Difference between revisions of "Table:Additional Info needs moderation"
Polantaris (talk | contribs) (Created page with "<!-- do not remove this. --> {{conference table thread}} <!-- Please always sign your comments with four tildes --> == Discussion == I've been reading a lot of the newer episo...") |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Professor Farnsworth's statement that his father wasn't actually his biological father would seem to imply that he is related to Fry through his mother. | Professor Farnsworth's statement that his father wasn't actually his biological father would seem to imply that he is related to Fry through his mother. | ||
:* Although, the milkman may have been Yancy's descendant. Farnsworth didn't seem to know he was related to the Philip J. Fry that was Yancy's son, although he was famous enough to be remembered in the 31st century. | |||
:** We're talking about a thousand year span between the two. That's 30 generations between them. Unless EVERY descendant only had one child, it's likely there were hundreds of descendants, and only in the year 3000 was it down to one. Being the great^30 grandson of a famous person doesn't mean anything to anyone other than a genealogist. | |||
This does not belong here. When I'm reading these topics, I expect concrete information. This is basically another user going "I don't like what you put here so I will contend it!" That doesn't belong in the article itself. [[User:Polantaris|Polantaris]] 07:04, 20 August 2010 (CEST) | This does not belong here. When I'm reading these topics, I expect concrete information. This is basically another user going "I don't like what you put here so I will contend it!" That doesn't belong in the article itself. [[User:Polantaris|Polantaris]] 07:04, 20 August 2010 (CEST) | ||
:I'd recommend you remove then. Add a reasonable entry in the summary. And be done with it. I was thinking of going through the new episodes' articles after the new season had been out for a bit, so the editing frenzy had died down and then remove and add and fiddle with whatever was required to tidy up the articles. I'll admit they are kind of messy at the moment. --'''[[User:Svip|Svip]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Svip|talk]]</sup> 10:16, 20 August 2010 (CEST) | |||
Revision as of 10:16, 20 August 2010
Discussion
I've been reading a lot of the newer episode "Additional Information" sections, and I see that a lot of these things are just squabbles between people. For example, someone puts something there (That probably shouldn't be), then there's an indented entry that's arguing this fact on how it can't be true. This type of discussion should be left in the Discussion Pages. Someone on the Staff should be watching these newer episodes for these types of situations because they don't belong there, they belong in the Discussion Pages.
Example: A Clockwork Origin page, the 3rd bullet under Additional Info - Trivia is the following: Professor Farnsworth's statement that his father wasn't actually his biological father would seem to imply that he is related to Fry through his mother.
- Although, the milkman may have been Yancy's descendant. Farnsworth didn't seem to know he was related to the Philip J. Fry that was Yancy's son, although he was famous enough to be remembered in the 31st century.
- We're talking about a thousand year span between the two. That's 30 generations between them. Unless EVERY descendant only had one child, it's likely there were hundreds of descendants, and only in the year 3000 was it down to one. Being the great^30 grandson of a famous person doesn't mean anything to anyone other than a genealogist.
- Although, the milkman may have been Yancy's descendant. Farnsworth didn't seem to know he was related to the Philip J. Fry that was Yancy's son, although he was famous enough to be remembered in the 31st century.
This does not belong here. When I'm reading these topics, I expect concrete information. This is basically another user going "I don't like what you put here so I will contend it!" That doesn't belong in the article itself. Polantaris 07:04, 20 August 2010 (CEST)
- I'd recommend you remove then. Add a reasonable entry in the summary. And be done with it. I was thinking of going through the new episodes' articles after the new season had been out for a bit, so the editing frenzy had died down and then remove and add and fiddle with whatever was required to tidy up the articles. I'll admit they are kind of messy at the moment. --Sviptalk 10:16, 20 August 2010 (CEST)