Talk:Arrested Development/Archive 3

message: http://www.nypost.com/gossip/pagesix/60385.htm
It seems that Showtime has picked it up. Still too much of a rumor to include in the artilce, but worth following up on when confirmed.  youngamerican (talk) 18:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I found that too and dropped it in right at the end of the "Future" section.  My sentence portrayed it too factually; it has since been edited to a better version stressing that it was, in fact, just the post and was, in fact, just gossip.  but still, i feel it warrants a mention. --jfg284 you were saying? 23:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Found a link... 

message: Hey, check out the page for the in production, future movie supposedly coming out in 2006, called Arrested Development.  
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0475934
It says that it stars Matthew McConaughey.  The plot outline is: When an over the hill high school narcotics agent is forced into retirement, he goes rogue to prove that he's still a viable commodity.
Why is this film important?  Because, it also lists Rob Riggle as Rep. Jon Van Huessen, and Hector Atreyu Ruiz as a prison guard.  Riggle played the same role in Fakin' It and Family Ties.  Ruiz played a prison guard in the Prison Break-In episode.  Does anybody know what any of this means?
:Sounds to me like some coincidences. As much as I'd love to see an Arrested Development movie, I don't think that it's going to happen. However, an amazon search reveals that there's a book in the works. WikiTruth 01:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie 

message: In the main box at the top of the page it lists the production style as a single camera setup. Later in the article it says "The show is shot with several free moving camera operators which follow the actors around in a documentary style." Which is it? Nambio 08:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How Many Cameras? 

message: Just to have a spot that this is written down for sure: the yacht in the last episode is clearly labeled "C-Word".  I know the yacht G.O.B. bought (along with Starla) in Season 2 was called the "Seaward", but the season 3 one isn't.  The endless anonymous edits to the yacht name are getting tiring... ka1iban 18:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's supposed to be a pun that only faithful fans would notice.  GOB is supposed to be a gross perv, and "C-Word" seems to refer to a certain dirty word that I'm too much of a gentleman to say.  Actually come to think of it, it refers to two dirty words.J.J. Bustamante 16:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finale Yacht Name 

message: Yes.  They use multiple cameras.  But that does not make it a multi-camera setup.  Read the descriptions of Multicamera setup and Single camera setup and you'll see it's absolutely single camera (hell, it's even included in a list on the single cam page of "half hour shows shot using single-camera setup.").  The number of cameras used isn't being debated - every show or film being shot this day in age uses mutiple cameras - it's the setup. 82.82.179.97 12:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Camera Setup 

message: My laptops being repaired, so I can't check this out myself...if the music played in the background during Balboa Bay Window cutaways The Girl from Ipanema?  (P.S. I re-instated the Bush/Bluth connection.  It's not terrifically written, but that can be fixed.  As for the sourcing, check the rationale in the above section.)
:It's not, as far as I can tell.  Most likely original David Schwartz music. — Miles←☎ 08:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My laptop was fixed recently, and i finally checked it out myself last night.  You're right.  It's not. 82.82.162.255 12:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balboa Bay Window 

message: Who, exactly, has lauded MadTV? I mean Mo Collins is funny, but I have never really heard a critic (or anyone else really) heap that much praise on the show. There's got to be a better way to say that.  youngamerican (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "other lauded television comedies " 

message: I would have thought that there should be a page for the psychological condition of arrested development...  I guess we need to wait for someone who's knowledgable about the subject to write an article?
--63.106.93.177 21:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is, considering the default for the term "Arrested development" is different than for the television show Arrested Development. BabuBhatt 23:38, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, who changed the default? This is ridiculous; either have a link at the top of this page to the band or have one page with both on it, not both!70.131.157.139 05:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a link at the top of the article for the band, so I'm not sure what your complaint is. --TM 06:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: My complaint is that the default for Arrested Development is a page linking to both this and the band. Then when you choose either of those two options, they both have a link pointing to the other one at the very top of the page. I say, either keep the default page with the two links and remove the links on the separate pages, or make one of the articles the default one and keep the links on the separate pages.Tflynn17 21:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this TV show article really the best default for "Arrested Development"? 

message: Has anyone heard plans of a boxed set of all three seasons? I know amazon, for example, had a deal on the first two seasons.Cms479 13:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just feel like noting that I just bought all 3 seasons for the crazy good deal of $33.79 on Amazon. That's free shipping too. It's a gold box special, so I don't know how long that'll last though.--SeizureDog 19:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD 

message: Ok since the last edits about if AD is or AD was a show should be fixed up. Example is Friends "Friends was one of the longest-running and most popular sitcoms in American television history" There they use WAS due to the show being cancelled but as we all know Friends is still syndicated around the world. So it still excists but its not developed anymore. Another large wiki page with the same theme is Sex and the City "Sex and the City was a popular American cable television program based on the book of the same name by Candace Bushnell."
So are we going to be correct or not? Avalean 03:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If that's your evidence I present Seinfeld and M*A*S*H (TV series). The fact of the matter is they are television shows, it's not like they were shows but then became something else. --TM 04:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By Seinfeld they are correct if you use the whole sentance, "Seinfeld is an American television situation comedy set in New York City that ran from 5 July 1989, to 14 May 1998." Which is correct in wording. M*A*S*H (TV series) is not correct in its wording "M*A*S*H is an American medical drama/black comedy produced by 20th Century Fox for CBS" since 20th Centuty Fox no longer produces those episodes.Avalean 22:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily, since "produced" is still past tense, however, if it was "being produced" it would be incorrect. Regardless, they still are shows even though they aren't ones currently in production, and I see no reason to change the phrasing to "was" in this article. --TM 00:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: common sense and common diction prefer was. 67.172.61.222 20:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is / Was 

message: I heard that Ron Howard was not originally planning to be the narrator of the show, but filled in for the job on the pilot episode with no intention of being the permanent narratator.  This, of course, is exactly what ended up happening.  If this is true, it's a good bit of trivia to add to the article. 75.36.80.103 12:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ron Howard originally temporary? 

message: I've added a very important sentence to this article, one which I think fans of the show might have purposely avoided? The hip hop group whom used the Arrested Development name, made it famous in the early 1990s via massive top ten hit singles such as People Everyday, Mr Wendal and Tennesee. Fox were sued over the use of the name as the group and its lawyers held that it diluted the name. Fox lawyers settled out of court. This fact is alluded to in the article to Arrested Development (Hip Hop group) but was curiously ommitted here - so Ive added it. Encise 23:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hip Hop Rap Group 

message: Just thought I'd showcase the Arrested Development userbox (not mine)  Feel free to add it to your userpage<BR> Dodge 02:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox 

message: A beautifully-written article, folks.  Good job!  I just started watching this (amazing) show on DVD this week and had to see what the 'pedia had to say. --nathanbeach 21:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great article 

message: The first few paragraphes are hard to read with all the links. If someone wants to improve the article, try reading over Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context and reduce the number of links. Some wiki-links that could be unlinked are: omniscience, narrator, american, comedy, all the countries in the second paragraph, series finale, cult. Cuñado  - Talk 22:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was way overlinked. I've fixed it now. If you find this kind of thing happen again, be bold and go ahead and fix it! --`/aksha 23:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlinked 

message: Shouldn't searching for "Arrested Development" take you to something regarding developmental psychology (with a link to the show at the top of the page), seeing as that's what the term originally pertains to (and the subject I was looking for)?  Or pehaps a disambiguation page.  The prevalance of popular culture articles at the expense of more encyclopedic ones is one of the flaws cited by detractors of Wikipedia. - 85.210.43.171 06:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Arrested development (with lower case "d") takes you to a definition of "arrested development" and disambiguates between the hip hop group and television show that have adopted that name. "Arrested Development" (with capital D) connotes a proper noun, hence why it leads to the show. --TM 10:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. - 85.210.43.171 12:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below.  All arguments favored moving and placing disambiguation page at main title.  I used the target suggested by Anþony.  Personally, I've never seen the show, and think of the hip-hop group first.  I still remember the words to "Tennessee".
NB: There are now a lot of links that need fixing. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation 

message: :Add  * Support  or  * Oppose  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
*Weak OpposeSupport (apparently I didn't read the text of the survey closely enough, nor did the person below me) - I'm fairly aware of the hip-hop group, and even now, I think of the group before I think of the tv show. IMHO, they're notable enough to deserve a disambig page. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 01:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Perhaps you, like I, didn't read the survey closely enough Milchama. User wants to create a disambig. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 21:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Does there really need to be a full section on the music of the show? It's really not important to the show itself, and there's not much to talk about. The fact that a handfull of songs are used occasionally doesn't seem to warrant an entire section.--SeizureDog 22:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music section 

message: Does anyone happen to know what religion the Bluths are supposed to be (aside from George Sr's Jewish and Christian whims)?  I thought maybe the whole family is Jewish, since Maeby didn't know what a Cross was and a member of the family is named Tobias.  But then they also did celebrate Christmas, not just in the Christmas party at the Bluth company but also that they had Christmas decorations in Lucille's apartment.  I know, this is sort of a stupid question, but I kept wondering it when I watched this show.
I had a discussion about this with a Jewish friend of mine who lives in the area who argued that the family is arguably obviously Jewish.  There are certainly several good points: many of the actors are convincingly Jewish-looking or actually Jewish, and Lindsay fits the JAP stereotype to a tee.  The best article I could find on it when I looked a while ago is this: http://www.nextbook.org/cultural/print.html?id=58, which you can take what you will from. Skibum8713 20:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bluth family's religion 

message: Hey, I turned the TV on just now and the pilot's on CBC Vancouver right now! Sure enough, the show's got a page on the CBC website now; should this be added to the article somehow? Max22 01:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AD reruns on CBC 

message: Posting this here because there doesn't seem to be any discussion at the episode pages.  On the episode page for Altar Egos there's a goof that says "Lucille proclaims she could not breastfeed any of her children because of George Sr.'s tweaking, but later in Spring Breakout, the narrator states "it was Buster's first taste of alcohol since he was nursing." One of these statements must be false, unless the narrator is implying that Lucille used alcoholic formula."  However, I'm sure that there's an episode that mentioned that buster was breastfed by somebody else (Lucille's housekeeper?).  His taste of alcohol could have been a small amount of alcohol to help him sleep, as some people do with their infants.  I agree that the narrator's joke itself may imply that he tasted alcohol in the breastmilk, but I disagree that it's truly a goof, because as far as I can tell what he said is entirely possible without contradicting known facts about characters.129.128.214.87 16:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buster Breastfeeding 

message: Arrested Development always had references to the actual actors real lives occasionally and so on, but did the show ever break the fourth wall on an eye level? Did an actor ever look straight at the camera, seeming as if in an obvious, "I'm an actor" way. Book M 11:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't think of an actual "to the camera" way, but the narrator was always the first one to break the fourth wall - especially after Michael Bluth happened to say "arrested development" as part of normal conversation and the narrator followed with "Hey! That's the name of this show!"ClassicBri 13:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

text: In Beef Consomme, the judge says that no cameras are allowed in the courtroom and part of the rest of the scene is seen from behind the door of the courtroom. I think that would count as breaking the fourth wall visually. Theshibboleth 19:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, in Mr. F, when they say someone could be listening in on them, a microphone like one that would be used on the set enters at the top of the frame. Theshibboleth 09:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  fourth wall? 

message: How many people reading the English article for Arrested Development really need to know that what it aired on in Thailand or any of those other countries? It seems like it violates WP:NOT#DIRECTORY, so I've removed it.--SeizureDog 11:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NOT#DIRECTORY is intended to indicate what articles are not - not about sections of articles. The international broadcasters represent facts which support the notability and verifiability of a programme. Also remember Wikipedia's audience is global - Wikipedia is not American, either (otherwise we have a fundamental NPOV problem here). There are undoubtedly people in Thailand who read the English WP and would find the international reach of a programme relevant. The section has a compact 2-column format that was not particularly intrusive in the first place. Nor would WP:IDONTLIKEIT be grounds for deleting information. The broadcasters section was therefore restored.  Dl2000 14:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, WP:NOT can be applied for articles or sections. The "no list of quotations" example in 1 for WP:NOT#DIRECTORY could clearly be applied to a "Quotes" section in any article. If you want to demonstrate the program's global reach, you can put it in a sentence "Arrested Development has been brocasted on x channels in y countries", you don't have to list every single one. This also violates the Wikipedia:Embedded list guideline as well. And WP:ILIKEIT isn't grounds for keeping information either; not that I ever even said that I didn't like it, I just think it's bad practice. Once you hit a certain point of this article it's just lists all the way down. "Celebrity guests" also should probably be taken care of; it is somewhat important but taking up a full page of text isn't good. Wiki articles aren't IMDB after all, and we generally don't have exhaustive cast lists. I'm not going to revert you here, but this is a Featured Article and we do need to be strict to making sure it sets a good example. Both of those sections were less than half of what it's crawled up to now since it's been promoted. What was moderately ok then is now looking very cluttered in my eyes.--SeizureDog 15:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Broadcasters" section. 

message: Right now the part about the show's critical reception needs a lot of work. It has several quotes from critics but doesn't have any summation or analysis. I'll add a one sentence summation, but it would help if someone more familiar witht hte topic expanded on this. Theshibboleth 23:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical response 

message: A new noticeboard, Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard, has been created. - Peregrine Fisher 18:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This noticeboard has been deleted per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard. Please disregard the above post. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard]] 

message: :Image:Adlogo.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 Wikipedia articles 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.
If there is other 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 16:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Danski14(talk) 17:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Adlogo.png 

message: Should we include some text describing how it's popularity has lived on in the "Post-cancellation" section? Maybe also a link to http://www.hulu.com/arrested-development  ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.242.96 (talk) 18:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet success / Where to view 

message: The article fails FA criterion #3, because :Image:ArrestedDevelopment S1.jpg, :Image:ArrestedDevelopment S2.jpg and :Image:ArrestedDevelopmentS3.jpg have no fair use rationales for this article. – Ilse@ 15:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I commented out these images. – Ilse@ 10:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They appear to have fair-use rationale added now, and have been uncommented. -- Bovineone 07:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article fails FA criterion #3 

message: This talk page is rather long.  I think some of the discussions need to be archived.  I read through WP:ARCHIVE; however, I didn't see any standard criteria for determining what to archive.  Discussions that haven't been active for a year or more, maybe?  Please give thoughts.  --Iknowyourider (talk) 14:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Older than a week is long enough. Darrenhusted 15:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool.  Thanks for your work!  I did a little more re-org -- the archives box is now autogenerated, and we should have an index of archived / current talk page topics generated the next time User:HBC Archive Indexerbot runs.--Iknowyourider (t c) 15:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Not a problem, I was just starting it off, I don't think that much talk is generated anyway. Darrenhusted 17:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to archive some of these entries 

message: I'm removing the table in the characters section because it seems redundant. The first time I saw it, it had three columns: Role | Full name | Portrayed By. But "Role" and "Full name" were identical (each simply had the name of the characters), so I merged the two as simply "Character". But now that I see that the character names and respective actors are listed underneath the table, I see no reason why it should be there at all. If there are any problems with this, please discuss it here. Pele Merengue 11:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I was wondering about the usefulness of that table myself.  Agree with removal.  Iknowyourider (t c) 13:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table in "Characters" section 

message: This article no longer appears to be of top quality.  Anyone want to defend against me?  --thedemonhog talk • edits 01:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have to agree. One blatant reason is that there are unsourced statements. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Sadly, I think you're right.  Upon rereading the article, I wanted to pepper several sections with  tags.  Iknowyourider (t c) 07:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just performed a cleanup on several sections of the article, adding a couple of references relating to the series' development (which were also present when the article was first given featured status, but was mysteriously not present in the article's prior condition), and removing unsourced statements and unencyclopedic sections at will. Can't we further improve the article and clean up the offending sections, instead of just sending the article over to featured review? I personally think we could easily clean up this article to featured status; it'd be a much better step forward. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu  13:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, fixing it is much better than sending it over to review, but I'm wondering if anyone is up to it.  It's a well-written factually accurate article; it is incredibly under-referenced.  --thedemonhog talk • edits 21:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, then I think we could improve the article and reference it further, perhaps. Are there any specific areas that need working on right now? ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu  03:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Some characters are listed as more than one appearance when they only appeared once, Wrench and Nellie being two examples. Darrenhusted 13:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've fixed the example you noted; let's be bold and correct any other such contradictions in the article, if there are any left. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu  14:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Should recurring roles be in order of most episodes, Barry at the bottom of the list seems odd. And are guests beign listed alphabetically or episode order, at the moment is seems to be a mix of both. Darrenhusted 14:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, apparently they were being listed alphabetically in terms of their surnames, apart from a few instances, so I've just fixed those right now. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu  14:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article review 

message: Hey there,
I put in the change to 'Futures' on Arrested Development, linking to the fan-petition for an Arrested Christmas Special in 2009. Sorry for doing so without properly getting to grips with editing.
I was wondering if you could help me legitimately get my site referenced on the Wiki page.
I feel the site, www.aresteddevelopment2009.com , is worth inclusion in the article as many visitors to the Wiki page are coming to find out if the show is still broadcasting or if there's a chance the show could come back - I know from my statscounter that a vast number of visitors come from WIki each day (about 250), all helping to give te show's fans a shot at a reprieve.
But in terms of justifying inclusin for Wikipedia (rather than just my own selfish gains), I think a case can be made. There have been 10+ news articles about the 'uprising', as one calls it, I've attached the two biggest ones, one is TV Squad, the second by an Associated Press reporter
http://www.tvsquad.com/2007/07/27/how-about-an-arrested-development-christmas-special/ http://www.centredaily.com/entertainment/story/163061.html
I feel it's currently the most relavent information about the show's future, and I think it's important that Wiki helps give out the information. I'm just hoping you might be able to give me some informed advice as to how to get the site mentioned without crossing Wikipedia's guidelines for entry - even if it's just a mention on the external links panel.
Thanks for your time, Ed
eddiewrenn at fastmail.co.uk (I'll also check on your talk page in a few days)
:The fact that there are reliable sources mentioning the petition might mean it's notable enough to warrant a sentence in the article, maybe under the "Future" section.  Thoughts?   Iknowyourider (t c) 16:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We could add a sentence about the general attempts fans have made to form petitions, only if we could find suitable references to back it up, however I'm not sure whether this particular petition (or any, for that matter) needs to be mentioned in the article. Has there been any official response to this petition, and has it been particularly successful, if at all, to gauge such a response? If not, then that's just what it is, I'm afraid: a fan petition, which has had no effect on the series' actual future. Even if there are a couple of articles and blogs mentioning the petition, that alone does not make it particularly notable or important enough to add it to the article, since there hasn't been much of a reaction. ···巌流? · talk to ganryuu  00:27, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, Ed. I love the show as much as you do, but this is an encyclopedia, not a fansite. I've removed the link for the reasons I outlined below. Please see WP:SOAP for the relevant posting guidelines. -Juansmith 08:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help? 

message: I think that in order to refer to the character correctly, G.O.B. should be called Gob - without the capitals and punctuation.  In episode credits he is referred to as Gob, and in the first episode of season 3, a letter addressed to him calls him Gob.  Obviously, a reference should be made regarding the fact that his name stems from the initials of his full name, but for accuracy's sake, I think we should be using Gob.  Out of courtesy, I mention it here, but if there are no problems, we should change this soon.fg 22:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The captions say "Gob" and the DVD box says "Gob". I will change it unless someones objects. --Henry W. Schmitt (talk) 06:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  G.O.B. 

message: Whenever Oscar and Lucile are together a song plays in the background, I think the lyrics are "oh my oh my". Anyone have an idea what song that is?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.109.155 (talk) 01:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music question 

message: At the end of the "Future" section, there is a line indicating that a fan petition has started for an Arrested Development Christmas special in 2009. This fact is cited, so I left it in. However, immediately following this, there is the following line:
"Sign it at http://www.arresteddevelopment2009.com!"
I removed that line, per the posting guidelines. See WP:SOAP for details.
-Juansmith 08:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christmas special petition 

message: do you think there can be a section about a possible movie? http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2007/12/06/jason-bateman-refuels-hope-for-arrested-development-movie/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.153.244.132 (talk) 04:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the notability guidelines for films says that the article should not be created until filming is confirmed to have started. -- Bovineone (talk) 17:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A section is not an article; notability guidelines only apply to article subjects, not content. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 16:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I started a page for Arrested Development (film), it's my first page so I may have jumped the gun a bit and it's barely two sentences.  I saw a link on Michael Cera's page for it, but it just went to the the TV show page, it's also announced on IMDB.  Sorry if I created it before it should have been made! Broooooooce (talk) 14:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay.  This is quite an embarrassing oversight on my part but I was just reading the movie section on here and it provides many more details than the page I have set up for the film.  Given that this project may not come to fruition, I don't want to migrate information over to that article without a consensus and guidance from the people who watch this page.  I was wondering if it would be appropriate to plug in a line under the subheading that links to the film page, something like Main Article: Arrested Development (film).  Would this be appropriate?  (see my user page for details on where my head is at!) Broooooooce (talk) 08:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Alright, it's been a few days; I'm adding the link. Broooooooce (talk) 03:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Or not, someone else beat me to it! Broooooooce (talk) 03:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie 

message: Confusion inevitably occurs with the title "Arrested Development" as many are referring to the hip hop band.  While there is a disambig page for this article, somehow, over-zealous fans of the TV series keep removing reference to the band suing the producers of the show.  This is a notable event that occurred.  It specifically relates to the program.  I challenge any misguided TV series editor to remove it again.  If this occurs, I will take it to a vote.  203.57.241.67 (talk) 22:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please refrain from "challenging" and disparaging other editors, and usually matters are solved through discussion rather than voting. Personally, I agree that the lawsuit is notable, and have never removed that bit of information. However, I find it is out of place in the lead, since it really isn't that relevant when introducing readers to this show, and I'm not sure where else to put it. I think this may have been why it was removed in the past, if that is actually where it was removed from. Would you be against moving it to the end of the development section? Giving it its own section seems unmerited now since there is only one sourced sentence and nothing seems to have come of the lawsuit. --TM 01:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the mention of the lawsuit should be moved after "Critical Reception" because that really seems to make sense as far as importance of sections go. Racheltwu (talk) 07:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that placement, I was just trying to find an existing section where it would make logical sense to place it, and chronologically it would fit with the development section in my opinion. Although it now has its own subsection, once I, or someone else, removes the unsourced sentence (if it doesn't get sourced) it might look odd to have a whole section for two small sentences; this is the only minor concern I have now. --TM 08:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hip hop group 

message: I think this part should be removed probably: 
"In episode "The Sword of Destiny", Tony Wonder (Ben Stiller), a magician, mentions "some band has got the rights to Use Your Illusion" referring to him not being able to use the name "Use Your Illusion" for a future video release of illusions performed by him, instead calling them "Use Your Allusion II". Guns N’ Roses released a pair of albums: Use Your Illusion I and Use Your Illusion II." 
It doesn't really fit in with the music section as it isn't really talking about music from the show. It could possibly go under a trivia section or something like that somewhere (probably under the specific episode the joke occurs in). Also, even if the sentence should stay, it is long and should be shortened I think. I had to reread it a few times because it uses the word illusion and allusion a lot. Racheltwu (talk) 06:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music section 

message: Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here . --Maniwar (talk) 01:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centralized TV Episode Discussion 

message: I want to point out the fact that although the show has been canceled, Fox has agreed to show the Arrested Development episodes on its joint venture website with NBC called Hulu.  Currently, all of the Season 1 episodes are available to watch with short 15 - 30 second commercial clips embedded.  The first 5 episodes of Season 2 and 3 are also available on Hulu.com.  Should the fact that Arrested Development is still available to watch through a new online medium be worthy of acknowledgment in the article?  Please let me know.  Gabbers511 (talk) 16:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Show Can Be Watched Online at Hulu.com 

message: (this is unverified research, so I'm putting it in discussion instead of the article.)
There are also some incest themes between Michael and his older brother Gob.
Gob (giving Michael a big bearhug): If you feel something moving down there, it's just the dove in my pants. (dove walks past on the counter) ~~  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.211.156.10 (talk) 14:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition to Incest 

message: Before creating this page, I neglected to read WP:NF which states that a film that has not been confirmed as shooting by reliable sources should not have it's own page.  WP:NF goes on further to say that failure to meet the guidelines specified is also not a criterion for speedy deletion.  So I guess this page may well be in limbo until the film comes to fruition or other parties intervene!  In the meanwhile, I will continue to update the article; I just felt I should start with an apology for jumping the gun on this one!  Broooooooce (talk) 09:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Normally it shouldn't be here, but I'm such a big AD fan that I don't have the heart to take it to AfD. So let's keep it! The Dominator (talk) 23:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:NF]] 

message: http://blogs.nypost.com/popwrap/archives/2008/04/an_arrested_dev.html Alia Shawkat confirms cast involvement + script writing
: - Done!  Thank you for this source.  Broooooooce (talk) 15:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: - Done!  Thank you for this source as well.  BTW: You should try and sign your post by adding 4 tildes at the end of what you've written! (~~~~).  Broooooooce (talk) 02:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Actually, the AD film article was the very first page I created.  It was merged into this article until actual filming begins, in accordance with WP:NFF.  Editing is not all that difficult once you get the hang of just a few basics; the biggest obstacles I had early on was just finding the proper way to format things--references and the such (WP:CITET, fyi).  My first advice to you would be to register your own account, it takes about 30 seconds.  If you have any questions, or need help with anything at all, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page.  I'd be glad to help in any way possible.  Broooooooce (talk) 11:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

text: - Done! This is rather significant because it confirms that Hurwitz had agreed to start writing the script. Broooooooce (talk) 22:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  http://ccinsider.comedycentral.com/cc_insider/2008/05/arrested-develo.html seems to use our article here as a source.  They don't say anything new, but we are even mentioned explicitly.  Broooooooce (talk) 18:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add 

message: I noticed that you (82.35.47.20) added that the movie had confirmed and you referenced a source.  I had to revert it because the source you listed was 404 and I could not find it when I searched on google, even by the authors name, the article name, and the site that is referenced seems like a business site rather than an entertainment news kinda place.  Can you link to the article here please?  Thanks.  Broooooooce (talk) 23:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie confirmation reverted 

message: Where are the refs for all the quotes? The DominatorTalkEdits 16:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the first, next to last, and last paragraphs, they are noted -- these are paragraphs that I collected, wrote, and sourced. The other quotes in the article came from the AD TV article which someone else moved over here and their sources are mostly mentioned within the paragraphs that contain them.  For example: In the Olberman/MSNBC paragraph, the quotes came from the show (apparently).  The 2nd and 5th paragraphs aren't properly sourced and I will try and find the means by which they were obtained. Broooooooce (talk) 18:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (ec} Well, all quotes should have a ref after them, even if it means using the same ref in one paragraph; "It's up to Mitch.", "It's something we're very interested in doing, but only after the writer's strike, and only if the powers that be approve.", "Yeah, we're currently in talks . . ., "a round of sniffing [had] started." and "[believes] Hurwitz wants to [do the film]," all need to be sourced. The DominatorTalkEdits 18:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All but "It's up to Mitch" and "put the wheels in motion toward a major motion picture." are sourced.  If the inline mentions of where the quote came from (TV Guide, Late Night With Conan O'Brien, etc) aren't good enough, then I suggest hunting down a link to transcripts from the shows or publications and linking them.  As for the first two that definitely need citations, I will try and track them down. Broooooooce (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying that the sources don't exist, just that it needs to be cited directly after the quote per WP:CITE. The DominatorTalkEdits 18:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it would be a good idea to enlist the help of the original authors on the TV article for help tracking down the two sources that we don't have already.  I will read up on WP:CITE and try and make the article conform to stylistic guidelines. Broooooooce (talk) 18:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Hooray! I was looking through old revisions of the TV series article and found some sources that had somehow gotten lost!  Still gotta find "it's up to Mitch" though.  Broooooooce (talk) 18:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Great job! The DominatorTalkEdits 19:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

text:  See: http://youtube.com/watch?v=e56-kBlYs6w for video of the actual Olberman MSNBC report.  I didn't quite know how to source this so I just used the news template available at Wikipedia:Citation_templates.  It doesn't link to anything, but I don't see how it can because I couldn't find a text transcript anywhere. Broooooooce (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I've seen that one, it is possible to use "cite episode" to cite the actual report, not sure if that's what you did, just don't link to Youtube, it's a copyright violation, I guess you know that, I've left a bunch of sources below, see if any of them are usable. The DominatorTalkEdits 20:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Yeah, as you were editing this page, I found that on the template page and was in the process of using it for the Conan quote, I also found a site with video of the quote http://tv.popcrunch.com/will-arnett-on-february-25-conan-obrien-video/.  I'm not sure if I should start an external link section at the bottom and add this link as I'm unsure of whether it would infringe on copyright.  I knew better than to add the youtube video ;) Broooooooce (talk) 20:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think you're allowed to add a link to any site that infringes copyright, the one you linked seems to do so, though I could of course be wrong. It's better not to link to it at all, and you don't need to link to it to use it as a source, it's the same thing as with citing a book, the book just needs to verify what is said in the article and editor's are not obliged to make every source accessible to the reader. But by all means make an external link section. The DominatorTalkEdits 20:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I did it!  Everything is cited properly (at least so far as I can see).  Couldn't have gotten the last of it without one of your sources, and another couple provided me with new content for the article. Thanks. Broooooooce (talk) 21:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to be clear, accessdate just means when the ref was added to the article, so all accessdates today should be 2008-04-13. The DominatorTalkEdits 22:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd just pasted the references from the old revision of the AD TV article, I didn't even look at that ;) Broooooooce (talk) 23:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, I thought that you found the dates in the actual sources, very well, oh and when you don't have all the fields filled out, just remove them from the citation templates, not a major thing, but it saves some room and bytes. The DominatorTalkEdits 23:25, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Right on, and don't hesitate to give me advice as I am new to all of this and have learned a great deal already just from this article!  BTW: I like the two column reflist. Broooooooce (talk) 23:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs

message: AH, you've edit conflicted me again =0
Here are a bunch: 
 I know that some of them might already be in the article, but hey, it's a start, personally I like to use the WP:CITET templates, as they format the stuff for you, and I think that </references> should be substituted with . The DominatorTalkEdits 20:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I did it!  Everything is cited properly (at least so far as I can see).  Couldn't have gotten the last of it without one of your sources, and another couple provided me with new content for the article. Thanks. Broooooooce (talk) 21:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to be clear, accessdate just means when the ref was added to the article, so all accessdates today should be 2008-04-13. The DominatorTalkEdits 22:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd just pasted the references from the old revision of the AD TV article, I didn't even look at that ;) Broooooooce (talk) 23:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, I thought that you found the dates in the actual sources, very well, oh and when you don't have all the fields filled out, just remove them from the citation templates, not a major thing, but it saves some room and bytes. The DominatorTalkEdits 23:25, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Right on, and don't hesitate to give me advice as I am new to all of this and have learned a great deal already just from this article!  BTW: I like the two column reflist. Broooooooce (talk) 23:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources