Talk:Pigs Is Pigs (1937 film)

message: Someguy0830, I noticed your recent edits to this article.  The sizing of the pictures I have found to be a slight problem.  Forget the differences in opinion about proper size 300 too big:200 too small -- the problem is in a different area.  the sizing of the pictures is done by width instead of height.  When you set ALL the images to the same size, the ones in the trivia section with different aspect ratios looked terrible.  Is there any way to go about formatting image px size to height instead of width?
BTW: thank you for your intrest in the article.  Your edits are appreciated.  Makes me feel good to know it's being read.  -- Jason Palpatine 13:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First, an attempt at humor.  Second -- what can we do?  Look at the result.  Jason Palpatine 22:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made them align and orgainzed the trivia to align with them. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 23:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It can also harm the article if you have to compess the image to a ridiculous size to achieve it.  It works both ways -- that's the problem.  Sorry, but I reformatted the article and added a new pic.  I look forward to your edit in bringing this to proper form.  Thank you for the help.  -- Jason Palpatine 04:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is where you'd be wrong. 200 px is not "small". In fact, it's fairly large. What size is your monitor set to, 2000? Any image can be clicked on for a full-size image, thus the "thumbnail" option. Smaller is always better when it comes to images. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh well.  One, your an admin, so you must know what you're talking about.  Thank you for the input and the help.  -- Jason Palpatine 09:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you.   I reuploaded a couple of the images to compensate.  I cropped off a little of the unnecessary backgrounds to reduce their aspect ratio (slightly compensating for the real problem: can't size the pics to height.)  Thanks. Jason Palpatine 11:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Pigs Is Pigs (1937 film)]]

message: Someguy0830, According to Bart Simpson (Treehose of Horror II), you discovered America in 1942.
Friend, please consider what I said earlier.  The 3 images in the information section are all sifferent aspect ratios.  Anday Panda is 1946 theater aspect.  Homer in Hell is square and roughly only 150px in size.  The Pigs be Pigs picture is drawn in very wide aspect.  When they are sized to be all the same WIDTH, the hights are squished and the results look terrible.  I am trying to make them the SAME HEIGHT -- which in photography is the more comon standard.  Please keep this in mind.  I appreciate your interest in the article -- but sizing different aspect ration images to the same width just looks too gaudy. 
I am copying this over to the article's talk page. Jason Palpatine 22:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First, an attempt at humor.  Second -- what can we do?  Look at the result.  Jason Palpatine 22:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made them align and orgainzed the trivia to align with them. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 23:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It can also harm the article if you have to compess the image to a ridiculous size to achieve it.  It works both ways -- that's the problem.  Sorry, but I reformatted the article and added a new pic.  I look forward to your edit in bringing this to proper form.  Thank you for the help.  -- Jason Palpatine 04:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is where you'd be wrong. 200 px is not "small". In fact, it's fairly large. What size is your monitor set to, 2000? Any image can be clicked on for a full-size image, thus the "thumbnail" option. Smaller is always better when it comes to images. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh well.  One, your an admin, so you must know what you're talking about.  Thank you for the input and the help.  -- Jason Palpatine 09:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Size

message: Don't give up just because someone's an admin. I'm an admin, but don't let that color my comments for you. As for the image dispute here, I think both of you have good points. The way the page is now is acceptable, but Jason's idea is also a good one should you decide to alternate left and right images in order to create a more balanced presentation. As for 200 px being large, I disagree. Very rarely does it look nice to have an image at fewer than 200 px. In my opinion, that's the low end of the scale. I tend to scale images to 200-350 px, depending on the image. For screenshots, I tend to stay with 200-225, but 250 or even 300 is acceptable in some cases. But, like I said, the current layout is acceptable. — BrianSmithson 16:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.   I reuploaded a couple of the images to compensate.  I cropped off a little of the unnecessary backgrounds to reduce their aspect ratio (slightly compensating for the real problem: can't size the pics to height.)  Thanks. Jason Palpatine 11:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't give up

message: Since the article goes into quite a lot of detail on the later influence of the feed-a-matic chair, does anyone know if the feeding machine in Chaplin's Modern Times, made the previous year,  had any influence on the idea as used in this cartoon? Rizzleboffin 20:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've wondered about that one myself.  The theme of Chaplin's film was the impact of industrialization on people, whereas Pigs is Pigs theme is gluttony.  There is no way of knowing whether or not Frieling was influenced by Chaplin's film  --  or even knew about it.  However, his use of industrialization for the first time in an animated cartoon, does make one wonder.  Still, without any hard evidence, I didn't include it on account of original research polocies.  -- Jason Palpatine 22:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the comment, Jason. I don't think there's any way Freleng couldn't have known the film-- one of the biggest successes of one of the biggest stars of the time, especially with it coming out only a year before this cartoon. As to whether he was making a conscious reference to the feeding machine, or whether it's just coincidentally a similar idea, I don't know. (And there are no doubt precursors to the Chaplin scene. The mechanical houses in Keaton and Snub Pollard films come to mind...) It would be an interesting bit of trivia to add if it's true, but without a source it's just speculation on our parts. I'll keep my eyes open for anything on the subject. (The Web turns up pretty much nothing). Rizzleboffin 23:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: thanks-I'd wondered if Chaplin influenced Frieling-or if Frieling influenced Chaplin!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.126.88 (talk) 13:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chaplin influence on feed-a-matic chair? 

message: Freiling had a habit later on of remaking a number of his earlier cartoons over the years as the quality of the studio's animation improved.  I recall that he did a remake of this one (possibly in the '50's).  The remake changed the pig's name to Sparky and featured a simplified food menu: A 200 foot submarine sandwich (no pickles), the Pie-A-Trope, and a ferries-wheel of ice-cream cones.  When he comes to the Pie-A-Trope he struggles to get out of the chair to get to them, whereupon the scientist comments "So, pies are your favourite food, aye?"  The machine makes him eat all 20 pies in only a few seconds.  Unlike the original, a mechanical arm with a wash cloth wipes his face clean before he is sent to the ice-cream machine.  The basement is not shown -- there is only blackness all around and the sequence is done to the LT POWERHOUSE song.  When Sparky is brought back up to the house, he is an ENORMOUS sphere bigger than the Scientist -- not just fat, he actually does look like he's ready to burst at any moment.  He roughly pokes Sparky twice in the navel (he is tight as a drum) and then yells at him "Now get out!  Never hearken my door again!"  The rest we all know.  There is NO record of this remake anywhere that I can find.  Does anybody out there know anything about it?   I remember seeing it air twice on the Sally Star show. --Jason Palpatine 09:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Remake

message: Why does the Web comic adaptation warrant a longer synopsis in this article, than the film that is the actual subject of the article?  I'd suggest that that material should be moved to the article of the strip in question. 67.158.72.8 03:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue weight 

message: This may be a little weird, but... Speaking of weight, I did some math.  Piggy, in the end is a ball of fat (i.e. a sphere).  With a 3 foot diameter, he would weigh 846 pounds!  Given the lack a appreciable scale, I considered that to be his minimum size based on his apparent height.  This is supposedly to have taken place during the course of a single day, however Piggy at the end is not only obese, but also taller.  For him to have also grown a full foot in height implies that his captivity in the scientist's Feed-a-matic was actually for the duration of an entire year!  But I'm not sure if I should include that particular supposition in the article. --Jason Palpatine 02:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weight

message: Recently, after reviewing the article again I've noticed that a lot of the material is given weight inappropriate for the subject matter. Some of the other series mentioned, with the exception of The Simpsons (wherein the machine's inspiration from Pigs is Pigs was cited by Matt Groening) and perhaps the Gumby mention, seem to have a coincidental connection, at best, to Pigs is Pigs and the webcomic is both unsourced and non-notable. I think that the main problem with the article is that it focuses too much on details that are, honestly, not particularly essential to understanding the subject matter. In addition, it contains trivia sections almost as large as the main synopsis itself, and besides this disrupting the flow of the article we all know that trivia sections have been discouraged recently in Wikipedia.
The other issue is that the article itself doesn't really read in an encyclopedic manner and is overly long in its descriptions. So, I'm going to make a few changes to the structure and try to get the article down to a manageable level that reads well, is organized, and is encyclopedic. If anyone has any concerns with this, let me know here. 76.18.140.105 07:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  On notability, trivia and organization 

message: The image :Image:Feed-a-matic chair3.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:      Image:FeedingonDoughnuts.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Feed-a-matic chair3.JPG

message: There is no mechanized force feeding but does anyone think there is a connection, acknowledged or not, between Mr Creosote from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life and Pigs is Pigs due to the sheer gluttony involved?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdderUser (talk • contribs) 03:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mr Creosote]] from [[Monty Python's The Meaning of Life]]? 

message: I recently discovered something that may have a connection here.  In Taiwan, every sixth day of the first month of the Chinese lunar calendar at the Zushi Temple, is held a Pigs of God (神豬) Contest. Farmers compete to raise the fattest pig, which during the competition day, the pig is decorated with ornaments.  These animals are force-fed so they are fattened to weights of a tonn or more.  The animals are like enourmous spheres of fat, like Piggy is at the end of his dream.  Given the simularities between the pigs shown at the festival and Piggy's being force-fed to such propotions; is it possible that this festival may have be some inspiration for the animators to make this cartoon?   Just Wondering.  
Info about it can be found here: http://www.odditycentral.com/pics/size-does-matter-at-controversial-pigs-of-god-festival.html 
-- Jason Palpatine (talk) 01:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pigs Of God 

message: Earlier today, somebody remeoved all but one of the pictures that were with this article.  They were entered into the article under terms of fair use.   In the case each image, rational for the action was include on the images pages.   The number of images is not excessive.  Why did you do this, whoever you are?  This article has existed for years and the inclusion of these images has already been addressed and found to be within accepted Wik criteria.  -- Jason Palpatine (talk) 21:23, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Where was their a discussion validating the usage of 5 non-free files without critical commentary? Wikipedia's rules about non-free media are far more strict than fair use. Our policies do not allow for the gallery of files that was removed from this article. Werieth (talk) 22:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: A notation on the article reads "This article's plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed."  You call a 715 plot summary TOO long?  Please explain.  A word count of 715 is short by any standards.  The other sections are even shorter.  What's the problem?   -- Jason Palpatine (talk) 05:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: This article's plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed.