Talk:List of characters in the Family Guy franchise/Archive 1

Jimmy

Jimmy (the guy who shot himself with a nail gun) was written into this article twice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Legend Chronicles (talk • contribs) 15:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Bruce the Performance Artist

Is he gay? 68.126.202.98 (talk) 22:34, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It is hinted at but it has never been confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.224.25.252 (talk) 12:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Alerts

These works are from a TV show, for those who have yet to see Family Guy (I feel sorry for them), then perhaps should be included a Spoiler Alert for some information, such as that SPOILER!! Peter Griffin's father is dead. It shall be noted that if any of the Family Guy newbies I have mentioned have now read this, that plot point would be ruined for them, it's the least a contributer can do to provide a preliminary warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.216.105 (talk) 09:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Dave Campbell

In the list, it says that Dave is played by Fred Willard. At this webpage, it says that he is played by Carlos Alazraqui. Is it Carlos or Fred?? --S-MAN

Carter and US Steel

When Peter was playing poker with Carter, Eisner, Bill Gates and Ted Turner, Carter offered US Steel at one point to see a large raise. -DynSkeet (talk) 11:43, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Ollie Williams

Ollie Williams' catch phrase "Iss Gon' rain" seems to be very similar to a piece by the American minimalist composer Steve Reich entitled "It's Gonna Rain". In 1965, Reich made a recording and subsequently created tape loops of an apocalyptic preacher talking, in his words "very forcefully about the flood [referring to the biblical story of Noah and the Ark]". The piece is in two parts. The piece is just a repeating tape loop of the preacher saying "it's gonna rain" over and over again. Although, this is probably too much though for an episode of Family Guy

Tom Tucker

Shouldn't he have his own page? And how come characters such as Muriel Goldman which are never going to have that much info have their own pages?

Quagmire's Mother

Quagmire's Mother - Quagmire once mentioned that he only grew up with his mother, meaning she was either a prostitute before he was born Where the hell does this comment come from? It's pure speculation. Edit (from random guy on street): actually, I have heard that somewhere, not on the internet... I seem to remember watching it on TV, and I realized why he's messed up (no offense to other people with prostitute mothers/who are prostitutes).

Regarding the Grinch's "death"

How do you know it was the Grinch who was executed? It was never even mentioned who the person that was executed was, other than the fact that he was, well, executed.- Lord Lonic

Kim Cattrall and Andrew McCarthy

Both Kim Cattrall and Andrew McCarthy should be on the list of real and fictional characters, as the show has parodied Mannequin. Additionally Kim Catrall has been parodied about old people having a lot to offer society in a cutaway in The Courtship of Stewie's Father. I think there is a third reference to her, but I am not certain.

Jonathan Weed

This is a detail, but I edited the part about Jonathan Weed's accent and replaced 'French accent' by 'Italian accent', however someone edited it back to 'French accent'. I'm not 100% sure Weed's accent is Italian, but what I know is that his accent sounds more Spanish or Italian than French. --Tanynep

• I'm pretty sure his accent is actually Latin. Then again, maybe I'm not sure.

his accent is clearly french. and his last name is Oui. look at his moustache it is a stereotypical french moustache. that is why I change it back to french accent. Dacnuroman (talk) 23:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)dacnuroman Immblueversion (talk) 21:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Francis Griffin article

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francis Griffin, the Francis Griffin article has been redirected here. Please use the article history of that article to merge the content into this article. Thank you. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 04:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Bottomtooth could be added

Bottomtooth is not a one-off character. He has appeared in several episodes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.72.8.45 (talk) 15:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's true. He was in the episode when Brian writes for the 'New Yorker' magazine, in the episode in which Brian is collecting signatures for a gay marriage petition (afterwards accompanies himself at the piano singing "Amazing Grace'), and also in an episode as a student when Chris attends his grandfather's prep school. That's 3 appearances that I can think of.

A (potentially) recurring character named RJ?

In the episode "Boys Do Cry," there is a character who claims to have seen Bigfoot, and reappears again in the episode "Blue Harvest." I'm not sure, but I've seen pages on the Internet that say his name is RJ. Seeing as how he is beginning to appear in more than one episode, should we put him on the list under "Other Characters" or should we wait for him to appear in one or two more episodes to call him a recurring character? In case you're wondering who I'm talking about, he's also the guy who talks about (dare I say it) "boning his girlfriend." Immblueversion (talk) 21:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I just watched the commentary of "Blue Harvest," which talks about this character and confirms that his name is indeed RJ. Because he has appeared in more than one episode (with the non-canon Star Wars episode acknowledging his existence), I have taken the liberty of adding him to the list under "Other characters." Immblueversion (talk) 02:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Bruce

There's nothing here on Bruce. Someone should make an article of him, as he's shown up several times.Sposato (talk) 02:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Bruce is here. He's listed under "Other characters" and is between Paddy Tanninger and Phineas & Barnaby. The list is arranged alphabetically, though for these people it's by title instead of name, so that doesn't make much sense. Immblueversion (talk) 04:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I just rearranged the list of other characters in alphabetical order of their names like it logically should be. Immblueversion (talk) 22:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

No One-off policy?

Somebody has been deleting alleged one-off (single appearance) characters, but many are still listed. Shouldn't there be a consistent policy? And what exactly is wrong with one-offs, except that somebody just doesn't happen to like them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.72.123.80 (talk) 01:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The policy is supposed to be consistent, tho some editors keep adding them anyway. Which one-offs have you spotted? / edg ☺ ☭ 04:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The one-off characters, as they like to call them, are considered padding in Wikipedia, (trnslt: fancruft), and are usually therefore not considered worth noting. Family Guy has a wikia, though. Any information you want to give on the one-offs, just go there and see if it's not been already added, and if it isn't, then put it in. Just don't here. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 23:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Is Soundwave a necessary addition to the list of Pawtucket employees?

Soundwave working as Peter's supervisor seems to have only been a one-time gag, being that he's an actual figure in popular culture. Should we still keep him up? Immblueversion (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Soundwave should be removed as a one-off. / edg ☺ ☭ 04:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bertram.png

Image:Bertram.png 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Just a suggestion...

Why not make an article about Peter's family like we have about his wife's? Pewterschmidt Family TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that could work, personally. If you look at Pewterschmidt Family, it lacks several references. In all fairness, Wikipedia's coverage of Family Guy isn't the best, so introducing a new article with original research in would make it even harder work to bring them up to decent articles. But by all means, if you (or others, for that matter) can find decent references for the article, It could definitely work. Qst (talk) 17:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I'm part of Wiki Project Family Guy, and I would like to create some articles about major characters and places, but whenever I try to make them, they always go to this page!!!!!!!So, help is needed!!!!!!!Mertozoro (talk) 17:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

See Qst's answer in the previous section. (Extra credit reading: WP:FICT, WP:WAF.) Minor characters such as Nigel Pinchley, Bruce the Performance Artist (Family Guy), and Olivia Fuller would make good articles on Family Guy Wiki, but lack sufficient notability for their own Wikipedia articles. / edg ☺ ☭ 05:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

We also need to add "Thaddeus Griffin is Peter's evil brother. He shows up when Peter's mother leaves her husband, declaring this new event will surely affect his inheritance" under Peter's Family. If we are listing Nate Griffin who is not part of the family but an ancestor then Thaddeus has more than earned his place! Thaddeus is a relative, Nate is an ancestor. Nate doesn't truly belong there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.78.149.242 (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we need to add him, because he made like a 5 second appearance out of the whole show. CTJF83Talk 20:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Pope

No Pope?! 141.166.227.101 (talk) 04:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

No Pope, daddy-o! Family Guy has hundreds of one-shot characters (especially counting cutaway gags). If they are worth mentioning at all, they go in their episode articles. The Pope's is "Holy Crap". Inform the Vatican. / edg ☺ ☭ 05:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking for a character

I probably just missed it on the page but theres a guy in the show, some ppl say his name is jasper but i cant find it anywhere, thanks for any help. Portillo (talk) 05:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to split article into separate articles

• Approve - I propose to split the page into separate articles, like a "recurring characters" list, or a "one-time" characters list. The page has begun to get "crufty", breaking guidelines like WP:CRUFT. If we split to a "list of recurring characters" (similar to list of The Simpsons recurring characters), then we could elaborate on the characters, source it, and have a separate list of one-time characters! - Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r _reply! 23:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

• Approve: yes, a list of characters should be a list of characters, not a list of characters with biographies. bonnie doesnt have her own page, at least give her a section.Phyzik 19:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
• Approve: I agree that there are too many characters to be efficiently mentioned on one page. The question is how and when we should get it done. By the way, Bonnie USED to have her own page. Immblueversion (talk) 19:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you two for replying! We should wait for like a while to get replies, and then begin the split.- Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r _reply! 23:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

• Weak Approve: I suppose a list of one-off characters makes sense, but we will have to set guidelines on what is and what isn't a one-off characters. I'll get to work on a proposal and let me know what any of you think. Saget53 (talk) 16:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. If you are going to do a "one-time" list, then you better be sure at least have a few sources. People have tried to delete the Simpsons one-time several times and it has only marginally survived, because it has a few references. --Maitch (talk) 12:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

One-off character guidelines

1. 99% of all celebrity appearances are non-canon and should not be inlcuded in the recurring character article. (Possible exceptions: James Woods, Michael Eisner)

2. All unnamed characters should not be included in recurring article. (Possible Exceptions: Judge)

3. All characters appearing in cutaway jokes should not be included in the recurring articles. (Exceptions: The Evil Monkey rule: Any cutaway character who makes three appearances or more can be safely counted as a character)

4. All characters who are central characters in the storyline of a single episode but do not make anymore appearances should not be inlcuded in the recurring character article. (Examples: Nigel the British pub owner, Ronaldo Peter's Mexican friend)

5. All characters who are central characters in the storyline of two or more episodes should be included in the recurring character article.

6. All one-time family members who have an episode or are a central part of a storyline devoted to them should be considered characters. (Examples: Mickey McFinnigan, Lois Laura Bush Lynne Cheney Pewterschmidt)

7. All cutaway joke family members should be considered non-canon and should not be included in the main article. (Examples: Peter's many "ancestors", Thaddeus Griffin, Stan Thompson)

Let me know what any of you think about this (changes, etc.) Saget53 (talk) 17:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with all those, 100%. That's exactly what I would have written, those are great guidlines, thanks! I doubt there would be anyone to disagree; these are fair and correct guildlines. Thanks! - Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r _reply! 23:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I like the first three particularily! But perhaps 7 is the best, because people often try to put Peter's many family members on the list. There was a long useless debate about Stan Thompson, which was obviously a joke. Five is very good. Four makes a lot of sense. These are great guidlines, thanks for taking the time! - Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r _reply! 23:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks alot! Saget53 (talk) 02:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It appears this one question remains: When will this thing be ready? Immblueversion (talk) 21:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Those all seem like good guidelines. One suggestion: canon is usually an in-universe property, and emphasizing a canon standard may encourage trivial, in-universe disputes (cf. Meg's parentage). Perhaps we should find another term. Significant? / edg ☺ ☭ 02:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Significant is fine. Saget53 (talk) 04:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Which characters go on the list?

Now, following the guidlines (above) we have to create the recurring and one-time characters lists. Characters to be added to recurring should follow an alphabetical order. Characters to be added (in my opinion) are Tom Tucker, Diane Simmons, Ollie Williams, and Tricia Takanawa. - Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r _reply! 23:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

This is how I plan on Tricia's section to look like.
Tricia Takanawa (Alex Borstein) is the main correspondent for Quahog Channel 5 News. Unlike her fellow news people, Tricia displays a strong, stoic attitude. Whenever Tucker or Simmons would switch the scene to Takanawa, either of the two would always say "Asian Correspondent Tricia Takanawa", or "Asian Reporter Tricia Takanawa". She is known for her flat, nasal voice and dead-pan attitude, even when laughing and during sex. On one occasion, however, she completely loses control while meeting David Bowie. Diane confirms her as being Japanese. Tricia is often made to do dirty jobs, such has covering a flu segment (prompting her to throw up), and to be abused in a hurricane report. In an uncanonical episode, she is grilled and eaten by Tom and Diane. Her explosion when she met David Bowie was publicised after she started to hump his left leg like a dog. In "North by North Quahog", she is not allowed into a hotel because of her ethnicity. - Yours truly, [ S ] υ ρ є r ı o r _reply! 23:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

This looks good, but a bit long. Suggestion:

In "North by North Quahog", she is not allowed into a hotel because of her ethnicity.

... is by itself excessive plot detail, but move it to after "Asian Reporter Tricia Takanawa" and it makes a statement about the jokes this show makes about her ethnicity. Also, lose the Bowie sentence, which is again plot recap, and is probably a case of deliberately breaking the character's normal behavior to make a joke. Being eaten can probably go as well.

In general, recapping a character's many appearances is discouraged in WP:PLOT and WP:WAF. Real world information (such as critics saying "yeah that's obviously Connie Chung", or young asian women avoiding careers in news reporting citing Takanawa's influence) is much needed. / edg ☺ ☭ 05:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

What everyone needs to be careful about is not just recapping everything each character did in each episode (In Episode X, he did this, then in Episode Y he did this, then in Episode Z he did this etc.). People are persistently trying to add every single character Bruce's voice has been on or every short phrase Ollie has yelled. Summarize their personalities and mannerisms and only use episodes as examples if necessary. Saget53 (talk) 04:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Jillian's Necklace?

Am I the only one who notices that Jillian's necklace looke strickingly similar to Brian's collar?--BrianGriffin-FG (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Sort of... Although Brian's is just a gold circle with his name on it (probably) and Jillian's is a heart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.224.25.252 (talk) 12:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Surname for Brian's son?

It has been established that the full name of Brian's old girlfriend is Tracy Flannigan, so I assume that is Dylan's surname as well. Immblueversion (talk) 22:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Is it not usually the surname is taken from the male parent? But yes we should probably have it as Flannigan for now.

missing character

I feel that there is a character missing.

i dont know his name, but he is a recurring character.

he is the aristocrat with the exaggerated chin. his doesnt realy speak, but makes a mumbling type sound. anthoughts of his name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zebra91 (talk • contribs) 03:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

His name is James William Bottomtooth III. He is listed. --216.255.39.125 (talk) 19:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ernie the Giant Chicken

Is the first fight between Peter and Ernie the Giant Chicken based off a scene from Toy Story 2 that was shown only in theaters? I've heard the scene is shown in the deleted scenes on the DVD release of the movie. Does anybody know if this is true? --216.255.39.125 (talk) 19:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

* Voice Cast *

This list of characters should contain their voice actors. I would suggest they are put in brackets after the character name. See similar lists such as Simpsons characters which contain their actors. All articles on individual Family Guy characters contain the actors, so this list of other characters should have them as well. Weasel Fetlocks (talk) 12:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:PetersTwoDads.jpg

The image Image:PetersTwoDads.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Bonnie/Debbie

I know Bonnie Swanson is her actual name, but in one episode, Love Thy Trophy, Lois calls bonnie debbie for some reason, anyone know why?

It's when they're in the van spying and waiting for Joe and Cleveland to recue Stewie.

Bonnie: It makes me so hot when Joe lies to strangers, when I get him home I'm just gonna[...]

Lois: [...] that's fine Debbie.

I've rewatched the clip soo many times, but she's defiently saying Debbie and there's nothing to make it unclear (no background noise or anything). So why does she call her Debbie? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.143.160 (talk) 07:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Ulysses S. Griffin?

I put him on the page, honestly because I thought it was kind of neccesary. Even though he is a one time character, he is still an ancestor of Peter. Since he's a one time character, I was having trouble deciding if I should put him under Others or Peter's family. I decided to put him on Peter's family. (Time4CrymeTime (talk) 13:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)).

I don't believe placing "Ulysses S. Griffin" on this or any page is necessary....

Do we actually need any "facts" on this show that are supposed to be a joke for one episode and are not meant to be part of any concrete continuity? It's not like this is a documentary of a serious American family, it's a comedy cartoon. For example, the reference to Jake Tucker's face being turned rightside up "temporarily" in an episode about a lake filled with toxic waste being documented on a wikipedia article as a fact is insulting to the integrity of this site and clearly misses the humorous point of the Family Guy show.

I just thought I'd press across my view on this "overflow of meaningless information" before I changed it myself. - Anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.120.130 (talk) 19:11, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Do we need him?

Why is Peter Hitler here? If he's here we should have Moses Griffin and the other one shots. I understand Nate, but P. Hitler isn't a recurring character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.28.70 (talk) 14:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Bruce's sexuality

Though it is frequently hinted at, there is no explicit proof Bruce the Performance Artist is gay.

He spoke to a male voice in his house (his own voice) but still. I guess that is still implied though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.231.71 (talk) 04:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Speaking to members of the same sex does not imply homosexuality. The man could very easily have been his brother, cousin, father, uncle, son etc.

Fjurg Van Der Ploeg

Should Fjurg be included on this page? He has appeared in "Love Blactually" and "Tales of a Third Grade Nothing" as well as in the extras in the Volume six DVD set. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzcrandall (talk • contribs) 04:10, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Refresh me on who he is, and what he does. CTJF83Talk 04:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I added a merge proposal. I don't watch Family Guy consistently but I have seen a few episodes. If this is in fact a character from the show, then Fjurg Van Der Ploeg should either be merged here or if not notable enough (for this article), then the page should be deleted. - Killiondude (talk) 01:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it needs to be merged here. He isn't notable for his own page. CTJF83Talk 01:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

He's not appropriate for this article either, in my opinion. Appearing in one-off jokes, even if it's on mulitple occasions, still doesn't make you a character. He's been deleted. Saget53 (talk) 22:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

By that kind of thinking, Bruce (Both Kaplan and the Performance Artist), The greased up deaf guy, Al Harrington, Buzz Killington, Carl, Ernie the Chicken, The Bottomtooths, Jim Kaplan, Phineas and Barnaby, Seamus, Steve, Shauna Parks, Sarah, and Craig Hoffman should be removed. Voxamimae (talk) 23:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

New Brian.

Don't we need New Brian? He was a very main character in The Man with Two Brians, so don't you think he deserves to be added to this page. Should he be added to Griffin Family section or other character section.(Zach Benjamin (talk) 23:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)).

Single-episode characters aren't listed. It is sufficient to list "New Brian" in the episode article. / edg ☺ ☭ 12:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

There needs to be one set of rules that are enforced instead of having one set of rules with users doing the total opposite. If you don't want to list single-episode characters, then alot of current characters listed on the page need to go, including Todd, Fluffy, Seabreeze, O'Brian, Coco, Anna, and some more. These characters were either mentioned in or appeared in 1 episode, and have the same or less time in the show as New Brian. As I said before, there needs to be one set of rules that are enforced instead of having one set of rules with users doing the total opposite. MOOOOOPS (talk) 08:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I've removed any characters I can find that aren't mentioned in more than one episode and don't have other significance. If anyone can find others, please remove them. Graymornings (talk) 14:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Should we remove Patrick Pewterschmidt? He only appeared in The Fat Guy Strangler and hasn't been mentioned in more than one episode Graymornings? And what about Fjurg Van Der Ploeg? He's on this page and only appeared in Tales of a Third Grade Nothing for a couple of seconds.

Patrick was only in 1 episode, but he is a family member, so I don't know if he should be exempt from the no single-episode character rule. Fjurg was also in the episode Love Blactually as the bakery employee, but only appeared for a few seconds in that episode. MOOOOOPS (talk) 23:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Carolyn,Omar,Ms. Wilson.

Don't you guys think we need Carolyn from Love Blactually? She was Brian's girlfriend then Cleveland's girlfriend. Don't you think that's a pretty big thing and it needs to be here. And Omar is the person who tried to win a spelling bee in Tales of a Third Grade Nothing. In case you don't know who he is. And Ms. Wilson was Peter's third grade teacher, who appeared also in Tales of a Third Grade Nothing.Since there one time characters, do you think we should make a section for characters called "one-time characters"?(Zach Benjamin (talk) 21:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC)). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zach Benjamin (talk • contribs) 21:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Bruce Jenner?

Do we need Bruce Jenner? He appeared in Tales of a Third Grade Nothing. This is what he said.

Peter Griffin:Take me home,Bruce Jenner!

Bruce Jenner:Hop on, Peter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.32.61.52 (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

He was in 1 episode for 5 seconds. He shouldn't be put on the page. MOOOOOPS (talk) 20:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

• I don't thin your being fair MOOOOOPS. Because Todd (The dog the Griffin's had before Brian) is on this page. And he only appeared in a cutaway for a couple of seconds and Bruce didn't appear in a cutaway he was actually with Peter for a couple of seconds.Plus they are both one time characters. Todd a one-time and he's on this page and Bruce is a one-time and he's not on this page. That's not fair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zach Benjamin (talk • contribs) 14:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Except Bruce Jenner is an actual person. If we listed Bruce Jenner, we'd have to list every single celebrity ever mentioned in Family Guy. Todd is unique to Family Guy; Bruce Jenner is not. Voxamimae (talk) 23:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:PetersTwoDads.jpg

The image File:PetersTwoDads.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

One-off Character Guidelines

I'm reposting these on the main page, since they have been archived.

1. 99% of all celebrity appearances are non-canon and should not be inlcuded in the recurring character article. (Possible exceptions: James Woods, Michael Eisner)

2. All unnamed characters should not be included in recurring article. (Possible Exceptions: Judge)

3. All characters appearing in cutaway jokes should not be included in the recurring articles. (Exceptions: The Evil Monkey rule: Any cutaway character who makes three appearances or more can be safely counted as a character)

4. All characters who are central characters in the storyline of a single episode but do not make anymore appearances should not be inlcuded in the recurring character article. (Examples: Nigel the British pub owner, Ronaldo Peter's Mexican friend)

5. All characters who are central characters in the storyline of two or more episodes should be included in the recurring character article.

6. All one-time family members who have an episode or are a central part of a storyline devoted to them should be considered characters. (Examples: Mickey McFinnigan, Lois Laura Bush Lynne Cheney Pewterschmidt)

7. All cutaway joke family members should be considered non-canon and should not be included in the main article. (Examples: Peter's many "ancestors", Thaddeus Griffin, Stan Thompson) Saget53 (talk) 04:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

You could perhaps create this as a talkheader FAQ? That would solve the archiving issue. –xeno (talk) 20:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I say go for it! I'm not sure how to do it, without having to look it up. CTJF83Talk 20:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, great idea. And per these tenets, it's time to clean out "Peter Griffin Jr". =) DP76764 (Talk) 20:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Ya, Dp, that is old already! Hopefully it will die down in a week or so. Do either of you know how to make an FAQ section...not that these IPs would read it anyway, but it still would be good to have. CTJF83Talk 01:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

There's an FAQ on Talk:Barack Obama; might be able to lift some of the code from there. DP76764 (Talk) 01:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess we could just post it at the top of this page? or have it hidden on the article page, but visible when editing? CTJF83Talk 01:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it's supposed to go at the top of talk pages, among the other 'header' stuff. DP76764 (Talk) 02:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

• Why is Greased-up Deaf Guy back? He makes very few appearances, and does nothing at all to further plots. I can see why Herbert should be here, having featured prominently in several episodes, and maybe Ernie The Giant Chicken, but I do not see why Greased-up Deaf Guy counts as an important character. He never really does anything at all. And if Greased-up Deaf Guy counts as an 'other' character, why does The Evil Monkey not? His appearances are sometimes some-what linked to the plot, and he has appeared in at least seven episodes. I'm just curious about who qualifies and who does not. I know that Saget53 made a great list just above, I'm just curious as to why The Evil Monkey has no section, since he makes a lot of appearances on the show. If it's just a case of he has not been added yet or has been forgotten or overlooked, I can just add the character myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.194.195 (talk) 23:40, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Well Segat's number 3 states the evil monkey should be included. I agree, I'm not sure Greased-up Deaf Guy should be listed, as he is a very minor character. There is no exact science to who should or shouldn't be listed. CTJF83Talk 00:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've re-arranged the order slightly. Residents and regulars first, supernatural and gag characters below, because it seems to make more sence. Also added Horace, as he has appeared in at least eight episodes, and was a frequent reccuring character in seasons 3-4. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.101.163 (talk) 14:28, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Eliza anyone?

Does anyone think that perhaps Eliza...damn forgot her last name, should be included? She is central to the Stewie and Brian storyline in the One If By Clam, Two If By Sea episode. The end of the episode also hints at her possible return because of her hatred for Lois. There is some similarities here with the Bertram line that may pan out in the future. It's not a big deal, but if we are listing some one episode characters, she could be a nominee so to speak.MephYazata (talk) 08:03, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think she should be listed, unless she actually appears in another episode. CTJF83Talk 16:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup?

What is the clean-up that's required to meet Wikipedia's quality standards? I can't see anything seriously wrong with the article, and whoever's put that heading on the article hasn't said what their concerns are (as far as I can see). Hibbertson (talk) 11:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Herbert "The Pervert"

Not counting Jump-rope rhymes, is this character ever called "Herbert The Pervert" in the show? If not, this appendix should be removed, despite the fondness of people who find it irresistibly witty to add it. / edg ☺ ☭ 17:44, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Nope, I'm so tired of this vandalism, we had a major problem with it, when he had his own page. Reverted.CTJF83Talk 17:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I also suggest that someone should remove the parenthetical information in: "He has a dog named Jesse, who is unable to use his hind legs (possibly suggesting that Herbert uses him for anal sex." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.106.158 (talk)

Agreed and removed. DP76764 (Talk) 15:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Links Link back to the orignal page

I've pressed Tom Tucker and Neil Goldman but they link to a Disambiguation page, so then once someone picks the Family Guy link, it leads back to the certain bit of text they were orignally reading on the same page. Someone needs to either remove the links, or put a page for that person/family? The drunken guy (talk) 16:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. I had merged the pages a while ago, based on a consensus. CTJF83Talk 16:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Suggesting deadline of: two weeks to acquire sourcing for each section to show some real-world importance.

In my opinion, any character that lacks importance shouldn't be included. This will set a certain standard for characters to reach, and it will no longer be ambiguous as to what's worth including. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Asian Reporter Tricia Takanawa

She was a recurring character, and I think should be added to the WQHG entry. 70.171.113.214 (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Shamus/Seamus?

The pirate guy with the 4 wooden limbs has been on at least as many episodes as Greased Up Deaf Guy, Death and the Vaudeville Guys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.209.7.122 (talk) 18:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Then add him...

One episode characters

I don't see any reason to include characters who are significant only for one episode, and therefore, I have removed at least some of them.

I removed Mickey Finnegan, Grandma Hebrewberg (no episodes at all, just one mention!), Carol Pewterschmidt (one episode, mere mentions elsewhere), Coco, Biscuit and Dylan. I didn't remove Jasper or Death, because (I think) they appear in more than one episode and so perhaps a case can be made for them.

Zaps93: it would have been helpful if you had just re-added Jasper if Jasper was your only criticism. As it is, the repeated suggestion that others go to the talk page, despite your refusal to do so, is not terribly helpful. Phiwum (talk) 15:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Did you take a look at the 'Guidelines' for characters in the FAQ linked at the top? Mickey and other characters who are a major figure of an entire episode should probably be kept. DP76764 (Talk) 15:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

That is exactly why I kept re-adding. They played major parts to the episode, and altered the history, as with Lois' grandmother, she revealed that Lois' family is infact Jewish which is a big chance, though she is not seen she is major role. Zaps93 (talk) 15:54, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Single-episode characters play major parts in a single episode, but are not important parts of the series. Family Guy should not be treated like a historical record. In the real world, Lois was not Jewish in preceding episodes, and this revelation does not change that. / edg ☺ ☭ 17:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

To Dp76764: I confess I had missed that FAQ entry, but the situation doesn't seem as clear as you suggest. Characters central to single episodes should not be included, but family members central to single episodes should be included. I've no idea why the distinction nor who came up with it, but if someone reverts (some of?) my deletion due to this FAQ entry, I'll defer.

Grandma Hewbrewberg is obviously not a central character to any episode and hence should be deleted. I don't know about Carol Pewterschmidt, since I don't recall the episode in which she makes an appearance. Does Brian's family count as "family members"? Beats me. (I really haven't any clue why the FAQ entry distinguishes family members from non-family members. Seems arbitrary to me.) Phiwum (talk) 17:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Why were we directed to an FAQ written by Wikipedians and not based on any policies or guidelines? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe the FAQ originated in this Talk space and represented some form of Consensus (there's your policy support). I merely moved that material into the FAQ format/template/whatever for easier visibility. DP76764 (Talk) 21:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a vote; the policy does not allow people to make their own inclusion guidelines that are not based on a preexisting guideline or policy, and your consensus was created by like-minded people who didn't seek outside opinion on the matter, which if you did, you would be directed to the many featured articles that have a higher standard for inclusion and the lack of featured articles with a similar standard for inclusion. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:30, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Please don't imply that I had anything to do with (or ownership of) the establishment of that list. I merely moved it into the current format. That being said, I happen to think it's a reasonably good list, but am totally open to suggestions for improving it. So let's hear some! DP76764 (Talk) 21:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

New age, what would you have us do? Post a memo all over the project so people that have no idea about Family Guy can weigh in? Obviously people who frequently edit FG related articles have the best knowledge of what should be added and what shouldn't. I'm not saying outside people will be ignored, because they are welcomed too. What is this about.."the policy does not allow people to make their own inclusion guidelines that are not based on a preexisting guideline or policy" Obviously people who are familiar with Family Guy and do a lot of editing can make guidelines for related articles. CTJF83 chat 23:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Uh? Because you're familiar with the series, that gives you the authority to create fan guidelines and cite them for why this article is like that? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

For the project yes, what do you think they are for? CTJF83 chat 01:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Individual projects will often develop more unusual features that depend on peculiarities of the projects' scope or activities; the best ways to discover these is through innovative experimentation, or to observe what successful WikiProjects are doing. CTJF83 chat 01:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

How about this - let's ask ourselves how many featured lists of characters are formed similarly. The logical step is that if your guidelines are dissimilar to those used by these featured character lists, then they are probably not good for the article's quality. Explain to me how this would be a featured list with one episode characters, especially when an inclusion criteria seeks to include any relatives of the Griffin family, regardless of notability. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 01:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

First I'll point out your second point is covered by FAQ 7. I'll have to look at other FL character pages first. CTJF83 chat 01:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Checking both WP:FA and WP:FL all I can find to compare it to is Characters of Carnivàle which has several sections for minor characters. Also List of Harry Potter cast members. Being I've never seen any, I can't tell you how minor these characters are compared to FG character list. CTJF83 chat 01:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

You can't compare a minor character in a serious show to a minor character in this show. You have to compare Brian's dad to the characters. Approximately none of the characters on either list provided are on a similar level to him. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 01:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Serious show? You act like we are adding Thadius Griffin, and Peter Hittler, etc. We (or I) only add and remove, all characters that are that minor. Obviously Jasper, Mickey McFinigan are very central to their episode. According to you, that isn't notable enough for this list. I think the opposite is true. They are notable for a list like this, because they aren't notable enough for their own page all together. What guidelines are you suggesting? Do a few minor appearances by Ernie, the piano guys, greased up deaf guy, somehow make them notable, because they have appeared in more then one episode, but always as minor, and usually not pertaining to the plot in anyway. Are you saying the 3 I mentioned (That again appear in ways that are irrelevant to the plot) are more notable then Jasper and McFingigan who are only in one episode, but play a crucial role in the plot? Why is Ollie on here? Sure he has appeared several times, but has never said more than a few words. CTJF83 chat 01:54, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

That I didn't remove Ollie is the exact opposite of a valid argument. I don't have to remove every single character that might be objectionable. Fact of the matter is that the writers of this article shot themselves in the foot by claiming family members are more notable just because they're related. A character who appears in a whole one episode of Family Guy, regardless of his importance to said episode, is not important to the show, he is important to the episode. And Wikipedia, quite frankly, is not a collection of indiscriminate information. Just because you discriminate some doesn't mean you discriminate enough - just because they can't have an article doesn't mean they belong here. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Well then get a new consensus! Uh, and by writers, you're clearly referring to IPs and new users who added very minor family members, not us main contributors. CTJF83 chat 06:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

If it's IPs who are trying to add the content, then why is there so much opposition to their removal? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 08:28, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Who, besides you? CTJF83 chat 20:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I oppose their removal? Huh. It seems to be a handful of registered users opposing the removals, for the reason that family members of the Griffins can't have articles and must be listed, but characters of similar notability who are not related to the Griffins cannot qualify for this reasoning. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Edited the section "Bertram" for spelling and grammar

I just went ahead and fixed that. I hope I kept the original intent of the previous editor. I just wanted to clean it up. --ThePenciler (talk) 14:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Maia Swanson

Deleted the following section of the page as it has several factual errors and is not legitimate, to the best of my knowledge.

• Maia Swanson - Joe and Bonnie's baby daughter, The second daughter, after Kevin, is 1 year old, at the beginning he didn't like her sister, but later you she felt fraternity with her, she will be the third daughter, but I eat Sussie she was not born but, when Bonnie was pregnant of Sussie, it was embarrassed 6 years and she decided to have Maia, non wise Bonnie that of 6 years, she will have Maia when Sussie is 6 years old, but it was not this way.

(Roxxor2k7 (talk) 20:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC))

Evil Monkey?

shouldn't the evil monkey be on this page? hes appeared in lot of episodes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.217.104.227 (talk) 02:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

whats more, Evil Monkey redirects to the "Other characters" section where he's not mentioned at all! bunch of geniuses here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.21.44.18 (talk) 06:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

and they can't even answer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.217.104.227 (talk) 04:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of "Glenn's Sister" and "No Way Guy"

Removed these from the page, per guidelines of not listing unnamed characters, as well as characters who are not featured in more than one episode or hold any significance to the storyline. Roxxor2k7 (talk) 19:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Hardcore Redundancy

Could someone please, who can, delete the List of recurring characters in Family Guy article? It is awfully redundant; that article has nothing in it that this article does not. It's job is already being done by this article, and having two articles which basically do the exact same thing and have the exact same information (apart from LorciFG having a lot less characters, clarity and info in it than LociFG as) just makes said information more confusing to access. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.32.16 (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done redirected to List of characters in Family Guy CTJF83 chat 00:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Buzz Killington

Buzz Killington redirects to the "list of other recurring characters" section of this article, but is not mentioned there. Was he deleted by vandals? OR does someone need to write up his description? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

http://familyguy.wikia.com/wiki/Buzz_Killington Jus' sayin'. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Probably removed because he is a very minor character. CTJF83 chat 00:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Stewies Accent

Stewie speak with dirty dog sound, which is the standard upper-class dialect of English in the United Kingdom. This was removed, but can be replaced if a source can be found. I point this out because it is an important aspect of Stewie's character.--Floydiac (talk) 20:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

This has been discussed and expressed enough in Stewies article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.106.95 (talk) 19:35, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Too much plot synopsis!

It's good that we have some guidelines about which characters appear in this list and which do not, but we could also use some guidelines about the character descriptions. As it is, they tend to devolve into messy plot synopses which list events that various editors found humorous. It seems to me that these entries are not meant to be histories, but descriptions of the primary features of the characters and their roles in the programs. Perhaps a more amibitious editor (or group of editors) could sketch a guideline for the sort of information that belongs here and the sort that does not. Phiwum (talk) 14:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Bitch Stewie and Brian

Would Bitch Stewie and Brian warrant a mention on this page?

They were memorable.

24.205.28.26 (talk) 02:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Probably not; they were a 1-shot set of joke characters. See the FAQ at the top of this page for suggested guidelines on inclusions. DP76764 (Talk) 04:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Following that logic, why is Peter's father listed?71.75.31.150 (talk) 04:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Simple. The family section has all the family, one-shot or not. After that are characters used often. Last is semi-minor recurring characters. Bitch Stewie and Bitch Brian can be included when they are shown again, being recurring characters. MJ56003 (talk) 15:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The Quagmires

The list currently include both Anna Lee and Dan/Ida Quagmire. As far as I know, these are characters that appeared in only one episode each, and thus should not be included in this list according to the guidelines found in the FAQ section of this talk page. I've deleted these entries, but if I'm mistaken, please revert. Phiwum (talk) 14:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

You are right, they don't really meet any of the requirements, but these 2 were each important to their specific episodes. Perhaps we could add another number to the FAQ and add this situation. I'll see what others think. CTJF83 chat 16:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

They actually were all rightly removed due to FAQ #6. They can probably be safely mentioned on Glenn Quagmire's page. CTJF83 chat 16:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps we should revisit #6? CTJF83 chat 17:04, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Loosening up #6 will probably lead us back towards all the Peter's Ancestors and such, sadly. I'd lean towards elaborating on characters like this on the pertinent character page instead of this one. The question, of course, is, how are these 1-shot characters important to the character they're tied to, and is that notable enough to mention? FG is quite good at 1-shot jokes that are against the normal character behavior (Brian 'praying', etc); all in the name of being funny, of course. Having a child (for example) has had little/zero impact on the core Quagmire character. DP76764 (Talk) 18:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

As the person who tightened FAQ #6 - being related to a Griffin character, even if they are important in only one episode, is not reason to be listed. This article should end at important characters. I may even request that since Family Guy has so many important unimportant characters like Bruce and The Giant Chicken, each character included must have an assertion of notability, notwithstanding characters with articles as they would most likely have accomplished this in the articles. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:45, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Good points. You're right DP, we can add stuff (if necessary) about Quagmire's dad/daughter on his page, where the info is more relative. CTJF83 chat 03:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Kevin's death

There is no reason to mention his death in "Da Boom" because that episode takes place out of continuity and is never mentioned in episodes following it and is therefore irrelevent. Not to mention that Kevin made more appearances after that episode, including "Peter's Two Dads" at Meg's birthday party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.116.4.185 (talk) 21:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

 Fixed I agree. CTJF83 chat 16:29, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

 Reverted I disagree. While it may be irrelivent to the overall continuity, there is no reason it can't be mentioned in Kevin's bio. There is a lot of notable events that happen in one particular episode, and is never referenced again. I don't see why this shouldn't be included, especially since the bio acknowledges the continuity issue. It was still an event that happened in the show and took place in the character's history whether it was reality or not. See Tony Soprano for a similar example. Geeky Randy (talk) 18:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

 Fixed Why are you fighting this so much? His "death" happened in a dream episode; it doesn't count. If we were going to include things that happened outside of continuity, many pages on here would be a mess.66.116.4.185 (talk) 00:39, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

These sorts of arguments occur because there are no guidelines regarding what counts as notable enough for inclusion here. As a result, the page consists of whatever some editor found funny enough to include, with no discrimination at all. These sorts of issues should be settled for character lists generally, but especially for an odd comedy like Family Guy where humor is more important than consistent character development. Phiwum (talk) 01:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

But he died in a dream episode. That doesn't count.66.116.4.185 (talk) 01:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

 Reverted We're not having a debate over what the show's reality is. So what if it was a dream? The bio explains this too. This doesn't mean it can't be included as long as it's not overly redundant. As for other pages looking like a "mess" if they were all like this, see WP:WAX as I've provided on your talk page already. I'm finding you're not reading the WPs I've been asking you to read in order to come to a consensus on this disagreement. If you continue, please be prepared to get accused of not adhering to WP:NPOV because you obviously care only about what you think the article should look like. Geeky Randy (talk) 21:41, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

These sorts of arguments occur because editors ignore the guideline Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction). It's a trivial plot detail not significant enough to include in a brief summary, such as this list article. / edg ☺ ☭ 22:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

That's not exactly how WP:NPOV works. Let's reach a WP:CONSENSUS on this before considering re-adding this material. For the record, I do not think that this bit of trivia is necessary to mention about the character. DP76764 (Talk) 22:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

It shouldn't be listed, in a way similar to how we don't list anything from the Treehouse of Horror episodes. CTJF83 chat 22:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to be overly self-righteous about this. I'm an inclusionist, so naturally I'm going to support the "Boom" info about Kevin stays. But I never looked at it as similar as Treehouse of Horror episodes, so that could be a good point by User:Ctjf83. However, 66.116.4.185 has been focusing on the dream-aspect for deleting the information, so I've been using notable information from other articles, Tony Soprano for example, as a defense for dreams still being notable. Geeky Randy (talk) 00:25, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

One Family Guy dream episode is not the same as multiple Soprano dream episodes.66.116.4.185 (talk) 01:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

There was only one "dream episode" on The Sopranos and that was "The Test Dream". The rest were just dream sequences in between continuity. Not much different than cutaway gags on Family Guy. These are notable because many characters have come out of cutaway gags. "Da Boom" can also be argued similarly with introducing the Ernie the Giant Chicken, who has become quite notable despite not being part of the continuity. Not to mention Mila Kunis's debut as Meg--so since this was all a dream and not part of the continuity, why didn't Meg's voice go back to Lacey Chabert's in the following episode? Do you see how weak the "it was just a dream so exclude it" argument is? I understand it's not part of the story; but I'm not seeing why this isn't notable. Geeky Randy (talk) 04:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't change the subject. This isn't about Meg's voice or the Giant Chicken debut. This is about Kevin's death; this is a bigger issue. His death in the episode doesn't count because it's part of a dream and he appeared in many episodes following it until his real death was brought up in "Stew-roids." You know you are the only one fighting for this right?66.116.4.185 (talk) 04:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Let me say this as well. Should we include other things like Peter was once mayor of New Quahog or that Stewie gave birth to multiple baby eggs? Those are pretty notable things for the characters, except they happened in a dream and are never brought up again, along with Kevin's death and the whole entire episode, excluding the Giant Chicken's debut. As for Meg's voice change, that's a production issue and not a story issue.66.116.4.185 (talk) 05:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I see you still haven't read WP:WAX. I've stated my point, and it should be noted that notable things happened in the episode that were a part of the continuity. To discuss that isn't changing the subject, but could possibly be an overriding factor in the disagreement about notability. Look at yourself, your last few messages haven't added anything new to this debate. You're officially going in circles, responding to your own posts. Geeky Randy (talk) 14:07, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I only added more to argument by responding to my own post. Well, it's quite obvious you and me are not going to reach an agreement. I've made my point, but you just can't let this go can you? Every other person who posted here agrees with me; you're the only one fighting this.66.116.4.185 (talk) 17:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Every person who posted here agree with you? I don't think that's entirely true, and even if it was, it's irrelivant per WP:NOT#DEM. Will you read this? Probably not. Geeky Randy (talk) 18:48, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

The death in a dream episode was not notable, even if other events in the same episode were notable. The fact that it happened only in that episode and was never again mentioned and had no effect on the series thereafter is a pretty good indication it wasn't notable. Phiwum (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

None of this episode's events are significant at all. We may only mention an event that occurs in an episode if it has a lasting effect on the series: Example: Loretta leaves Cleveland in an episode. We include this because it alters the character in future episodes, and without mentioning it, his actions would be confusing. However, Kevin dying in this episode is irrelevant because it does not shape the character in later episodes. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 22:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Ya, and after rewatching the episode to refresh my memory, we obviously wouldn't mention Cleveland and Quagmire being fused together or Joe being fused in concrete, or Stewie's tentacles, or Quahog (and the world) blowing up. CTJF83 chat 05:09, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Berler?

Is Mr. Berler (Meg's math teacher) significant enough for the list? I don't recall the character myself. Perhaps someone who has wasted even more hours watching this show can verify whether Berler is a recurring character or appears in only one episode. In the latter case, please delete his entry. Phiwum (talk) 12:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I can't think of any appearance that was more than minor. CTJF83 chat 16:52, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

He's in at least four episodes: "Let's Go to the Hop", "And the Wiener Is..." and "North by North Quahog". The fourth includes a scene where he accidentally shows his sex tape to his class. Geeky Randy (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

James William Bottomtooth

Just wondered if it's worth adding James William Bottomtooth to the list. From memory I think he appeared in two episodes, and some relative of his was in another one. I put his name in the search and was redirected to this page but found no mention of him. AnemoneProjectors 23:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Take a look through the FAQ at the top of this page, if you please. DP76764 (Talk) 02:10, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I already did but it wasn't entirely clear so that's why I asked. But looking at the recurring characters on the page I can see he's not recurring enough. Why bother with a redirect though if he's not going to be mentioned? AnemoneProjectors 10:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think this is addressed in the FAQ. Bottomtooth is in at two episodes, and isn't excluded by any of the Q1 rules. However, he's more a recurring joke (about Boston Brahmin) than a character. That said, he is referenced in the article on Locust Valley lockjaw. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:41, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

He's also mentioned in Yale in popular culture, or is that his son? AnemoneProjectors 12:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Fouad

Why is there a redirect to the character Fouad on this page but no actual reference to him? NorthernThunder (talk) 21:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

 Done Arricherekk (talk) 18:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Jesus

Jesus has been removed with User:New Age Retro Hippie saying that "One major role in one episode and trivial roles in all the rest is not notable for inclusion". However, the same could be said for the Evil Monkey. I think Jesus should be replaced in the article for this reason. God, Kool-Aid Man and Drunk Billy were also removed, but I'm not as concerned about those characters being included. AnemoneProjectors 11:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

None of them meet the criteria at the top of this page for inclusion. CTJF83 pride 16:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. I think Jesus passes the so-called "Evil Monkey rule". Plus like the Evil Monkey, he had one central episode. AnemoneProjectors 17:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Kool-Aid Man should definitely not be included, all he does it bust into a room saying "OH YA!", that is in no way notable. Who is Drunk Billy?? Besides I Dream of Jesus, I can only think of appearances in cutaways? CTJF83 pride 18:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Therefore doesn't he pass the Evil Monkey Rule: "Any cutaway character who makes three appearances or more can be safely counted as a character"? God also passes that criterion. It says to discuss the characters' additions but as they were already listed, I think their removal should have been discussed instead. According to what was removed "Drunk Billy was the news helicopter pilot for WQHG. He is only shown in one episode called "Dial Meg for Murder", in which he dies in a helicopter crash. Shortly following that, WQHG plays a video, remembering him for his work." Was listed alongside his colleagues. AnemoneProjectors 18:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I guess I should read your whole post "but I'm not as concerned about those characters being included". I guess you're right, since they were already added, I think removing them should be discussed. CTJF83 pride 19:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Well I guess I'm less bothered about some of the ones that were removed - a character who appeared only once probably doesn't belong here) but yes their removal should have been discussed, it wasn't like someone just added them without checking first. AnemoneProjectors 21:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

This article is very poor in its application of fan-made guidelines. Unless they are plot characters or they have out-of-universe information apart from development, they shouldn't be included. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:48, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Fewer

We all want to change the page after the season premiere but lets not throw up any old misspelled sentenced fragment okay? Lots42 (talk) 02:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

This note would be better in the article, hidden, for people who will actually do that, no WP:FG members who wouldn't. CTJF83 chat 02:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Only problem would be where to put it; there are all sorts of new additions tonight. DP76764 (Talk) 02:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Ya, best bet is to wait 3-4 days and then clean it up....or WP:RPP :) CTJF83 chat 03:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Fargus

Should it be noted under Mr. Fargus that he may possibly be injured or dead, because at the end the hallway robot stopped him to ask for a hall pass misinterpreting the teacher for a student. The robot raises his arm which is also a weapon and says "last request". When the screen turns to black you hear a gun-like sound, implying that he MAY be possibly dead or injured. Just thought that could be added. Any objections? Thanks. LeMasterC (talk) 01:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

It's trivial anyway, relating to 20 seconds on one episode, that kind of trivia is usually not included. Plus "possibly injured" equals WP:OR CTJF83 chat 03:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

A character who appeared in one episode? Not noteable enough. Lots42 (talk) 22:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Mort Goldman

I believe that Mort Goldman should have his own article. He has been in many episodes. There is plenty of information on him that could be placed in the article. I mean, if Ernie the Giant Chicken can get his own page, why shouldn't Mort? The chicken has been in only a few episodes, and only for pointless fight scenes. Mort has a lot more background information on him, like his Jewish ancestry and his wife, Muriel. So please consider it. Thanks. LeMasterC (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm a little confused...if you feel this way, why don't you start an article? You don't need anyone's permission. (smile) Doniago (talk) 13:45, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Weed

I am pretty sure Mr. Weed or Mr. Oui, is a french speaker.

What do you base that on? CTJF83 chat 22:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Meg Griffin

I'm not sure if this is a joke or if it spam which wasn't reverted, but, why does Meg Griffin's description just says "Nobody Likes Meg."? Nineko (talk) 04:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

That was vandalism, thanks for bringing it to attention. Sometimes those things get lost in the shuffle. DP76764 (Talk) 05:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Peter Griffin JR and Meg's other sister

I know these where jokes on the show, but they ARE part of the family, shouldn't people atleast acknowledge their existence in Family guy? If Seth MacFarlin wanted we won't have created them, so can't anybody add a header like: EXTRAS or NON MAIN STREAM CHARACTERS. Also Could somebody please reply with a reason, rather than "DO NOT add any other characters, including Peter Griffin Jr, or Meg's "other sister". They WILL be revert!" ? Thank you, 109.152.169.132 (talk) 19:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Because it's a list of recurring (and hence not one-joke) characters. Doniago (talk) 20:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I added "They are just joke characters" to the note, good enough or want more? CTJF83 chat 20:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Portuguese Guys

I think it is worth mentioning that the two Portuguese guys speak with a Brazilian accent. I should know... I am Portuguese. Can't get a better source than this. Just because it appears to be a casting mistake, it does not mean it is not a significant feature. Accents and tones of voice are one of Family Guy's main joke branches: Consuela, Stewie, the Goldmans, the Browns, Bruce, Herbert, Seamus... the way all of these characters talk is a matter of amusement. So why not mention it in Santos and Pasqual?

(and by the way, it is normally spelled Pascoal) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.162.139.42 (talk) 10:48, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Ya, per WP:V and WP:RS a source would be needed...something more than you saying it. CTJF83 chat 23:46, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes the unsigned person e absolutely right, Santos and Pasqual really speak brazilian... and it should say that on the main page, i'm also portuguese, so i know! Don't ask me for sources, WE ARE SOURCES, so you better change it and stop acting like you own this website! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gomes89 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm portuguese too and I noticed that, they're not really portuguese, they're brazilian!

Okay, whatever is going on here, cites -are- needed. Lots42 (talk) 22:56, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, cites are required...I could say I'm Portuguese till the cows come home...doesn't make it true. CTJF83 chat 23:46, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Fact is that they are always refered to as Portuguese, such as Stewie saying "We couldn't run an ad that said 'no Portuguese', but no Portuguese" or when one of them said something about going back to Portugal. AnemoneProjectors 00:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Fisrt of all, I'm Portuguese, and this isn't the only show to mistake Brazilian Portuguese for European Portuguese - it's understandable given that it's not a very well known language and not that many people in the USA speak it. That said, I would like to point something out, just for your consideration - how would you like it if we got a british guy playing an American man on a Portuguese TV show and didn't care to change his accent? It may be insignificant, I know it is, but it matters because some people might find it insulting. I'm not very patriotic, I love my language, but I know how small and ridiculous my country can be - I'm not offended - I find it perfectly natural - an honest mistake. But it's still arrogant for American TV to continually not bother checking or respecting other cultures to their fullest - I can't imagine how many misrepresentations have happened of cultures throughout the world, because of that, for lack of a better word, arrogance. As for it needing to be a citing of someone "official" sayint it's Barazilian Portuguese because we could just be lying about our nationality, well, fisrt of all - why would we care or lie otherwise? second - the first poster was trying to bring that to the attention of people! If no one's noticed before, or at least gotten to the trouble of pointing it out, it's because there isn't any official thingy about it. If there was, maybe they wouldn't be speaking Brazilian Portugese by now, would they? Duh! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.169.74.101 (talk) 18:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I kind of agree with this fellow here. Where are these people supposed to get their sources from? Not from an American site or magazine, that’s for sure… besides, all over Wikipedia there are simply hundreds of links to sites that just are not there anymore. What are we going to do about this? And would you perhaps like them to provide a Portuguese site or book as a reference? It would be written in Portuguese but your bureaucratic problem would be solved. I think that something in Portuguese is better than nothing or a link to something that is no longer there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.189.236.120 (talk) 01:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

We should include info that says they speak Brazilian because it's trivia and someone may find it interesting. And if it's innacurate information (which it isn't, I've noticed it myself), it's not like somebody's going to die because of it. If someone does die because of it, well, that's just life.--Midasminus (talk) 20:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

As brought up at the beginning of this discussion, where's the reliable source to establish that they are in fact speaking Brazilian? Of course, as you mentioned yourself, it's trivial and hence isn't really appropriate for inclusion in any case, so I'm not sure why it's being brought up again. This isn't IMDb. Doniago (talk) 20:46, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

This article really needs to be fixed.

As it stands, it is extremely in-universe, and really has no point in being this way. The article needs to start following a proper criteria, and since the series has a heavy reliance on joke characters, these characters will need individual assertions of notability. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 01:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree for the most part. Might be time to re-debate the criteria for inclusion in the FAQ section. DP76764 (Talk) 03:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. For one, I think that we should drop the notion of setting a specific criteria of number of appearances. I believe that we should view each character individually and discuss whether they should be included. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:54, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Considering the nature of the show, one-episode characters should -not- be included. Otherwise this article will become near unreadable. Lots42 (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think anyone was arguing otherwise; I was arguing that having arbitrary criteria was making characters notable based on what the creators want to do with them, rather than how the public perceives them. A character who only appeared in one episode can be notable; he or she merely has to be covered in outside media significantly. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Consuela, the cleaning lady

The Spanish cleaning lady should be added. 83.108.194.198 (talk) 23:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Take a look through the FAQ listed near the top of the page, please. DP76764 (Talk) 00:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

She has been in three episodes right? "5. All characters who are central characters in the storyline of two or more episodes should be included in the recurring character article.". But we could wait until she appears in more episodes, theres no rush. 83.108.194.198 (talk) 00:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

She is the central character in 0 episodes though. She only appears in very minor roles, which doesn't qualify for this list. CTJF83 chat 00:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

She was featured prominently in one episode and has been in more than one.71.75.31.150 (talk) 04:58, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

She has not been the main character of any episode so far, but she has appeared in 5 episodes now I believe, including the 2nd special star wars spoof episode.Benjaminmin (talk) 09:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Francis Griffin's hatred

In the article, it says that "he (Francis) hates Lois because she is Protestant/Jewish." However, Francis died in season 5, and we aren't shown Lois's Jewish heritage until season 8. If no one responds to this in a week, I will just change it myself, but I would appreciate feedback.67.167.224.151 (talk) 04:01, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

His ghost appears to Peter in the episode where Lois is revealed to be Jewish and I believe takes issue with it, but I wouldn't make a case for it. One could just as easily argue that the ghost was a figment of Peter's imagination rather than actually being Francis. Doniago (talk) 05:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

You both make good points, how about..."He hates Lois because she is not catholic"? Solves the problem. CTJF83 chat 12:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Works for me. Doniago (talk) 14:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done CTJF83 chat 22:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Going on from the previous discussion, assessment now.

I think we should get to the assessment. First off, I will list everyone that I think should just be given a quick pass as an obviously major enough character to be notable by default.

1. Peter
2. Lois
3. Brian
4. Stewie
5. Chris
6. Meg
7. Cleveland
8. Quagmire
9. Joe
10. Tom
11. Diane

Basically, the above characters are frequently important to the plot or are in many episodes as more than joke roles.

What about Adam West? He is certainly a very frequent appearer on the show Benjaminmin (talk) 10:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

And now, we have to make a criteria for inclusion. For one, I think we need to be extra-hard on gag characters. Evil Monkey and Giant Chicken are examples of exceptions, whereas Consuela and "Quahog Con Man" are not. A character must have substance - they cannot simply be a list of every gag they've ever had. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:24, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree CTJF83 chat 22:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I think more important now, that we've discussed who's worthy of inclusion, is who isn't. I would venture to say that most of what's included now is not worth including. Mort's wife could be a footnote to Mort, and most of the joke characters could be removed, as they are merely a list of episodes they appeared in, basically. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Mort Goldman & Carter Pewterschmidt

We have enough background information on both--and both are big enough supporting characters--that they should be split into their own separate articles. I'm going to start work on Mort Goldman, but if anyone has any objections, feel free to comment back. Thanks! Jgera5 (talk) 15:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm surprised they haven't had their own sections already. Carter is very important to what passes for continuity in the show. Lots42 (talk) 15:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I've created an article for Mort Goldman (though I did tag it as a stub, as it could be expanded more), while Carter I haven't touched yet. Especially the past two seasons it seems like Carter has increased in importance, while, say, Tom Tucker has decreased in importance. Personally, I like Carter better between the two. Jgera5 (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I hate to be an ass, but it's simply not acceptable to split out these articles yet. Simply being important, or becoming more important, is not a valid reason to split an article. Mort Goldman has not one mention of the hows or whys of his creation, nor does it cover any third party opinions of the character. That is the only consideration that should be made when splitting. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 11:54, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Order of characters

I think the characters should be arranged in alphabetical order. For people to better orient.--ToonsFan (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

They are. You got the Griffin's in age order, which I support that, then you got the 3 other main characters in alphabetical order. Then you have the other recurring characters in alphabetical order by first name. Probably should be by last name. CTJF83 17:34, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

We organize by first name in the event of fictional characters. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 01:21, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Missing characters

Missing people like Vern and Johnny, Paddy Tanniger, and Santos and Pasqual, which are recurring characters, but very important in the series as gag characters.--ToonsFan (talk) 19:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I would contend that none of those characters are "very important in the series". If they are, surely there will be some reliable sources discussing their importance. DP76764 (Talk) 21:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Agree with DP CTJF83 22:30, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I would contend they are at least as "important" as some of those listed already. But what do I know, I don't normally go around thinking I'm King Wiki using phrases like "I would contend".

Go4thAndDie (talk) 04:01, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Clearly, you don't normally have conversations like a reasonable person without becoming offended and becoming anti-intellectual. You write important as if importance is trivial. This is not a fan list. This list exists to educate people who are not fans of Family Guy rather than to be a reference guide for fans. There is a Family Guy Wikia. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:05, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

missing characters

Where is Broderick Brown? He is Cleveland's brother, the cosmetic surgeon. I think he should be on the list.

Also where is Phidias and Barnabe, the Muscular work out guys? They have been seen in plenty of episodes not to be posted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.151.237 (talk) 00:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

We do not include very minor characters. CTJF83 chat 22:23, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I Wiki'd "Al Harrington" which brought me to the article, but found nothing. The article indicated that characters who appear once are omitted, but he had to be in three or more different episodes because he had three different "commercials" that I had know of. NBK1122 (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

There are lots of redirects for characters with no mention in the article. Angus Griffin, Black-Eye Griffin, Jabba the Griffin, James William Bottomtooth, Marguerite Pewterschmidt, Peter Griffin Jr, Rufus Griffin, Bertram (Family Guy), Jeff Campbell (Family Guy), Carl (Family Guy), Consuela (Family Guy), Kevin Swanson, Patrick Pewterschmidt, Muriel Goldman, Olivia Fuller, Al Harrington (Family Guy), Buzz Killington, Dr. Bruce Kaplan, Fjurg Van Der Ploeg, Paddy Tanniger, Rose Griffin, Rush Limbaugh (Family Guy), Broderick Brown, Susie Swanson, Joan Quagmire, The Quahog Con Man and Vern and Johnny. Obviously many of them shouldn't be included, maybe some of them should. But there shouldn't be redirects if there's no mention of these characters. –AnemoneProjectors– 10:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Agree, can you delete the unnecessary ones? CTJF83 19:21, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I think they would have to be listed for deletion as they've existed for a while. –AnemoneProjectors– 20:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Olivia Fuller is who I came here looking for, got redirected and there is no listing here. I would like to know who voice acted her part, if nothing else, and she was a main character in at least two episodes. #### —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.122.43.152 (talk) 02:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Muriel Goldman has appeared in the series from series 3 and was kiled off in sereis 10! Where is she? MayhemMario

Consuela

I would like to see Consuela added. She has been in several episodes and I think the reverted section about her was well written. –CWenger (talk) 03:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Number of appearances has no bearing on inclusion; due to the common practice of bringing back gag characters, we need to independently analyze such characters to discern whether they are worth including, at least in terms of them. As such, you will have to search Google for Consuela "Family Guy"; it will be difficult without any system to verify which sites are good for use, but use good judgment; for example, wordpress is not a usable source. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I second adding Consuela, among other characters. Geeky Randy (talk) 03:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Again, these number of characters have no plot relevance; simply using the number of appearances is not an acceptable measure of real world notability when they are so flippantly used for trivial appearances. If you would like to include this gag character, there must be evidence of notability - ie, reception (positive or negative) and/or development information. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I have to admit I can't find many reliable sources about her. The best I can do is this editorial. –CWenger (talk) 03:42, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

It does look like a good source, but if it is the only one, it would best be used for the Criticisms of Family Guy article. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps, but at least it is a mention of this character in a secondary source. It wouldn't back up all the detail about her—not sure if that is a problem, but I bet it is true of most characters in this article. –CWenger (talk) 04:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Hippie, she is nothing more than a minor character, mostly focused on cutaway jokes. Until she is the focus of a plot, she shouldn't be added. CTJF83 04:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

We should apply this standard universally then; for example, I doubt Greased-up Deaf Guy makes the cut. –CWenger (talk) 04:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

This is certainly true. We need to do a verification check on every character without an article. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Concur CTJF83 19:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe she was the subject of one episode, kind of. I'm all for her being a gag character as opposed to a supporting character at this time. Kjscotte34 (talk) 16:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Quagmire

Just curious- why is Quagmire's description so long as compared to the other characters when he has his own page? Kjscotte34 (talk) 23:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Fans added it? I've shortened it. CTJF83 00:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Split the article

I recommend that this article be split into separate sections including:

• Main characters
• Secondary characters
• Former characters

I also suggest that the list spawn tables; see List of characters in South Park for a reference. Railer-man (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

How do you define main/secondary characters? What's a former character? How do you know they won't appear in flashbacks? CTJF83 18:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Splitting in such a way is basically making a list of characters that aren't important, which is basically making a list of non-notable subjects. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I do agree with your South Park logic...and shortening descriptions of these characters. CTJF83 19:07, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't recommend separating former characters because they're not former characters if you're watching the episodes they're in. Calling them "former" is in-universe information based on the most recently broadcast new episodes. All episodes should be treated as current. –AnemoneProjectors– 23:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The "former characters" are those that no longer appear, even in flashbacks. I've watched enough Family Guy episodes to know. They are mentioned in some cases, however. Railer-man (talk) 00:30, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Please see the guide to writing about fiction. fiction is always written about in the present tense. oknazevad (talk) 01:22, 5 June 2011 (UTC)