Jump to content

Talk:Peter's Two Dads

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articlePeter's Two Dads has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 25, 2008Good article nomineeListed
September 21, 2010Good topic candidateNot promoted
February 15, 2011Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Untitled

[edit]
  • How did they manage to mix up so many Welsh and Scottish things and pass them off as Irish in this episode?? They should have done a bit more research before making so many errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.76.143 (talk) 16:09, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Peter said thta throwing Meg's birthday part will be worse than getting stuck behing Robert Loggia at the airport.

Star Wars

[edit]

Concerning the references section, in which movie did Han call Leia 'Carrie'? Lots42 05:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Starwarsfrancis.png

[edit]

Image:Starwarsfrancis.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nomination

[edit]

I noticed that this article is up for Good Article, but you have no template on this article saying it is. You should add one. ISD (talk) 09:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be my fault, I always forget something :) Qst 10:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This article is well-written and meets the criteria of a good article, in my opinion. Before it is approved, the lead of the article should be edited to avoid duplicating material that belongs in the Plot section. Additionally, the Production section could be split into multiple paragraphs to enhance readability. --BradV 22:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The latter comment is good, but the introduction is meant to consist of a brief synopsis of the plot. Qst 21:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
  • 1. It is well written. In this respect:

The negativity of Francis was becoming dull to write for" quotation mark at the end, but none at the beginning...I'd add it, but not sure if it is suppose to even been quote marks there. The line "MacFarlane comments it would not have looked good without computer aid, and it makes the scene more realistic if it includes it" could be written a little better, unless it is a direct quote is there any significance of the last production entry of the 2 men circling each other?

  • 2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect, it:

(a) (b) (c)

  • 3. It is broad in its coverage. In this respect, it:

(a) (b)

  • 4. It is neutral
  • 5. It is stable
  • 6. It is illustrated

Ctjf83talk 22:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Qst 22:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other Cultural References

[edit]
  • Mother Theresa in the car is a reference to Pulp Fiction?
  • When Peter's mother asks if he was bringing the TV back he responds that he sold it for crack, does anyone see the reference to Requiem for a Dream
  • When Peter and His dad are dancing they break chairs over the heads of some Riverdancers.
  • Reference to Brian's "twin" sheep O'brien asking "Who's leg do I have to hump to get a pint of Guinness over here?"

Angel of Anubis (talk) 06:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have to find a reliable source for all this. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 09:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, and IMDb and TV/com are unreliable for cultural references. Qst (talk) 10:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Watched the episode, thought I would ask. and I didn't get anything from IMDB or TV. Typed em as I was watching the episode Angel of Anubis (talk) 03:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC) Also where exactly would one find a "reliable" source for this, I mean aside from the episode itself, where? Angel of Anubis (talk) 03:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Audio commentary, newspaper article, interviews with the makers. Please keep in mind that television shows aren't always reliable, for example, if South Park would parody some event, you can't use that as a reliable source because they aren't copying the event, they're making fun of it. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I just want to ask. Why does it matter if they're making fun of something or copying it? Either way it's a cultural reference. A cultural reference just is something that refers to some part of a culture. Also, how is an episode not reliable for information about that episode? That's like saying that after everyone sees me do something, it's not reliable to say that I did it based soley on the fact that I did it. -Ganon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.111.156.117 (talk) 03:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about the song that Chris sings? What's that called? - Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.197.111 (talk) 04:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peter's Two Dads. 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) 23:50, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peter's Two Dads. 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) 21:03, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter%27s_Two_Dads&oldid=1209728581"