced the different heritages. i would prefer that they are left alone; i suppose that if you want to remove it, you can. Ono 19:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I was talking about "appearance outside Family Guy" section, how is The Ringer appearance any less acceptable than the rest? TheBlazikenMaster 10:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
- Common, can we discuss what I officially wanted to discuss? TheBlazikenMaster 23:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- I was talking about "appearance outside Family Guy" section, how is The Ringer appearance any less acceptable than the rest? TheBlazikenMaster 10:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Common, I can't believe this, the article is good but the talk page is deserted.
-
-
-
Let me ask this simply:
"How is Ringer's appearance any more unnotable than the rest?"
Common, I know you all hate as well, then you are trying to do good edits, and get reverted without explaination. TheBlazikenMaster 00:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Common, I need to know how it's more unnotable, I seriously need to know. Common, this encyclopedia isn't good one if we don't discuss it. TheBlazikenMaster 16:05, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- This is unfair, I just wanna know HOW the appearances of the list are more important than other appearance. I need to know, common. I know the cleaning discussion is important, but so is this. TheBlazikenMaster 23:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Common, if it's easy to remove it, HOW HARD can it be to explain to me? TheBlazikenMaster 20:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- IT IS A USELESS CAMEO APPEARANCE LASTING ALL OF TWO SECONDS. I AM SORRY THAT IT GOT REVERTED, BUT IF IT BOTHERS YOU SO MUCH, PUT IT BACK. THE REASON THE OTHERS ARE MORE NOTABLE IS BECAUSE THEY LASTED LONG ENOUGH TO BE NOTICED BY SOMEONE (OTHER THAN YOU) =). PLEASE USE THE TALK PAGE FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN TO SAY THAT SOMETHING GOT REMOVED. IF YOU KNOW WHO REMOVED IT, GO TO THEIR TALK PAGE AND ASK THEM WHY. DON'T CONTINUE TO SAY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THANK YOU. Ono 21:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, I'll try to do that next time. Oh and I haven't seen any episode, or movie of that, so it isn't noticed by me. TheBlazikenMaster 21:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- That is all right. And when you use "common" are you meaning for it to sound like "come on"?
- Yes. TheBlazikenMaster 21:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- That is all right. And when you use "common" are you meaning for it to sound like "come on"?
- Sorry about that, I'll try to do that next time. Oh and I haven't seen any episode, or movie of that, so it isn't noticed by me. TheBlazikenMaster 21:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- IT IS A USELESS CAMEO APPEARANCE LASTING ALL OF TWO SECONDS. I AM SORRY THAT IT GOT REVERTED, BUT IF IT BOTHERS YOU SO MUCH, PUT IT BACK. THE REASON THE OTHERS ARE MORE NOTABLE IS BECAUSE THEY LASTED LONG ENOUGH TO BE NOTICED BY SOMEONE (OTHER THAN YOU) =). PLEASE USE THE TALK PAGE FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN TO SAY THAT SOMETHING GOT REMOVED. IF YOU KNOW WHO REMOVED IT, GO TO THEIR TALK PAGE AND ASK THEM WHY. DON'T CONTINUE TO SAY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THANK YOU. Ono 21:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
connie dechico? What the hell?
I can't remove it from the article, I tried, but it's still at the bottom of the page, I even used Microsoft Word to search but found nothing. Can someone help me? TheBlazikenMaster 00:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- Nevermind, I found out, the template was vandalized, I fixed that. TheBlazikenMaster 00:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)