Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes (season 21–present)/Archive 1

message: I don't think we need a table for season 17 yet. Hardly anything is known about it, and the season 16 section has barely been started. Kaizersoze 20:54, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
:On a different note, I'm questioning the episodes airing in September.  For the past several years, Fox has started airing new episodes with "Treehouse" in Novermber.  It's possible they'll break with tradition, but is there a source saying they will?Bjones
*Hey i noticed that the S17 ep The Mook, Chef, Wife and Her Homer was removed on 22/4/06, is it going to be part of S18? (Dannybriggs93 19:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding season 17 

message: ===>Help Can anyone tell me why the 302nd episode was touted as the 300th, and the 351st as the 350th? Thanks. Justin (koavf) 23:20, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
: I believe it's explained in the article for the "300th episode". Something to do with sweeps or something. Optichan 02:36, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
: Because the actual ones were not good enough material for 300th and 350th episode material.
See Strong Arms of the Ma, the real 300th episode, and Barting Over, the advertised 300th episode.  Besides, no one was probably counting the number of episodes anyway. -- Bobman123 01:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A question regarding numbering of episodes 

message: We need some volunteers to give input on how a list of television episodes (such as this one) should look. Please follow the link at the top and join the project. Otherwise, I hope there are some fans who are willing to adjust this page to match the preferred format as described on the page. Thanks!--Will2k 14:47, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
:I'm glad a list is available, although there are also episode guides I can check. I'm sort of a fan. Although I think the show declined a bit around season 10, but has rebounded a bit recently. Anyway I'm changing this to incomplete lists of Movie, TV, etc. I hope that's okay. It's just that "Incomplete lists" is very crowded right now. I'm not trying to screw up where people find this. If anything it might be easier at the new place--T. Anthony 06:49, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject - List of Television Episodes 

message: List of The Simpsons episodes by theme has been deleted, just letting people know. - Matthew238 02:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: I've been creating anonymously for over two years by now.  It was certainly a shock to for me to read about this experimental creation limitation (announced here).  As a Ricky Gervais fan I was attempting to add some details, available from Ricky's site about the Gervais-written episode "Homer Simpson, This is Your Wife", .  66.167.253.134 20:34, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can't create an episode's article 

message: I don't like the idea of spliting this page. It is more convienant the way it is. Every episode I'm looking for right in the page. Splitting it would cause some difficulties in scrolling through episodes. - Ted87
::Me neither. I know it takes a long time for the page to load for some, but I really don't know what episode is in what season. Firefox does a good job of rendering the page as it loads, you may want to try that browser.—Fitch 19:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO splitting is a bad idea. I've used this list countless times with no trouble whatsoever. When you know the name but not the season of an episode you can Ctrl-F it, which would be a lot harder split up. The ToC links make travelling to distant seasons easy. I really don't see the prob. Ludraman 21:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: No splitting

message: What episode was it where there was a huge lottery jackpot in Sprinfield and Kent Brockman won it?
--I may be wrong but I think it may have been the episode called "Dog of Death" in which Santas Little Helper gets sick.
you are correct.    swidly 01:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Which Episode was this?

message: It should not be split because I like to be able to see it all on one page --Adam1213 Talk [/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&action=edit§ion=new +] 22:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  spliting 

message: Unlock this page right now! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.21.35.114 (talk • contribs) . The list needs to be updated - there's a new episode on January 29. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.157.55.203 (talk • contribs) .
* I moved this comment from the top and added attributions. Also, if you read Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy, you will see that editing is only blocked for unregistered editors and editors with accounts newer than four days." If you sign up for an account and are patient, you too can edit semi-protected pages. tregoweth 05:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Unsigned comment]

message: I've changed the table layout to match that of seasons 1-4. The only problem is I don't know the code for the colour red. Could someone who does know please change it to red (because that's the boxset colour).
--DChiuch 06:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 5 Tables 

message: I think we should vote on whether we are going to split the article or not. Does anyone know how to create a vote page? The page is very long but it is convenient like this. I suggest we have pages in groups of 5 seasons, a page for the shorts, and a page for other things like music videos and television commercials; all accessible from a disambiguation page. My vote would be to split it. So people that use this page, could you either create a vote page if you know how to, or just say your vote here.
--DChiuch 04:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting Article 

message: All of the screen shots in the article are licenced under fair use (well I checked most). But they aren't meeting the requirements of fair use, and should be removed (and some, if not all, deleted). I'm going to go through each of the images and deal with them, I'm just letting you know that this  article/list will look different if/when all of the images are gone.--Commander Keane 07:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you care? Your not an administrator so why must you delete the images and reduce the quality of this article? Sure it might be copyright infringment but do you really think Fox is going to care? --DChiuch 07:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um I am an admin, and I care because having the images on this page is against the law - and thus threatens Wikipedia's validity. If Fox don't care then you could email them and ask them to release all the screenshots  under a free licence (eg public domain would be nice). I'd love to keep the images, but I'd like to keep Wikipedia running (ie no law suits) too. If you do send that email to fox let me know, I won't delete any until they respond.--Commander Keane 07:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use images - need to be removed 

message: We need to find some way of stopping people from making the same edits to Seasons Seventeen and Eighteen - it's so annoying to have to delete it every time. Things like "Wrecks of the Homeribbean" and "Simpsons Christmas Stories II" are complete bull. DVD Smith 18:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated bogus Season 18 edits 

message: Which episode was the THX logo used in?
*That would be Burns' Heir (1F16). The THX logo/sound shows up right before Mr. Burns' message looking for an heir. Baseballfan 10:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  THX logo? 

message: I think things like the music videos and links to the ads and shorts etc should be moved to the above page. This page should be about episodes only. Creating a media page will assist in disambiguating this page somewhat. Any objections? Discordance 19:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of The Simpsons media]]

message: when bart kept lying so who wouldn't do a test?
Pece Kocovski 08:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  which episode was it 

message: I find this page hard to read, relating to the french version. I think it's easier to read a simple list without to much informations and links to complete description. 84.103.210.43 22:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The french list of the Simpsons episodes 

message: I'm a user a Firefox, and I've noticed that the picture for Flaming Moe's doesn't work. Instead it just has a link to the image page. In Internet Explorer there is no problem. Has anyone else encountered this problem? If so, can anyone think of a solution? --DChiuch 06:24, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I'm also using Firefox (and the original uploader) and it seems to work fine for me.  Is this a persistent problem you've had, or a one-time occurrence? --Mcmillin24 15:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm using 1.5.0.1 and I don't seem to have any problems. Have you tried refreshing the page. Theshibboleth 04:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Just use Internet Explorer.  That's what I do. 206.47.141.21 16:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Firefox]] Image Problem 

message: Is there any particular reason as to why this list was added? As of right now it seems a bit out of place, perhaps each date would be better off on the page of each individual episde? KDLarsen 23:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Australia 

message: I'm not sure this section is required. While I'm an inclusionist, upcoming episodes of a show really isn't encyclopedic, requires a lot of maintenance, and can be found elsewhere on the Internet . I'd argue against its inclusion.
And if it is kept, Sky One schedules should also be listed under UK. - Wezzo (talk) (ubx) 14:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote against this section.  It will require too many updates that people will end up not doing.  Wikipedia is not TVGuide.  Also, it contains errors: Last Updated on Monday, April 10, 2006 at 4:27am (London Time), 11:27pm (New York Time).  How can this be updated at 11:27 pm New York time when it's now only 9:33 am New York time???  Also, who calls this New York time?  It's called eastern time. 206.47.141.21 13:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upcoming Episodes 

message: (Posted this on the WikiProject talk page, and got nothing, so I'm posting it here):
Recently people have been adding episode airdates from other countries- Simpsons Christmas Stories and We're on the Road to D'ohwhere have UK airdates, and Bonfire of the Manatees has an Australian airdate. I haven't found any others, though.
Should the episode articles contain US airdates only, or should they all have airdates from other countries? IMDb has a complete listing of all UK Simpsons airdates from mid-1995 onward (and several from 1993-4) added by myself, but finding ones for other countries may be tricky. Plus, what if people start adding French, Spanish, Outer Mongolian airdates - do we allow them, or just ones for English-speaking countries? BillyH 17:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any thoughts on this yet? It's starting to get a bit out of hand now - people are adding multiple airdates for single episodes (The Call of the Simpsons now has four US dates). BillyH 07:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I think we should keep the orignal airdates for english-speaking countries only (perhaps only USA, UK and Australia). --DChiuch 11:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me, though it's gonna take a heck of a lot of editing, going through almost 400 pages. I'll need some help! BillyH 14:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Airdates 

message: I'd like to make a proposal. I've noticed that in recent episodes (such as "Kiss Kiss, Bang Bangalore") the episode will be composed primarily of quotes. Although quotes are undeniably useful in giving a feeling for the episode, we've got too much of a good thing. I'd like to make a proposal, and put it to a vote: henceforth, no new episode recap should be more than 1/4 quotes. How does that sound? -Litefantastic 23:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cut the Quotes

message: I think the new format is really stupid, it's so much harder now to search for an episode. If it has to be done, then hey, I undersstand, just saying that it's crappy. My two cents... AMac2002 08:28, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can bookmark this page: here It's the best version of the article in the history. It's dated April 14. 206.47.141.21 16:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I like that. I say we have 2 episode lists. This one, which will be the one that is automatically linked to, then a 2nd one which has the all the episodes on one page. That way people can choose which they they like. What do ya'll think? If no one has any objections I'm gong to do that.--Ted87 17:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New format

message: I'd like to say that Kaizersoze has a good idea going.  Having a list of just the episodes, with no description is much better than just the list of season numbers.  If we really can't continue with the old complete list, it's a good compromise.  Continue with your good work.  206.47.141.21 11:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kaizersoze's edits 

message: Because I linked to the season 7 page directly I added this:
:For list of all seasons of The Simpsons, go to List of The Simpsons episodes.
It is a kind of a proof and I don't feel emotionally attached to it. Srx 23:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backlinks from season pages 

message: Can someone please add the correct time zones to the upcoming episodes for US, Canada and Australia? Thanks. WP 04:10, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  time zone 

message: I cannot believe there is such a big project about the simpsons!! Anyway, I was just wondering... this is one of the longest page in wikipedia. And it will likely be the longest when it will be finished. I saw you have already introduced subarticles. Any other idea? gala.martin  <Small>(what?)</Small> 04:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WOW 

message: Why is this page changing in such a fast rate without any rationale behind? Why do we have both The Simpsons season 7 (linked from this page) and List of The Simpsons episodes (Season 7) (linked from everywhere else)? Why it has duplicated content? I am tired of this...
--Srx 10:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a problem with this page and many others on Wikipedia.  People make major changes to articles without discussing it first on the talk pages so we end up with ugly results like that.  It sucks but there's nothing we can do about that except revert the edits, which I will not do.  206.47.141.21 16:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Simpsons season X vs List of The Simpsons episodes (Season X) 

message: Is that site that 'Downloadable Episodes' links to even legal...?
*well it looks like someone deleted it. please sign comments.216.222.255.113 19:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Downloadable episodes? 

message: Because i cant tell which episode im looking for, and besides, like Family guy or American Dad!, the list of episodes are easy to find.
Who's with me?
Pece Kocovski 10:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No need. The individual season lists still have the pictures. Example: The Simpsons season 1 --SeizureDog 08:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Family Guy and American Dad! lists are easier to read, because they don't have as many episodes as The Simpsons. When or if they reach 378 episodes they can't be on one page. Even if the average image is 3KB, then the whole page would be over 1MB to load, which is too much. --Maitch 13:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  i think we should return this article to its previous view? 

message: Is it ok to create redirects from production codes, just like DABF10 would content #REDIRECT Blame It on Lisa?--217.233.238.211 15:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirects from Production-Codes 

message: Willie: "Brothers and sisters are natural born enemies! Like Englishmen and Scots! Or Welshmen and Scots! Or Japanese and Scots! Or Scots and other Scots! Damned Scots! They ruined Scotland..." 
Skinner: "You Scots sure are a contentious people." 
Willie: "You just made an enemy for life!"
Jlaforteza 17:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Milhouse Doesn't Live Here Anymore --Ted87 06:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What episode is this quote from? 

message: Over in List of Lost episodes tehre is currently something of an edit war going on with teh dvd covers. A lot of peopel are saying that the fair use claim is invalid. I took the liberty of changing the fair use rationale for hte images to match the one used here, but its still getting removed without much of an explanation. Can someone explain whether the dvd covers are or are not valid? --larsinio (poke)(prod) 18:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I recall a minor objection in this page's featured list candidacy to the DVD covers for not being low-resolution.  The fair use laws only extend to low-resolution DVD covers.  As long as proper fair use rationale is used, I don't think this page has the same problem. --McMillin24 contribstalk 13:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to write something about the DVDs in the lead. That way you can claim that they are used to illustrate the text. --Maitch 15:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or, note in the lead that this article overs the topic of multiple episodes as well as DVD release info, rather than just being a simple "list".  -- Ned Scott 19:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dvd covers

message: In order to resolve the long standing debate over fair use of screenshots on List of Lost episodes, I am now trying to resolve the issue under the belief that the issue is an opinionated matter and not a matter of policy. Talk:List of Lost episodes#Fair use criteria number 8.  I ask that people share their comments, but please try to keep the conversation in this section focused.
One thing that works against us is that the conversation tries to defend too many points at once. Try not to respond to comments about other aspects of the debate, and just take this one step at a time. Basically, respond if you think this is an opinionated matter regarding policy point 8 of WP:FUC or not.
I believe if we can break through on the issue of point 8, the rest will fall into place. -- Ned Scott 08:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots as fair use 

message: Can Someone give me a list featuring all the Simpsons episodes rated TV-14? 'sed 00:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can someone at least acknowledge my plea and help me find out?'sed 04:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: TV-14

message: Using a generic Simpsons image/logo everytime they are mentioned is decorative and prohibited under WP:FUC. Yes it provides visual identification, but they are not the subject of this article, and therefore illustrating them is non-essential. ed g2s • talk 21:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family picture 

message: While I can see how it is perceived as non-fair use, dissenters should also see how it can be considered something more than just decorative. What irks me the most is the unilateral deletions while the subject is still under heavy discussion. Leave the image the way it was before the dispute until said dispute is resolved here. Otherwise you are just being rude and inconsiderate. --Will2k 03:45, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is not rationale for a use this page. You can claim one on the image talk page, but I will contest it. The amendment is a clarification of what is already meant by our policy, that is we only use fair use when we have to i.e. when the family is the subject of the article. In the case of copyright disputes, content should always be ommitted until it is cleared. This is also policy. ed g2s • talk 16:47, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on the family picture 

message: After I've removed the 18 season articles into List of the Simpsons episodes the season articles could be deleted. --Xls 21:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, if you're going to do this, it would be much wiser to make the individual season articles template pages and include them in here that way. --Kaizersoze 21:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season articles 

message: List of vehicles in The Simpsons is currently an AfD candidate.  You are invited to partake in this discussion. --Czj 04:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "List of vehicles in The Simpsons" currently up for deletion 

message: I've reverted the merging of the season articles. On this talk page in the section "Far too long" we agreed that the article gets far too long and I still agree with that.--Maitch 12:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The episode list is  --Xls 12:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging season articles 

message: My edit was not vandalism... I cannot see a compelling reason why the tables in this list need to be set to 700px, which looks poor in 800x600 screens. Yes, I understand it keeps the tables uniform widths, but I don't consider that compelling. And perhaps UK air dates on Season 18 should be dumped... the Simpsons is an American show and other airdates are of little importance. - RoyBoy 800 16:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the UK air dates should be removed - so I've removed them. The tables should have an uniform width. If you think you can make it look good with a shorter width, then you could try that. --Maitch 19:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well some seasons won't look good (episode title will take two lines), but my point is there should be no width at all so that the tables can adapt to a given resolution and even a floating browser window (not maximized) without forcing a horizontal bar. - RoyBoy 800 22:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I would prefer two lines for some episodes and an uniform width to no width at all. --Maitch 23:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Width in tables, UK air dates 

message: I'd like to add some templates to the pages of all the episodes (so far) in Season 18. These will have no visible effect, but are used by the bot ListGenBot to read data from the pages and compile lists.
This bot is currently approved for testing, so I am only proposing changing Season 18. The bot will generate pages containing the data on the episode pages, ordered by section or alphabetically - see User:ListGenBot/Details for full details.
I'm aware that many of the data items on these pages already have list pages, but I propose generating independent list pages from the bot and evaluate the worth of adding some of those lists (dynamically updated) to other pages.
My proposal is to make invisible updates to the Season 18 episode pages but the bot will only read these pages, it will make no updates, so there is no risk of corrupting existing episode data. I'll add the templates with HTML comments to explain their use.
I'll create list pages that the bot will maintain (probably as subpages of this page) until their worth is evaluated and there's a consensus to integrate them into other pages. If there is that consensus, I'll add the templates to all the other episode pages.
Please let me know if anyone has concern or wants clarification with this exercise --Mortice 18:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're interested in this, there's minor discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Simpsons  --Mortice 20:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for updates to Season 18 pages for evaluating bot list generation 

message: Is it possible to replace the pictures in the infoboxes of each episode with the episode's own promo card (if, of course, there is one)? Some of the images in the infoboxes are of low resolution, and in my opinion, it would be good to use the official card Fox released for the episode. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dan m90 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox pictures 

message: Why do some of the episodes have the production code 3Gxx? It doesn't appear in the key on the top. (One of the episodes in question was 'Lisa's Sax')141.156.231.174 19:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production Codes 

message: What happened to, like, half the list? —Signed, your friendly neighborhood MessedRocker. 03:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Half the list 

message: There is a discussion concerning the images on the individual season article of this show at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Clean_up_for_the_featured_ones. They are removing all fair use images. - Gman124 19:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Clean_up_for_the_featured_ones]] 

message: What happened to the images of the DVD covers in the table of contents? I think the images add significantly to the quality of the article. --Hotdoglives 00:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed per fair use policy change. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maitch (talk • contribs) 15:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lame. This used to be one of the best-looking Wikipedia articles before the image removal, IMO. Hope this isn't permanent. --Hotdoglives 03:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD covers 

message: What do the colors next to the seasons mean on the list of seasons at the top? --Wack'd Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! 16:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The colour of the season's DVD box. Gran2 17:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Than why are seasons 11-19, which are yet to be realeased on DVD (or even have an announced date), listed as having yellow boxes? --Wack'd Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! 17:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the Simpsons are yellow, and that's better than plain white. Gran2 17:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colors 

message: Those three sources for the US Copyright links, the go no where, just to let you know. I mean, they go to a generic page that doesn't mention The Simpsons.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 21:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We know, the copyright database, doesn;t allow specific links. Gran2 21:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Copyright Data 

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 . Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia, including this one. --Maniwar (talk) 19:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've checked it out. Boy, do I have a lot to read up on. thanks for the HU. Eaglestorm (talk) 02:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centralized TV Episode Discussion 

message: How does one search the U.S. Copyright Records database?  I want to find titles of the fourth season of Lost.  An actor confirmed that episode 7 is titled "Ji Yeon".  Maybe you could search for that and tell me how you found it.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: the copyright database is more efficient for shows with a lengthy production process such as animation shows, which take about 9 months to produce an episode, as compared to weeks for a show like lost.  Some shows also don't submit things in advance to the database, or dont submit all the details.  I believe if you go here  http://lostseason3.blogspot.com/  they list the season 4 titles for the first 8 eps, with some other spoilerish info. Grande13 (talk) 22:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know about lostseason3.blogspot.com, but it is not considered a reliable source.  Thanks, –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

text: All right, thanks.  For future reference, how did you come across "Double, Double, Boy in Trouble"?  –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I searched for "Simpsons", then rearranged the results so that they were sorted by the date they were added in descending order. -- Scorpion0422 00:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Searching the copyright database 

message: How come every episode article has been completly cut inhalf?--76.230.146.131 (talk) 18:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you elaborate? Are you perhaps wondering why all of the unsourced trivia and cultural references have gone from some pages? Gran2 18:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

text: I've seen the same thing. (Only in this article, tough). The list at the top of the article has lost half its entries. It is as if the entries of the last seasons have all been moved down, replacing the entries of the previous seasons. This is quite bad. - GeiwTeol 13:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  simpsons episode articles 

message: dear Scorpion,
I personally found the toc a bit more convenient to click, plus you can hide those anyway, but ymmv. Xaver David (talk) 18:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  TOC 

message: I don'f know if its just me, bit the top half of the Seasons list at the top seems to be missing. I looked at the source, it seemed to be all there, but when displayed, the top half is missing again.
Maybe its an issue with the way pages are rendered? GeiwTeol 14:06, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what you mean, everything is working fine for me. Maybe if you took a screenshot? Gran2 14:23, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Half of top Seasons List Missing (or broken) 

message: Several IPs have added this, but I have removed it, but I'm starting to wonder if it should just be included, Al Jean has confirmed a 21st season and said Treehouse of Horror XX would be one of the episodes. THOHXX is also now in the copyright database. Thoughts? -- Scorpion0422 15:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we need more than one episode, especially just a THOH episode. Everyone knows it, and all future seasons will have a THOH episode. CTJF83Talk 19:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. -- MISTER ALCOHOL T C  05:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Season 21

message: Apparently the seasons section is the table of contents? This isn't very obvious, and personally I think it's bad design, but maybe this is something that can be fixed amicably. 71.17.5.245 (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of Contents 

message: After being involved in an edit war, I have realized this. Our productions codes, which currently go under the name LABF??, should not be called that. We assume that it is LABF, but we don't actually have any proof or sources for this. It might as well be an episode from the next production season or it could be some kind of special episode, which has a whole different code scheme. I am therefore going to change these to TBA.--Maitch (talk) 11:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production code 

message: The as yet unreleased episodes near the bottom are referenced with a link to the U.S. Copyright Records database e.g. "Reg. # PAu003362813 in the U.S. Copyright Records database Retrieved on September 12, 2008."  None of these actually link to the relevent place in the database but only to the home page and it is actually not obvious how to get there from that page.  Should these links be modified to jump to the actual database entry for each episode?  Jubilee♫clipman 18:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that direct links don't work properly. Anyway, it's fairly simple, from that link: click search the catalog, enter the code, select registration number and it should come up. Gran2 19:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  A direct link works for me  CTJF83Talk 19:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

text: I, too, was able to link up directly to each record.  In fact, I just finished an experimental run wherin I changed all 6 records as of April 10, 2010, titled them with the name of the site and their individual refernce #, and was able (from a preview edit-no permanent changes) to link directly to each reference page and return.  With all due respect to Gran2, your 3-step way may be "simple", but not as simple as click-and-go.--KnownAlias  contact 20:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry are you accusing me of something? Did I say "direct links don't work so this potential solution must be enforced"? No I said my "understanding" was that they didn't, because the last time I looked they didn't work, and I offered a solution. The fact is, that direct links do work, and I was mistaken. If direct links work then please go ahead and change them. Gran2 20:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Sorry (sincere), I was not accusing you of anything.  I was merely noting that one click was easier than click, enter, and select (it was the quotation marks, wasn't it?).  Especially when trying to remember the actual reference # after you've left the Wiki page.  If it's cool, as you say, I saved the data from my experiment, and I'll go ahead and give it a try.  And I'll take any notes anyone (including your vastly more experienced self, Gran2) has on content or format changes in presentation or titles.  I'm still a noob in here, and I'm learning, which is why I didn't know where my authority lie on just doing it, or I probably would have.--KnownAlias  contact 21:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry about it, we're all still learning! You've done better than me by remembering to see if it works now. And yes, please, go ahead. If you see anything that needs doing, especially something to make stuff easier, then WP:BE BOLD. Happy editing! Gran2 21:30, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And the plot thickens.  It appears the U.S. Copyright Records database operates in "sessions", and the code for each session appears as part of the link.  My sessions had apparently expired, and would no longer allow me access to the pages in question.  The page only read, "Your Session Timed Out".  When I did link back to the pages through the original link on the Wiki page, the "session" data in the web address was completely different from the data in the one I'd done earlier.  So from now on, to all who ask, that is why we don't link directly.  For the rest, I apologize again.  All hail the Grand Gran2, who knew better.  I'm just grateful I'm insecure enough to check my work first.--KnownAlias  contact 21:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: After watching it for a few days, I'm happy to report that the recent edit I made to bypass the home page and skip straight to the search page was successful.  Unlike the information page, the search page is like the home page; a permanent link.  You now only need to enter the appropriate PAu reference #, then click the appropriate search parameter.  I think this is as good as it's going to get, unless the Copyright office updates their operating system (good luck with that). KnownAlias  contact 16:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to U.S. Copyright Records database 

message: Why Why isn't there a caption for the episode "four great women and a manicure" season 20 episode 20.--A9l8e7n (talk) 00:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What exactly are you talking about? Caption?? CTJF83 chat 01:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

text: It was deleted for lack of rational. CTJF83 chat 07:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I have no idea where they got it from, sorry. CTJF83 chat 00:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The same picture that used to be there is on google, just google the episode name and youll find hundreds. Just please add a caption it is really bugging me.--A9l8e7n (talk) 20:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: An image isn't needed in that article anyway. See WP:NFCC. Theleftorium 20:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Did you read the page? As quoted "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.". Not having an image isn't detrimental to understanding the episode. CTJF83 chat 21:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, but tell me this, why should any article of the all the episodes have a picture if it doesn't "incresase readers' understanding of the topic". About 99 percent of the articles have pictures, am i right?.--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  That doesn't make it right, I think Wikipedia is a whole is trying to get away from that. I don't like it, but that's policy CTJF83 chat 22:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Yes, I agree. If it was up to me, we'd have tons of pictures. Believe me, i've been in plenty of fights on the side of adding pictures. But official policy doesn't allow for that. Being this is a free encyclopedia, it is suppose to be mostly made up of free content. CTJF83 chat 22:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand, but i don't see the consistency in it. Whg isn't this article allowed pictures, if i see pictures in all the rest of the articles.--A9l8e7n (talk) 22:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well this is a newer article, to be honest, we probably should go and remove all the picture from the other episode pages. Plus many of the images now are added by people who don't know the policy that I pointed out to you CTJF83 chat 22:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

text: We personally, like I said, I personally think images enhance the pages, so I don't feel it necessary to remove them. Eventhough policy technically says we shouldn't have them. Now on newer GAs and FAs, we are removing the images, so they will pass. CTJF83 chat 22:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Aren't you able to upload one? I said I don't like removing them, I also didn't say I'm going to contribute to the problem by adding more unneeded images. CTJF83 chat 22:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

text: just list where you got it from. Look at another proper episode image for help. CTJF83 chat 22:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I would just like to get people's attention Why isn't there a caption for the episode "four great women and a manicure" 

message: There should be a column for specials for The Simpsons 20th Anniversary Special – In 3-D! On Ice!. If seen other articles have specials column as well such as list of family guy episodes.--A9l8e7n (talk) 02:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What else is there besides this one special? none. CTJF83 chat 02:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not an episode of the show, and it's linked in the template at the bottom, so why should it be mentioned here? -- Scorpion0422 02:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

text: It's not an episode, it's a special. It doesn't really matter what other shows do. If The Simpsons regularily had specials (like Lost), then a section might not hurt, but this is one special, which can more than easily be linked in the lead or see also section. -- Scorpion0422 16:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need to add a Specials column 

message: Toc is needed for a better accessibility. There is no reason to remove it. Almost any article on Wikipedia has got the index, and this is a pretty long page. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 06:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an index, it's the "seasons" table, which has links to every seasons section. The two were merged because it made little sense to have two long index tables one after the other. Also, why did you split the lead into sections? The lead summarizes the article and having an "introduction" section that just contains a bit of the lead, and not an actual introduction that contains basic show info seems useless. -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 12:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well any non-standard designs, in order to be an improvment, has to be much better than the ordinary solution. As you can see above 1 2, I'm not the only one to think it is not a good and intuitive design. The lead section seemed to be pretty long and the article is not about "Simpsons", it is about the episode list: so I splitted the introduction in a more specific lead section for the episode list and a brief (less important) introduction to the show. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 17:48, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing wrong with the design of the template. Some users, such as yourself, are confused because it's different from the majority of the other articles. But, how is having a long ToC, then a long table much better? There is a potential solution in the form of a compact ToC, like this one. As for splitting the lead into sections, that's pretty pointless because this is a list of episodes. All essential introduction information should be in the lead, not in an individual section. -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 18:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure why we need a TOC at all, since, as Scorpion pointed out, the seasons summary functions as a TOC.  CTJF83 chat 18:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  The ToC is only neccesary to find a particular section, such as if you looked up the main Simpsons page looking specifically for information on the voice actors; then the ToC is a nice shortcut to keep you from having to hunt through the whole article.  But when all you're doing is scrolling down from season 1 to season 12, it seems redundant.  I've personally never used it for any of the episode guides. Most to all information not related to the list itself is located at the top of the page before the ToC, anyway. KnownAlias  contact 18:41, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  TOC again 

message: I found valuable sources for some of the ratings for the early episodes of The Simpsons, namely 1x12 & 1x13, and 2x03 & 2x04. On the other pages for the episodes, people have guessed an approximation of what the viewers will be based on the neilson ratings. These need to be taken off, because there was a guess of the viewers for 2x03 and 2x04 and they were completely off. For example, someone said 2x04 was "estimated to have been watched by at least 14 million viewers", when in fact, it was viewed by 26.1 million. The estimations are completely wrong, and need to be taken off. Thank you. Codywarren08 (talk) 17:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you provide the "valuable sources" in question, so they can be verified? Thanks Gran2 17:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

text: (ec) Reliable sources? CTJF83 chat 17:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Codywarren08, there's a difference between "viewers" and "homes"/"households". One home can contain many viewers. Theleftorium (talk) 18:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have put the sources on the episode pages of 1x12, 1x13, 2x03 and 2x04, in which they all had been guessed to have been about 14 million viewers, when in fact they were way off. Regardless, no estimations should be made on wikipedia unless the information can be verified. I'd remove the estimations myself but there are a lot of Simpsons episode pages with guesses rather than facts. Codywarren08 (talk) 15:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You do realize that Nielsen ratings are already essentially estimations, right? We're just including the information that helped them calculate that rating. I'll use an example: Homer vs. Lisa and the 8th Commandment. According to the cited article, the episode had a 15.2 rating, and "Each ratings point represents 931,000 homes." So, to calculate the number of households that viewed the episode, you do 15.2x0.931, which gives you 14.15. Nielsen does also calculate the approximate number of viewers, but that usually involves a lot more guesswork, so including just the households is more reliable. -- Scorpion0422 00:30, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ratings 

message: I noticed that the seasons' colors are changed to match those of their DVD box sets, and those seasons that have not been released on DVD yet are colored yellow. However, the box set for season 20 has come out already, but the article still has its color as yellow. Shouldn't that be changed? --SpongeSebastian (talk) 22:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I Agree, and why are the box sizes different from 1-19, to 20-22 seasons.--A9l8e7n (talk) 00:19, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 20 color 

message: Why is this listed as "not aired" ?  I know I've seen it once. 69.196.139.73 (talk) 17:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are probably thinking of "Flaming Moes". "Flaming Moe" is an unaired episode using a virtually identical title to the Season 3 classic, because the writers have no original or good ideas whatsoever anymore. Gran2 18:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flaming Moe 

message: A user has added the number of episodes in a production code to the "seasons" table. 
And I have removed it. Firstly, it is complete trivia, especially here. I've never understood why some fans are obsessed with production codes, it's just something the producers use to differentiate between episode a and episode b. We basically note them for completeness, and because it also provides insight into the order episodes were produced. We already note the number of episodes per season, the number of episodes in a production run is overkill, and something better suited for a fansite like The Simpsons Archive or WikiSimpsons.
The table also doesn't look that great with the numbers in brackets. -- Scorpion0422 04:20, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As I can tell from your tone towards production codes, it seems you've come across a lot of people who are interested in them, and for good reason. A lot of DVD sets (especially in Europe) for certain shows (ex. Futurama), are not released in broadcast order. To many people overseas, broadcast order in the USA means nothing. Most shows, especially ones that have plotlines that carry over should have been broadcast in production order, but networks decided to air them as they see fit and not the way most producers intended. I especially do not understand your comment about it being "trivia", since it's just another bit of information that can be useful to certain people. I especially do not see how it's overkill seeing as how there are DVD release dates for 3 different regions included in the table. Everyone notes the episode code or number on their wiki episodes page, the Simpsons one isn't special in doing so. The only thing I agree with is that the number of episodes produced per season should be in a separate column, in order to have a cleaner look. Goldeneyed (talk) 02:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, no I haven't, at least, not on Wikipedia. However, there is a thread at a Simpsons forum I frequent where they treat production codes as being as important as plot information. It's funny that you bring you say production codes are needed for those overseas, then you say including the DVD release info for other regions is trivia. Okay, it's not vital, but the majority of other episode lists do include such information. But, that doesn't have a lot to do with the topic. A line has to be drawn somewhere on what is and isn't included and what is and isn't trivial. As you say, it "can be useful to certain people". The table should only include information that is useful to most users. Otherwise, why not also note how many episodes aired in a certain calendar year (to use your logic: "it's just another bit of information that can be useful to certain people")? -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 03:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  By certain people I didn't mean minority or majority. Why should you be the one to decide to how big a proportion of wiki readers it's important to? You don't know who it's useful to at all. Second of all, the Futurama (which is a similar show) page goes by production order first. So does Batman the Animated Series. So if you're going to follow what the majority of episode lists are doing, then production codes should be included. Episodes in a calendar year is useless as NO ONE follows that order. It's a ridiculous argument. Your arguments for keeping DVD release dates are because everyone is doing it, despite the fact that you agree that it's trivial like production codes. And yet you feel that those should not be included despite the fact that everyone else is doing it. The logic simply is not there. 69.157.200.186 (talk) 16:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we've gotten our arguments very mixed up here, so lets start over. I'm not saying production codes should be removed. I'm saying there's no point in including the number episodes per code in the main summary table. No other list I've seen does that, and I'll cite some (I'm just limiting it to shows where there were holdovers from season to season, very non-animated shows do that): List of Family Guy episodes, List of American Dad! episodes, List of The Cleveland Show episodes. And your Futurama example isn't very good, because the airing of those episodes got very spread out and convoluted that it made sense to list them by DVD release. -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 23:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even List of Futurama episodes does this. Get rid of it. --Dorsal Axe 10:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of episodes per production code

message: We just touched on this on Talk:List of Medium episodes (season 7)#Future episodes; The Futon Critic is considered a reliable source that goes by official information; The "N/A" in the date spaces means they have no title for that date, but the dates have been confirmed for them by the network and if they were, as you say, guessing, the title space would say "(projected date)" as it all too typically does (check out House's future listings for examples of "guesswork"; they have confirmed dates through episode 15, and 9 projected dates for 7 remaining epiosdes all marked "(projected date)".  It's even a good example that shows that most of Fox's shows are scheduled through February sweeps).  Even the two week gap seen on January 30 and February 6 are perfectly coinciding with the NFL championship games and Superbowl respectively.  Seems they did some kind of homework.  If you still want to revert it go ahead (I ain't going to live here arguing about it), but there's nothing wrong with the source.  KnownAlias  contact 14:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If Futon goes by official information, why is there absolutely nothing at FoxFlash about those dates? The standard on most pages is to not include dates without an episode. -- Scorpion0422 15:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with Scropion, no title, not need for airdate. CTJF83 chat 21:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Futon air dates