Talk:Madea

message: All of the movies from the Tyler Perry Collection are funny!
The Madea Plays and the madea movies are deeply spiritual and teach people christian values.~Unsigned
:This whole article needs to be re-written.~Unsigned 
Obviously it was done by a fan.~Unsigned
I already did that! Well actually, kinda... I just moved things and rewrote some things...  ~Sassychick1898
::Agreed and tagged --JD79 13:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This article needs to be rewritten

message: I know they're spelled different, but is there any correllation between mAdea and mEdea, the psycho greek sorceress? --Agreatguy6 00:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're identical twins. Born 10 years apart, but identical. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. I think Perry had Medea in mind, except hers is pronounced "MEH-deh-a" or "MEH-dee-ya", not "ma-DEE-ah".76.195.87.149 (talk) 11:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Any Relation?

message: Which is it?
Baby16 22:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purnch or punch? 

message: From the Article:  Her name is spelled variously as "Mabel" and "Mable," probably in order to confuse government authorities and others when applying for jobs, getting credit cards, etc.[citation needed]   you are darn right this needs a citation, otherwise it seems like a racist statement that some graffiti artist put in (i'm new to the whole "Madea" thing, so maybe it is in the movies or plays). Liljimmyt (talk) 05:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: having only rudimentary knowledge of the character gleaned through her presentation in media, i would say that it seems very much like something the character would do. it may be some form of stereotype, but madea is a walking stereotype so it's just par for the course really. also, people who vandalize wikipedia are referred to as vandals, graffiti is something seen on buildings in the inner city. if anybody reads this article and sees any parts of it as racist, i suggest you take it up with tyler perry as he's the one who created the character which, in my opinion, embodies several negative african american stereotypes.99.153.29.112 (talk) 13:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this serious 

message: I've been thinking about this for a while, and the ages never seem to make sense. The timeline is obviously different in the play, and Madea's age is listed as 68 on varying sources, but William's daughter is in her mid-late thirties, and he and his wife are in their 50s. Also, Cora is in her forties, yet, William is listed as Madea's youngest child though he's in his fifties. Is this just an error on Tyler Perry's part, or does the info regarding the ages and the order of her kids need to be changed?CH (talk) 19:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ages

message: This thing is a damned migraine to read. I will try to fix it without messing anyone's content/contributions. For example, WHICH film introduces Madea? I was always under the impression she was introduced in I Can Do Bad All By Myself... . Elsewhwre I read she's introduced in the film Diary of a Mad Black Woman and even Madea's Family Reunion.
Problem is, these three films were ALL released in 2002. Weren't they??
I don't necessarily criticize the article's content; it's the grammar and flow. If Madea is to be rightly represented here, how about we begin with Tyler Perry created a fictional nightmare? Madea is in plays, then in movies which initially overlapped with the plays. Perry himself can't keep track of this mess.76.195.87.149 (talk) 10:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Some work was done, everybody. Cleaned it up as best I could. I didn't have citations handy, but it's a hell of a lot better than it was!76.195.87.149 (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Hell With Ages, Fix the Article 

message: Shouldn't it be called Madea? She's not really known as Mabel Cimmons; everyone calls her just Madea. 68.43.222.187 (talk) 19:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: The edits made in this reversion  have inaccuracies: Number 1, the exact height of Madea as "6'5" is unsourced, so my describing her as towering and massive is more accurate; number 2, argumentative isn't exactly an accurate description of the character, considering her tendnecy to use guns and land herself in court from offenses. "Overreactive" is better considering the willingness to use weaponry and go to jail for feeling wronged. So please do not refer to these corrections as "vandalism", give warnings on my talkpage for "vandalism", or continue to try to revert them or else I will go to an administrator, Cresix. Thank you! 173.0.254.242 (talk) 22:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: All of your changes (with the sole exception of the  6'5") are personal interpretations, which have been challenged. That means you need to wait for consensus here instead of edit warring. And please note that a bot, not a live editor, used the term "vandalism". Cresix (talk) 22:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

text: My edits are not interpretations. If you read the below sections, you will see that the comedic feature of the character is going overboard, willing to use guns and weaponry to get even. Making characterization that basically says the same thing and is synonymous with that; hence, vindictive, overreactive is NOT interpretation but accuracy. And besides that, it could just as easily be argued that the version you're instating with "argumentative", which really doesn't describe the character at all, is interpretation as well. Besides that, you've just admitted that your reversion contains inaccuracies so please leave it as is. Furthermore, it behooves you to provide a reasoning in edit summary for why you revert 7 edits as opposed to just making the reversion and leaving it at that. 173.0.254.242 (talk) 22:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, "massive, elderly,  vindictive, defensive, overreactive, trigger-happy,  combative, reckless, unruly, and in-your-face, loving, caring, lawless, unorthodox" are interpretations, not to mention excessive for the lead. Again, wait for consensus. That's policy. It "behooves" me to provide the reasoning here, which I am doing. I disagree with your edits. The burden of proof (i.e., getting consensus) is on the editor making or restoring a change when challenged. Cresix (talk) 22:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

text: For the love of god, the article is all about how Madea goes overboard and in one section reads on how Madea has even murdered some of her husbands. It's not interpretation to say she's "overreactive and reckless". It's basically just restating her character into single words in the heading where it belongs. "Argumentative" is not descriptive of murder of someone and threatening murder of someone and if you think it is, you have a flawed vocabulary. And I hate to burst your bubble, but the same arguments you're making could be made for the reversion you're trying to instate: "Argumentative" is interpretation and inaccurate given the character's actions at that. I'm willing to scale it down, but it's nothing inaccurate. 173.0.254.242 (talk) 22:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: AGAIN, cease edit warring and wait for a consensus. That is policy. Cresix (talk) 23:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Cresix, please do not revert anymore edits until consensus are made. Furthermore, I see that this dispute is about the characterization on Madea. Can someone explain? Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 23:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Jonayo, to answer your question: Yes, this dispute is about characterization of  Madea. I thought based upon what the entire article talks about with Madea's willingness to go to jail over being wronged, having a history of murdering her husbands, using guns, and other parts of the article, that a more sufficient wording for her character is "overreactive" and "vindictive" as opposed to "argumentative" in the heading which Cresix is insisting upon adding. The two terms I've used are basically rewording what is described of her in the other parts of the article where she's described as doing things, again, like murdering her husbands. Again, this is as opposed to the inaccurate description word Cresix is trying to reinstate, "argumentative" and "unique accent", which nothing in this article can verify or support. I'm confused by Cresix behavior because he states on the administrative noticeboards that his protests are not involving the edit, but the "edit warring" as I highlight down below, yet he has come back here and reverted the page after we agreed to not reverting anymore until a consensus was reached on the dispute. 173.0.254.242 (talk) 11:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Anon 173, you did much more than change "two terms". A simple glance at your changes by making a comparison in the article's edit history shows that. This is a content dispute, as well as a disagreement about what should be included in the lead. I disagree with the content changes you have made. It's perfectly acceptable to make such challenges on Wikipedia; they are then resolved by WP:CONSENSUS. They are not resolved by edit warring. If the consensus accepts your changes, then I will accept them. But so far that consensus has not occurred. Cresix (talk) 16:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

text: Don't start this again, anon 173. AGAIN, the burden is on the editor who makes or restores a change (i.e., YOU) to get consensus for a change that has been challenged. That is Wikipedia policy.  Your original changes were challenged. Don't restore them until consensus has been achieved. BTW, I never stated I had no interest in the edits you have made. I am the one who challenged your edits. Please don't try to put words in my mouth. The 3RR report (from which you were mercifully excused from a block) had nothing to do with the content of your edits. The discussion here has everything to do with your edits. Cresix (talk) 14:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok do you guys have any WP:RS that verifies your claims? I'm a huge fan of Madea myself, but on Wikipedia we need sources so the article won't border WP:OR and WP:FAN. Because of the content dispute, I've added a WP:RFC template so someone who is an expert on these situations can help us. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 16:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely that reliable sourcing would improve the article, especially the changes that recently have been added and removed. Cresix (talk) 16:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok so now lets focus on what you guys want to add/replace in the lead. Which sentence have you guys deemed appropriate to add? Keep in mind about WP:RS so we can determine which one would be suited better. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 21:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's clear that I want the lead the way it is at this moment, and that anon 173 wants the changes he made. Either way, none of it is sourced, so it could be removed if challenged. But that would pretty much remove the entire article. So, in the absence of that drastic alternative, the usual way things are done on Wikipedia in such cases is to wait for consensus. I'm quite fine with waiting to see if other editors have opinions. BTW, thanks for your efforts here AJona. Cresix (talk) 21:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

text: Anon 173, please comment on the article, not on editors. Cresix (talk) 00:01, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversions 

message: I have closed both edit-warring reports and have fully protected the article for 3 days for the editors to work out their differences about the content. Focus on content, not on the other editors. Keep it respectful. If you can't achieve a consensus, then use WP:DR.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article locked 

message: has again resumed making the changes even though there is no consensus to do so. Therefore I am starting this discussion again, for the very same reasons I gave in the previous discussion, to get more opinions. Cresix (talk) 17:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but as again you still reverted the edits continuously which in part does not make you right. Instead of edit-warring why not we all just work together, collectively, and bring this article to good or featured status? Best, Jonatalk to me 17:50, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'm taking the article off my watch list for a while to let the dust settle. Thanks Jona. Cresix (talk) 17:54, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't need to remove it from your watchlist, just simply do not engage in any type of reverting. If the IP continues to edit, and you claim it is vandalism, then WP:BR or WP:AN/I is a great place to discuss his behavior. Best, Jonatalk to me 18:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously, if Cresix can remain calm and just discuss the content dispute, there's no reason for him to take the article off his watchlist. However, my assumption is he wants to take a breather. That, of course, is entirely up to him. I don't think it would be appropriate to charge the IP with vandalism in a content dispute of this nature, except at the outer limits if a clear consensus is reached and any editor defies consensus - but that's always touchy. ANI generally doesn't like content disputes. I don't know what WP:BR is (Brazil project??).--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Aah, that makes sense, and a better option than ANI. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversions, again 

message: An infobox is supposed to be brief, and I think the list of relatives in the infobox is overkill. Relatives are named in list format in the article itself (some unsourced). I think we should restrict the list in the infobox to characters who appear in more than one film/play/book, such as Joe and Brian. Cresix (talk) 01:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relatives in infobox 

message: The episode in which Madea is referenced is Funnybot, Season 15 episode 2, 211th in the series overall. Jimmy Valmer hosts a Comedy Awards show, in which Tyler Perry receives the "Kathy Griffin Award" for the most likely star to show up and accept their award. Throughout the rest of the episode Tyler shows up in full make up as Madea and proceeds to continuously take money away from Token Black - the only student to find him funny. Eventually Tyler is buried under the earth and Jimmy vows never again to host a comedy awards show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.125.185.114 (talk • contribs) 
:Sorry, but we need more than your summary of the episode. We need a reliable source. Sundayclose (talk) 21:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Park citation 

message: This article is absurdly long and detailed for a subject of such low notability. I would think that listing all the distant relatives of a fictional character from a low-grossing film series would be more appropriate for a fansite rather than an encyclopedia. Consider that it is much longer and more detailed than, for instance, the pages of characters such as Snow White, Robinson Crusoe, Oliver Twist.Ordinary Person (talk) 12:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. So I was bold and removed "distant relatives" and "family tree". I suspect some or most of it was inaccurate, but in any event excessive detail. I think we should also move forward in trimming the entire article. Sundayclose (talk) 14:48, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability to Depth ratio 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Madea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130423030541/http://www.10-movies.com/ to http://www.10-movies.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140128021140/http://s2smagazine.com/70127/tyler-perry-calls-orlando-jones-news-not-true-and-not-funny/ to http://s2smagazine.com/70127/tyler-perry-calls-orlando-jones-news-not-true-and-not-funny/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:55, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Honestly this article is so poorly written it negatively impacts the integrity of this website. The article should be deleted, and, if someone is up to the task, rewritten. AskewPropane (talk) 03:40, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the Article 

message: Add some categories and make it fun reading
Raidertalks (talk)  — Preceding undated comment added 15:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  weak