Jump to content

Talk:Griffin family

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge this article

[edit]

I think that this article should be merged into List of characters in Family Guy; since all the Griffins have their own articles, there's really no need for this article. Railer-man (talk) 03:31, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This article contains no information particular to the subject of the Griffin family (other than the currently disputed family tree). What little here isn't repeated from other articles would be better off relocated to the relevant character articles, where it would improve those articles, and be reviewed by more editors. / edg 10:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the family tree is the most adequately summarizing section in this whole article. Every part of it is backed up by the series' plot, throughout the series' 9-season long run. Therefore, if anyone disagrees with this section, they should discuss instead of just zapping it under false pretenses of "unsourced" and "unnecessary". As demonstrated here and here, I tried communicating with the editor who keeps removing the section (this might be an ownership issue since they appear to have created the article) but have had zero response. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So, you agree to the merge proposal then? You seem to be discussing something else. / edg 02:32, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I do. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 03:36, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Family tree

[edit]

I have started a discussion here. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 12:21, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I don't have a strong opinion on the family tree, though I see both positives and negatives. Can we agree to abide by whatever WP:NORN comes up with? If nothing else, it would end the edit war. / edg 23:39, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For $0.02 worth: I don't have a strong opinion on it either, but would lean towards following existing precedent (MOS say anything about this?). Personally, I think articles regarding The Simpsons could be considered a gold standard. A cursory examination of the corresponding article shows a lack of something similar. DP76764 (Talk) 23:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's anything wrong with FG articles innovating a bit—the presence of a Simpson family article neither defines the form of this article, nor does it justfy the existance of this article in the first place.
My biggest concern is the chart is excessively in-universe. AFAIK, Adam West and Unnamed Child are not part of the family in the normal course of the show. I am sure that Mickey McFinnegan was not Peter Griffin's father until the manatee picked that ball in Season 5. A future show could have a twist which invalidates the entire family tree, and by the next episode it will not have changed anything substantial about the show. While family relationships are important in Family Guy, the lineage is neither constant nor very important.
That said, I WP:DGAF if the chart is kept or not, I just want the edit warring to stop. / edg 02:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Griffin family. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:20, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]