Talk:Smosh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Internet Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the Internet culture. For more information, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a quality rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
Comedy Portal
This article is within the scope of the Comedy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to comedy, comics, comedians, comedy movies, and the like. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on July 18, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep..

Contents

[edit] Editing smosh

Why is the page not editable? Some things need to be updated. user:ScoutingforGirls 10:42 13 February 2008 (GMT)

[edit] Newgrounds

They have several flash videos on Newgrounds. Should we include them in the article? snakecrack76 06:24 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Some of those movies on Newgrounds are ones that are also on YouTube (e.g. Mortal Kombat Theme)[1]. I also found out that the person who maintains the Smosh profile on Newgrounds is Anthony. Preceding 16 September (15 September and before), the profile had his age as 19, but the next day on 16 September, the age was 20, and I'm pretty positive that it's Anthony who has the profile on Newgrounds. SchfiftyThree (talk) 23:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re-orginisation

I shuffled a few things around yesterday (thought I'd added to the talk page but must not have saved it)

I put the article under some sub-headings: the list of videos and the controversy over the pokemon theme. Any veterans out there who think it was a turn for the worse please feel free to speak up. Also I added the bit about the "shut up- that song's copyrighted" themeVeggieburgerfish (talk) 19:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

By the way I think something needs to be done about the list of videos it needs to be updated or abolished; there are only a few there. I also think there is a template for videography somewhere I think I've seen it on some other page but I can't remember which and have no clue how to use them anywayVeggieburgerfish (talk) 19:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hebrew

I made a smosh page in the Hebrew wikipedia, you can see it from the left side of the article here, in other languages: עברית. --80.230.4.130 10:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources needed

The article contains quite a lot of utterly unsourced statements. Among the worst (in this respect) sections, I would name "Website history", "Removed/Altered videos", "Equipment", and "Trivia". "Video history" could also be a little more precise when, for example, "critical acclaim" or "good reviews" are mentioned. While I do not doubt the truth of these statements, we should still give reliable sources for them. If none are forthcoming, I might remove all unsourced statements in a few weeks. --Huon 17:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thats pretty much my fault. I've been an active part of the smosh community for over 3 years. When I saw this article I just sorta started writing pretty much everything I knew about smosh.--Ashuku 07:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Lets just cite what we can from the New York Times article, the magazine article, that interview with Anthony on the Smosh myspace blog, and the rest we can say was confirmed by the webmaster of Smosh or Anthony --Ngard039 14:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. We can't say something "was confirmed by Anthony". Even if Anthony edited the article in person (and I believe people are discouraged from significantly adding to articles about themselves), he would still need to give reliable sources in order to satisfy WP:RS and WP:NOR. Actually, I believe everything that can't be sourced is not notable enough to be included in the first place. For example, "Equipment" - is it really notable that Anthony uses a Dell? Does it have any impact on the quality of Smosh's work? --Huon 15:41, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually it is, one of the questions frequently asked on the website is "what equipment do you guys use for the videos?" The inclusion of that into the article helps to answer this and cut down on people's questions.--Ngard039 21:23, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't object - if it is verifiable. If it is not, then it does not belong on Wikipedia. After all, Wikipedia is not Smosh's FAQ. --Huon 12:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I have verifiable sources, but do I really have to put a newpaper quote verifying that Anthony and Ian are really 18 and attend Amercain River College?

If there is a newspaper article mentioning those facts, sure, go ahead and put it under "References". I wouldn't even know where to look for such an article. --Huon 15:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I actually had links to the articles in exterior links, but someone deleted them.--Ngard039 01:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, Huon. Is that better?--Ngard039 20:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's quite a lot better. I would love to add the Sacramento Bee article [2], too, but unfortunately it can only be read by registered users. --Huon 09:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Can we have this article locked from vandals? There's been way too much vandalism on this page.--Ngard039 20:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

If you used Wikipedia for anything other than creating and editing the entry about yourself you might better understand wikipedia's Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy.

"Semi-protection should be considered if it is the only option left available to solve the problem of vandalism of the page, if the amount of vandalism is difficult for editors to keep up with. Like full protection, it is usually a last resort, not a pre-emptive measure."

Jaderaid 08:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

We've been getting very large amounts of vandalism resently. I suggest have we reconsider semi-protection for this page. CRouleau 00:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Most vandalism is done by 207.216.48.71 I think we need an admin to ban him from editing pages -CRouleau 06:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Strong support I also agree we need to semi-protect this page. -- ChunkyStyle (talk • contribs) 22:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Age?

How old are the boys? What's their date of births, are they still 18 or is that info old? JayKeaton 14:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

According to the Medium article, both were eighteen in March 2006. Their birthdates seem to be difficult to trace. Maybe we should just give their ages at some important event (e.g. creation of the Pokémon theme song)? --Huon 15:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh cool, I got the dobs, just emailed them. I will also create stubs for both of them. The rationale behind it is that they are pretty well known, one of their videos is the second most popular of all time on YouTube and there is a strong possibility that their website and community may expand a lot in the future, like other sites that have turned into industries, like PennyArcade and newgrounds. JayKeaton 19:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

According to their Myspace profile (which is run by Anthony and Ian) they are both currently 19 years old. evoblur 21:12, 26 June 2007 (EST)

Ian is 19 and Anthony is 20. User:EuroJordan 16:10 November 6, 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 22:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clean up

This page could also use quite a bit of clean up, I'll add it to my things to do but any suggestions, or better yet some cleaning up itself, please report here JayKeaton 19:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It's much too breezy, in a fannish tone, and the article should not repeatedly call them by their first names. User:Zoe|(talk) 02:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Why can't they call them by their first names? A lot of people don't know their last names and besides, look at the "Brookers" article: Brooke_Brodack. That seems way more fannish than the Smosh one. --Ngard039 15:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedias don't use first names except to distinguish people with the same last name. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

There's other articles that call the subject by their first name Kimbo_Slice, do they all need the cleanup stamp? --Ngard039 14:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Almost everywhere it said "Ian and Anthony" I changed to "Padilla and Hecox" it sounds kinda weird in some of the places so feel free to change them to "the boys" "smosh" whatever.

I fixed the brookers article too. :) Jaderaid 08:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I fixed the Kimbo Slice article, Ngard039, if you know of any more articles with the first name, last name problem please tell me on my talk page. -CRouleau 05:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Some of you may have cleaned it up a bit TOO Well. Look at the article. What's different? EuroJordan (talk) 19:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Cruft"

I fail to see how including their dates of birth is "cruft." illspirit|talk 23:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Agree, calling something cruft ("low-quality things in general") that's point of veiw, an opinion, dob's can be found all over wikipedia, please don't start a Revert war --Sirex98 00:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Easter Eggs, Deleted Videoes?

Should we add these? They are apart of something and would let people know. Why did we delete them in the first place?MattC13 15:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pokemon theme song

Hey I was on youtube today and hello the pokemon theme song is still there.

It is not from smosh, though.
Well the original video by Smosh was removed a while ago, did you see one of the voice dubs in another language? A speed-up slow-down version? If you just saw the original Smosh video then it was uploaded it by someone who went to Smosh.com and downloaded it from there and re-uploaded it to YouTube. I know that that happened because I saw the video myself. {{ÇɧĭДfrĪĔпd12}} 04:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Youtube probably doesn't care about other people uploading the pokemon theme video. Oh yeah.. for some strange reason, I didn't delete the pokemon video from my playlist. It shows how many views it had, 24,732,537. Please do not delete it, it isn't an estimated number. It is true. Snakecrack76 8:39, 21 August 2007

[edit] Grammar

Cleanup tags, such as the grammar tag that I added to this article today, are used to designate articles that would benefit from improvement. Please respect the contributions of other users as we work together to improve articles, and do not remove cleanup tags before anyone has a chance to work on the article. Maralia 03:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the mistake. I will make sure it never happens again. 24.107.66.62

[edit] Delete

Note: This article will not be deleted. The Delete section is simply for discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.151.174.208 (talk) 23:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The article basically says that "Smosh" are two guys who post videos on YouTube. Like MILLIONS of other YouTube users. I propose the article for deletion because its subject is not notable. Devil Master 10:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

To note, they are also one of the biggest ones on YouTube currently and have been around longer than most of the current video posters. They also have a massive fanbase and others. Nocarsgo 18:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I say the Smosh article should be kept for reasons stated above, and because they are subscribed to by over 130,000 people on YouTube and because they have a contract with MTV or VH1 or somebody. ÇɧĭДfrĪĔпd12 03:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

this should be deleted, its ridiculous, there is nothing special about them

I'm sorry, but you don't have a contract with MTV/VH1 or whatever, so don't go telling us what's notable and what isn't. 81.145.241.67 15:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

They have a contract to do two videos a month or something like that. And for your information, oh great "I'm going to tell everyone what's wrong because I'm always right", they had a video on MTV's TRL. So they're obviously bigger than just YouTube. They also have their own actual website, They created video's and hosted Logitech's "How Not To" contest. It's obvious they're more than just a couple of guys on YouTube. You're obviously just jealous because you'll never be as loved as them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.33.186 (talk) 10:27, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Most subscribed and most viewed (before being taken down) video is notable enough. More people watched that video than there were people that tuned in for Lost last week. JayKeaton 02:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

But are they original? Like that one video with them stamping those manila envelopes, did that have something to do with lick-less stamps? What did that have to do with American River College, anyway? Didn't they graduate? Is Smosh political or something, like nobody knows about it? What do they have to do with that ACT test thing?

Maybe Youtube is the right place for them. And did you notice their Smosh.com site? Is their page format new or was it always like that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.157.235 (talk) 07:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

No, there seems to be some kind of tie-in with that ACT test Black Chalks deletion thing. There is a Padilla family in the Sacramento area who has made its fortune from multiple bail bonds agencies; if the Smosh Padilla is from the same family, then the Smosh videos can be seen to be unoriginal, just recreations of bail bonds arrests. If a different Padilla family, then no. But the whole Smosh success is hinged on Black Chalks? What a sad commentary on California education. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.145.32 (talk) 11:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

If Smosh is deleted every other Youtuber page (including Youtube Celebrity main page) should be deleted! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.47.134.10 (talk) 13:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Guy in background

Does anybody know anything about the guy who is almost always in the background of a shoot? After the camera switches and goes back to the original camera, the guy is gone. Examples: Reunited? and Assassins. In Reunited? the guy is standing across the street when Teabag pulls his gun out and in Assassins he is sitting on a fire hydrant in the escape scene. Who is this guy?? Guus Hoekman 08:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Watch this video. http://youtube.com/watch?v=dewxCGrauco EuroJordan 22:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe that's the man whose sister started Black Chalks at American River College. I may be wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.153.52 (talk) 15:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

He's a friend of Anthony and Ians and a founding member of Smosh.

Check out their video called "that damn neighbor" he is the damn neighbor, people are asking questions like this on youtube alot and I keep having to answer them.

[edit] Verifiablity

Please provide references to all information in the article, according to wikipedia policies summarized in wikipedia:Attribution. Unattributed information may be deleted at any time. `'Míkka>t 18:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link to a review site

Hi,

yesterday I deleted an external link from this article's page. It was a link to the page http://tilzy.tv/ . Specifically the tilzy-page on this article's topic. I came to the idea of deleting those links as such a link was also added to Ze Frank's wikipedia page, and I expected that there wouldn't be much new information on such an external site, as Ze Frank's show ended more than half a year ago.

I got a mail now by one of the founders of tilzy.tv. He explained to me relatively convincingly that he didn't post the link, and that he thinks of his site as adding extra information.

Whether or not we re-add this link should probably be based on Wikipedia:External_links.

I am actually not sure whether tilzy.tv is a

Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, 
amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) 
or other reasons.

Does someone else know this site?

My main concern was, that there should be several sites that aggregate links to vlogs. Even several sites that aggregate links and add write a small review about them. So I wasn't sure whether tilzy.tv is in someway special or provided better information.

Could maybe someone post his/her opinion on that, so we can decided whether or not to include the links to tilzy.tv.

Thanks, -- JanCK (talk) 09:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] YouTube chronology list

I kind of don't understand why the chronology of Smosh's videos keep getting deleted. Their videos are from YouTube of course, and I believe that's the source. If we keep it, then it would provide the title, release date, and the "Shut Up!" intro (probably), among other things. Those users who still delete that stuff, like Mikkalai, could be wrong... SchfiftyThree (talk) 00:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, just a second ago I was wondering why the Smosh page was so short and I scrolled down and saw there was no chronology list and that's one of the major things people will look at. We need to fix this! 76.185.52.212 (talk) 18:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Just because he thinks it shouldn't be there doesn't mean it should be deleted all together. Arogi Ho (talk) 20:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The bad news for me is that this page is now fully protected, and can only be edited by administrators. Mikkalai is an admin, and because of the page protection, he can probably decide whether it can be on there or not. I'm not an administrator, but I wish to be one someday, so I can edit fully-protected pages and block bad users. Maybe I'll discuss this with the person who keeps reverting it. SchfiftyThree (talk) 23:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What happened?

The chronology doesn't really need to be deleted - it could quite easily be sourced with the actual videos.SouperAwesome (talk) 03:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Just as we don't list huge lists of articles published by professors and journalists, some of which have 100, 200, 400, ..., publications, there is no reason to list all 2-4 minute videos, unless they have been discussed by someone somewhere. This follows general wikipedia rules of "common sense" and "notability". But I will not object to this list, if it will be supplied with external links and all notes of kind "First video to have extra cast" or "Longest video", etc., must be with references as well. Please create a draft of such table here (not necessarily complete), after that I will unprotect the article, you yourself will copy it there (so that your glory will be in article's history), and hopefully all subsequent fans of Smosh will follow the established pattern in the list. `'Míkka>t 02:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
  • P.S. What the heck is the ' "Shut up!" Intro' thingy. If it is something of note, please provide an explanation (of course, with a reference), otherwise it has no place in the table. `'Míkka>t 02:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
If you think all the tables were fancruft, then isn't Lonelygirl15 like the biggest piece of fancruft that exists at the moment? Because Smosh is WAY more known and popular than Lonelygirl15. Also, check the Geriatric1927 article. Arogi Ho (talk) 14:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

um its at the start of like every video its when thers a funny noise or quote that relares to the video and then either anthony or ian yells "shut up!" they change throughout so they should probably stay i dont understand why the page has been protected and all the chronology deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.15.19 (talk) 04:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

This is really stupid... we shouldnt delete the info mainly because smosh is a bigger thing then chris crocker lisa nova ect. if they diserve all that info on them so should smosh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.47.134.10 (talk) 23:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, that is no way for admin to act, I'm pretty sure fascism is not part of Wikipedia's policies. For Mikalai, I suggest to reconsider your actions and reverting the article back to the state where the info has not yet been deleted. There was bunch of referenced parts that got deleted by your rash actions. Also you are using admin priviledges to force your own opinion that has no wide support. --Sapeli (talk) 18:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone inform another admin to fix this? Arogi Ho (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
There's nothing to fix. Mikalai did the right thing. If you feel another article has similar problems, put an appropriate notice on that article. "There's a lot of worse junk on Wikipedia!" is never a justification for having bad article content. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I hav to disagree.... Wikipedia is an informational site... All the admins did is delete info... and thats unfair to Smosh because they are a bigger and more popular Youtube Channel than TWK or Chris Crocker (who mite i say has a giant wiki page compared to Smosh) and if u just say "If u think the other channels have the same (nonexsistant)problems as Smosh tell the admins to delete there info too to be fair," Thats just deleting creditable info. Wikipedia is meant for info... so why would u delete almost a whole (creditable) page and then lock it so it cant be fixed! This page had no problems it just makes Wikipedia look bad to Smosh Fans! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.47.134.10 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

At least add a Trivia section or something. Chris Crocker doesn't deserve his own page anyway.

Let's remove Mikkalai's so called "fancruft" from other pages as well then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arogi Ho (talk • contribs) 11:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC) The Chronology may have been unneccessary, but what about the pokemon video being taken down, and the the later comment on the "SHUT UP!!!" intro saying "SHUT UP- THAT SONG's COPYRIGHTED". The shut up theme is a notable feature on all of there videos and therefore it is information that should be included in all their articles. There was lots of valid information in the parts of the articles deleted. Wikipedia:Trivia_sections says "If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all.". This was not a trivia section but the idea still applies to it- do not delete valid information because of poor presenation- do all you can to improve the presentation and sift through unwanted information. Smosh are probably the most famous people on the internet and warrant more than 7 lines. The current state of the article is pathetic. There are no sections, just short sentences that are basically just trivia but instead of bullets put into a paragraph in individual sentences. Rever the article, and if you don't like the current state of it- YOU make on in your userspace and then upload it when it is fit for wikipedia. Because this isn't.
WP:IDONTCARE - Just because you aren't interested in the subject matter- doesn't mean it is worthless --Veggieburgerfish (talk) 12:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I am ambivalent regarding the complete deletion of the chronology table, but come on everyone, look at what that table used to say in December: "First video to have a chance of death" etc. If we can make a clean, Wikipedia-appropriate chronology without fancruft such as "Shut Up! intro" and the like, then I am all for it. ~ Hyuugamoto (talk) 23:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Greg Checci

Greg Checci actually directs most of their videos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SantanaHomerunner (talk • contribs) 15:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Any proof? Arogi Ho (talk) 02:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

yes check there vids —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.185.242 (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

They say he's the cameraman, not their director. Arogi Ho (talk) 20:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

He's the Camerman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.129.207 (talk) 05:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] $20,000,000 Lawsuit

I removed this due to the fact that it was an obvious April Fool's Joke and there is enough proof to back it up.Waffle77 (talk) 19:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

But It doesnt matter who backs it up man they are selling thier stuff and they wearent even kidding around like they usually do.The only reason why they are getting sued bow was becaz they were barely 18 when they made it and now they are 20.Wait and see —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.128.162 (talk) 22:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a real lawsuit it's an april fools joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.128.65 (talk) 23:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

If you actually try buying something on the Buy Our Stuff section of the Smosh website, it will say the item is unavailable; and U.S. civil lawsuits aren't the same as criminal/juvenile cases. I don't want to make this too complicated but they still could have been sued back when they were 18 or whatver, but it would be suing their guardians. They would have probably sued Youtube for hosting the video anyway. Waffle77 (talk) 00:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

And even if it wasn't an April fools joke, why the hell would they sell an empty bottle for $1,000? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sage1989 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Site crash

The Smosh site recently crashed, probably from traffic.75.67.128.65 (talk) 23:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This article needs to be extended

Just a suggestion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RaggedGlory (talk • contribs) 08:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

It was much larger last December, but most was removed for being unreferenced. The removal was discussed back in January, as seen above. --ÇɧĭДfrĪĔпd12 (talk) 20:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Should Smosh get some more chat lines? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SurelyEvan (talk • contribs) 19:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Clearing up all this "SHUT UP!!!" rucus

A note needs to made in the article again About the "SHUT UP!!!" Intro to each video. I haven't added it to the trivia section because I'm not sure if that would be appropriate. It really is a notable feature of their videos, so I think it may even warrant its own section. Any comments? Wikipedia veterans and/or admin would be welcomed. --Veggieburgerfish (talk) 20:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reception section?

Maybe a few details like their award, the Pokemon video, and some notable high viewcounts and maybe other statisics like how quickly videos get 1 mil views or something, could go into a reception section, or something similar. --Veggieburgerfish (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chronolgy

So from reading the results of discussion, the general consensus is that a chronolgy section is good, as long as it is of a good standard, and using the propper template, sounds good, but I for one have no idea how to do that. If anyone here has then please post some sort of a draft here and see if our beloved admin deem it acceptable (no sarcasm intended)--Veggieburgerfish (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)