Talk:Weekday cartoon

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Animation: American Mid‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Whatever happened to syndicated cartoons?[edit]

Man, I wish those cartoons would come back. Everyeditcounts 21:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm[edit]

First: Damn you congress and your infernal Telecommunications Act of 1996 for stealing from this newest generation childhood memories of innocent afternoon cartoon watching! It's no wonder so many kids are vapid and oversexed.. many were weaned watching talk shows in place of the toons earlier generations were given. Sorry, end rant.. I know, not the place but it was building up for a while.

Anyhow, as for the article, I like it but I am pretty sure several of the toons listed in the 1960's and 70's are in fact 80's cartoons and several of them didn't hit syndication outside of Saturday mornings till the early 90's (Smurfs and Snorks, for example.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.240.167 (talk) 11:25, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010s[edit]

Was the author of that section high? That paragraph was ridiculous. JamesEG (talk) 08:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrote the whole damn thing. Had to be done. Apple8800 (talk) 17:31, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good Intent[edit]

The article's compass is pointing to the correct destination, but I think a complete overhaul would be great, and slightly more informative in comparison to this current version. I'll give it a shot way later, as I want to use this article as a basis to see if I can compose something that's instructive and informative as to what this "weekday cartoon" was and how we so need to bring it back. Apple8800 (talk) 17:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]