Talk:List of Ed, Edd n Eddy characters/Archive 2

message: Please read this before editing the page.
It seems people are having trouble finding where the rules actually are on this page, but I'll make it easier.  Heres a full list of the rules for this page.
# One episode rule.  If it was mentioned in only one single episode, it doesn't belong here.  There are many trivial facts about each and every character (which I believe is actually canon), but the page would be a big mess, therefore these one time facts aren't worth mentioning.  Although, there can be exceptions to this rule.  First of all, one part mentions a single episode which reveals Jimmy's teeth being destroyed by a bowling pin disguised as a cream horn.  This should stay because it gives people the answer to "why" he has the retainer (which was a popular question before it was revealed).  Stuff like "Nazz is fat" should not be put in because it was never assumed in the first place she was fat in the past.  Another is Eddy's Brother's history with the kids.  This explains his relationships with the other kids.
# Parents, characters alter-egos, and other kids shall not be added.  They do not have a dense personality like the kids, and never appear.  I realize one episode Ed's mom or aunt, and Eddy's dad pulls them off screen, but this refers back to the one episode rule.  Their parents are not characters, like I stated above, they have little to no personality, and were just there to finish off the plot. Same goes with the Lemon Brook Lumpers, the school nurse, and other one shots. alter-egos should not be added either because it once again, breaks the one episode rule.
# Double D's hat.  It is a mystery of whats under there, and the videogame "lunchroom rumble" is not canon, because it wasn't made by AKA Cartoon.  This goes for fanfics too, fanfics are not canon.
# Rolf's country has no name, and shall remain that way.  This country is a fictional country made by Danny. He chose Rolf to be from a fictional country so he could make up several foreign ways to make the stories, plots, and his overall character more interesting.  If he was from a specific real country, there would be a limit to what Rolf could do.
# Superhuman strength.  All characters can possess unrealalistic strength at anytime to keep the story going along, it's used in many, many old cartoons.
# Jimmy is not a homsexual.  He looks up to Sarah as an older sister, and tends to immitate her because he wants to be just like her.  More evidence that supports this is "Ed in a halfshell", where Sarah leaves Jimmy with the Ed's.  Jimmy for a short time, looks up to Ed and Eddy, therefore he begins acting similar to them.  I understand this is only in one episode, but like I said, I believe the entire show is filled with canon trivial facts about the characters.  This comment about Jimmy looking up to people should not be added to the page, but it proves that Jimmy is not a homosexual. That's all I can think of right now, if anyone wants to add anything I missed or forgot, feel free.  DietLimeCola 02:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ....Since when can you tell other people what to do? Who died and made you queen? No one! --Naruto134 00:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No one. These rules were reached from a consensus vote, not created by Wack'd. Dagron12345 23:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I have to give DietLimeCola for listing 1-6. If you'll notice, I only worte the last one. But, yes, these were agreed on before the list was written here. --Wack'd Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! 14:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rules (READ NEW USERS) 

message: Judging for this page 
What symptons Ed has or doesn't have.
Directional Confusion - Doesn't Have
Sequencing Difficulties -Doesn't Have
Difficulties with the Little Words - Doesn't Have
Bizarre Reading and Spelling - Doesn't Have
Late Talking or Immature Speech - Has
Difficulties with Handwriting - Doesn't have
Difficulties with Math - Doesn't Have
God, this takes overanalizing a cartoon to a whole new level.  You two figured it out.  DietLimeCola 06:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have related problems with attention in a school setting; for instance they might seem to "zone out" or daydream often; get lost easily or lose track of time; and have difficulty sustaining attention. In other words, "mind movies." -- Elaich 23:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dyslexic 

message: I know about the 1 episode rule, but is it okay to add some of the characters' nicknames to their profiles—I mean the ones that don't break the 1 episode rule? For example, Eddy refers to Edd as "Sockhead" in many episodes, so wouldn't this be appropriate to add to the article? Kikiluvscheese 03:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicknames? 

message: I've tagged this article for clean-up because most of it is written in a in-universe perspective. At first, in the the lead, the characters are treated as if they were fictional (out-of-universe perspective), but then it becomes the opposite when it starts to describe them. Wikipedia is an out-of-universe source, and all articles about fiction and elements of fiction should take an overall out-of-universe perspective. See WP:WAF for more information.
The article only has a few references. It has problems with tone and a having a neutral point of view. Squirepants101 18:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess we could use some of the actual quotes of the show as references. Final Fantasy VII is a featured article and it does this. Squirepants101 02:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've tagged this article for clean-up 

message: What part of this talk page do people not understand? Like the cartoons before it, characters have been known to gain unrealistic stregnth dozens of times. Sometimes Ed is stronger than Sarah, sometimes Eddy is stronger than Ed, sometimes Ed is stronger than Sarah, sometimes Rolf is stronger than Ed, sometimes Eddy is stronger than Rolf, you get my point. Why should it say Ed has inhuman strength? It doesn't say that about any other characters. What makes Ed so special? He might seem to be stronger then all the characters, but still, all characters can gain inhuman strength numerous times in order to advance the story. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blakebs (talk • contribs) 04:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He is actually called the "ultimate tool" in one episode (the spa one) - apparently the others recognize his above-average strength. Add that to the fact that they commonly use him as the muscle (in the truth or dare episode, Rolf even appropriates "Ed" to help him crush grapes).KrytenKoro 02:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: removed the part about Ed possessing inhuman strength

message: People tend to make many common mistakes surrounding Rolf and what they perceive as the show's so-called "rewritten canon" (not). As far as I can tell, the only retcon in the show's entire history was changing Double D's name to "Eddward." The "official site biographies" and "FAQs from the comics" are the only write-ups with any actual or real credentials. Anything else is purely subjective and/or conjectural (including this commentary, strange as that may seem).
Anyway, just because Rolf wore lederhosen does not mean he is German, as many other countries do the same thing. Knowing a Norwegian prankster does not make him Norwegian, it just makes said prankster famous (in more than one country). It was NEVER stated he was part of those countries, it was just implied that he shared customs and celebrities.
It is perfectly likely he is from an as yet unnamed and made-up-by-the-creator Indo-European (?) country that just so happens to combine the traits of numerous other countries (for exotic flavor I'd imagine), such as having German lederhosen, Swiss snow-capped mountains, imported Indian elephants, a meaty Christmas with a bearded lady (made-up), East Asian seafood, Lovecraftian giant sea monsters, werewolves, Greek Faeries, and what-have-you (all of these things have appeared in the show as of now).
Point in fact "Früz Du" (seen on a sign in the "old country scam") is NOT German, but made-up (except the "du" part, indicating a linguistic RELATION, but NOT identicalness). 
In sum, the only thing we know is that the "Old Country" Rolf came from is NOT any extant country, but a made-up "fairy-tale land" (just like "Norweigia" is a made-up place, but perhaps that's a wrong analogy). Anyone agree? --Zenosaga 18:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rolf's Nationality? He's from "Fairy-Tale-Land" for crying out loud! 

message: Wouldn't it be easier to create separate character pages for each of the characters, thus allowing better citations of the so-called "trivial data" and better analysis of the characters? Even The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy has this basic functionality. A page for each of the main characters, and a page for brief write-ups of the "lacking of personality minor characters" in the series, which incidentally are actually more like cameos (such as parents, animals, alter egos, props, etc). Thoughts? --Zenosaga 18:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The characters would have to meet basic notability guidelines in order to do that. Squirepants101 19:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separare Character Pages? Why not? 

message: Since most of you seem to agree that the parts of the article that the  refers to basically cannot be rewritten practically, why not remove the template with a note on the talk page (and, if necessary, comments in the article).  Or did I miss some that can be fixed?Thinboy00 21:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the <nowiki>{{In universe}}</nowiki> 

message: I attempted to Wikify the page by using leading statements to take the article more out-of-universe, as suggested by Squirepants. What do you think? It probably could be improved upon, but I don't think we need to go to great lengths. It goes without saying that this a cartoon and fiction. -- Elaich 20:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attempts to Wikify 

message: We should refrain from contributing information about "characters" that only appear in one episode, which is currently unaired.  We don't even know if they are aliens, could be something like Kankers pretending to be them, etc. We just don't know. DietLimeCola 23:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Aliens 

message: Wow. I never would have thought those would have survived an AfD. That really proves that the system definitely is a vote instead of a discussion. It makes no sense for these pages to exist when looking from policy, guidelines, or just with common sense. Why do they need to exist? Nemu 10:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They didn't, and that is why I nominated them for Afd. Why they survived is beyond me. They did not meet notability guidelines in any way. Now, they have been merged, and the issue is over, for now. -- Elaich 13:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They're still not redirected due to the closing admin sticking too close to the book. I guess it should be fine in a few days. Nemu 16:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now, some other admin has restored them after being merged. -- Elaich 02:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

text: This issue has already been discussed. The articles stay. The Prince of Darkness 12:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The closing admin stated that this could be rediscussed as a merge. Nemu 12:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but this discussion is not concluded. Other users should be able to share their opinions. Now, instead of being so impatient, leave the discussion for a while, and if mostly vote for merge, you can eventually merge the articles. As of now the articles stay. The Prince of Darkness 12:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no specified time limit for mergers. The suggested time limit is five days, but with the current trend of "votes", it's easy to see that they will be redirected. Nemu 12:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Is that OK, if i edit the title from "List of characters in Ed, Edd n Eddy" to "List of Ed Edd n Eddy characters"?
:I don't see what's wrong with the article's title. Squirepants101 20:54, 19 April 2007
:Im just saying that List of Ed Edd n Eddy Characters sounds a little bit better (Im NOT critism the original title!)
You would have to change the page name to change that link. "List of characters in..." is universally used across Wikipedia. -- Elaich 18:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: I definitely think insane, as he has demonstrated intelligence on more than a few occassions. He has also demonstrated violent schizophrenia, violent bipolar disorder, violent multiple personality disorder, extreme naivete, violent manipulation of reality, violent astral projection, and violent psychopathy, among other things. What do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zenosaga (talk • contribs) 00:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he has not displayed any of these things. Ed suffers from dyslexia. His mind is constantly playing movies for him that he confuses with reality. You take a mere cartoon too seriously. Many times, Ed is made to say certain things just to further a storyline. At any rate, discussion pages are for discussing the content of the article, nothing more.-- Elaich 03:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly how so? The only thing he has in common with dyslexia is bad writing skills, which doesn't necessarily indicate dyslexia as the absolute cause. Dyslexia is NOT a confusion of reality and fiction, despite your apparent belief that it is. How can dyslexia possibly cause hallucinations, extreme naivete, and oft times violent behavior (such as dropping houses on people, throwing them like baseballs, or virtually strangling them)? Ed is a character designed to appear stupid (a common cartoon cliche that entertains children) at first glance, but when you get to know him you realize he is in actually violently insane (which is really quite original for children's cartoons). --Zenosaga 19:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I disagree. Ed's "insane" acts of violence are for comic relief. The punch line of the joke is when the victim is not hurt at all. Be careful that you yourself do not fall victim to not being able to distinguish between fiction and reality. You are talking about a cartoon character, not a real person. A characer being "violently insane" is not new, and by no means original . You only have to go back to both Donald Duck and Daffy Duck to find examples of the same thing. Or, Itchy and Scratchy. As you mentioned, it's a cartoon cliche, and has been around almost since the beginnings of the animation industry. As far as dyslexia, Ed's exhibits a number of symptoms, including "zoning out from reality." My son's school psychologist called it "mind movies." So, as you can see, I have some experience with this area. As per your first post in this thread, you saw "violent" in every aspect of Ed's behavior. He is certainly neither schizophrenic or bi-polar. Perhaps the problem lies in your perception of Ed (which could be based on a number of factors.) At least, thanks for discussing it. That's the proper thing to do. -- Elaich 22:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It could be possible he has one of those disorders. Just like Elaich said, though, it's a cartoon, and a lot of times the slap-stick is it's main purpose. You're right that dyslexia wouldn't affect his personality, and Danny (the creator) even said that Ed's persona is basically living in his own world. I think that Edd has OCD, due to that he pretty much fits it perfectly. Don't know whether he actually does have it or not as a fact, but he definitely copies the common traits. It could just be a way to make it silly. EEnE is definitely written to be a slap-stick style, which is probably part of Danny's homage to old cartoons, just like the swiggly line effect is. Black Kat 13:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's pretty obvious that Edd's parents have OCD. As far as Edd himself, he is just reacting to his upbringing and surroundings. OCD is not diagnosed in children, as far as I know. -- Elaich 03:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If Edd's parents have OCD, 99.9% chance he has it too. My OCD came out at the oldest age 10, so it is detectable, depending on recorded history. JadeOwl 12:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Ed stupid or insane? 

message: I don't remember the name of the episode, but it was the one where Ed and Eddy were messing around in Edd's house, impersonating his parents. I noticed that Edd's parents have seperate beds - I know that this is probably a one-time only fact, but I can't think of any time it's been contradicted, and it would certainly fit with the impersonal, unemotional personality that seems to be given to Edd's parents.
I don't see a section on the parents, and I'm not sure how I'd cleanly fit that into Edd's section, so should this even be mentioned?KrytenKoro 02:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not needed. Those are small facts, and the parents aren't even talked about since they're so rarely seen. Good idea on asking, just to make sure before you added. Black Kat 20:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Having 2 beds is a sly reference to old TV sitcoms from the 1950s and 1960s, like The Dick Van Dyke Show. -- Elaich 14:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edd's parents 

message: Why is Eddy labeled as Psychotic??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.205.70.254 (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that as well. He is definetly NOT psychotic. a megalomaniac and narcisstic for sure, but he's perfectly in contact with reality! 86.12.242.245 20:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psychotic? 

message: Here are some possible reasons for some users adding fancruft to this page: 1. The user/IP is new to Wikipedia. 2. The user/IP is new to editing this article. 3. The user/IP did not read the rules in neither the hidden note or the talk page. 4. The user/IP read the rules, but missed one. 5. The user/IP missed all of the rules by accident (e.g. scrolling the page window too fast in a web browser). 6. The user/IP is intentionally adding cruft. There may be other reasons for users to add cruft, but most of the time, good faith should be assumed. If the contributor is a new user, then the user should be welcomed with one of the templates from the welcoming committee and should not be bitten. A light warning or reminder will do just fine. Keep in mind that fancruft is not officially categorized into the nineteen categories of vandalism, so a vandalism template is not necessary. Also keep in mind that fancruft is an essay, so it does not have policy or guideline status. Squirepants101 22:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Has there been fighting or editors adding cruft hassled by the regulars? Just so I know. Black Kat 19:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible reasons for others adding cruft 

message: Has the in-universe problem been satisfied yet? I'm really not quite sure how else to approach it, other than making sure it's known that the characters are playing roles. And, they are. Every character in EEnE is a stereotype. -- Elaich 03:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In-universe 

message: Here we go again... --Wack'd About Wiki 02:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This time, the IP address who added it is not an open proxy and seemed to have made some constructive edits on other articles. It is probably shared by multiple users. I have warned the IP with uw-vandalism1. Pants(T) 03:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And I warned him with a 3rd level vandalism warning, as well as reporting him to a moderator. This particular vandalism is intentional, and it is unlikely that it is not the same person every time. The last time, the vandal was blocked for 6 months. It's no surprise that he would vandalize again if he could do so from another computer. Any such vandalism should be reacted to with extreme prejudice. If there are other users at this IP, they need to know that someone is using it for vandalism, so they can take steps to deal with it. There is no way under the sun to assume good faith with this kind of edit. -- Elaich 07:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it was necessary to lock the page because of one IP vandal.  DietLimeCola 04:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The admin decided to do that. The IP was blocked for only 24 hours. When the vandal comes back, maybe we'll just let you be the one to have to deal with it. -- Elaich 13:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If he vandalizes again, let's just inform the admin again and he'll block him for longer. DietLimeCola 18:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm a afraid you are a little too late for that comment because the IP was blocked days ago, and hasn't edited this page ever since. The article was also semi-protected for a few hours. Pants(T) 02:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mime Trio vandalism is back 

message: Does anybody think Double D looks like a girl because I've watched a couple of episodes and to my opinion he looks like a girl.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.81.251.251 (talk • contribs).
*No, Double D does not look like a girl, and this page is for discussion of editing the article only. -- Elaich 22:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double D 

message: I got something on my talk page that said "There is no Mr. Sun".  But there IS a Mr. Sun, he talks to Jimmy, and I can prove it! If anyone watched the episode "The Ed's are Coming", you'll see Mr. Sun.  I even have a screenshot, here you go! img341.imagesha ck.us/img341/4246/mrsunym4.png I proved you wrong, now what do you have to say about THAT Mr. Editor? I think you owe me an apology.  64.72.126.134 09:39, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mr. Sun was a character in Jimmy's imagination, and has no relivance to this article. He only appeared in one episode, anyway. --Wack'd • Talk to me! • Admire my handywork! • 15:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I explained to that user that Mr. Sun is not a character. BTW, Wack'd, handiwork is spelled with an "i", not a "y." -- Elaich  talk 21:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Thank you. I fixed that now. --Wack'd • Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! • 12:19, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How is he not a character?  He was there, he talked to Jimmy, and he moved, he had a voice and everything! 64.72.126.134 22:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: imagine any given television show. in one scene, one of the main characters passes a guy on the street and he says "good day". would you list him as one of the characters? --Philip Laurence 22:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If he has a name, then yes! And Mr. Sun is his name. However, I suppose this isnt worth fighting over.  It's just a stupid sun. 64.72.126.134 00:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A number of different individuals have appeared, but they are not characters because they appeared only once. I suppose they could be listed under a section called "One time appearances" or something, but then that would encourage editors to begin adding too much material, and we'd end up with a huge, bloated section like the old "Trivia" section. It would also encourage the listing of parent's arms, etc. which we have been fighting here ongoingly. -- Elaich  talk 02:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is a Mr. Sun! 

message: Now, I know there is to be an Ed Edd n Eddy movie at some point, but the information on this page is clearly false and made-up. For one, unless openly stated by Antonucci that the movie would introduce new characters, there should not be any guest voices (and the ones listed are rediculous anyway). Then, there is absolutely no date on when a DVD would even be released, let alone the rating for it.
:It was vandalism, and the editor who added it has been blocked. -- Elaich  talk 07:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Movie?

message: I requested semi protection for this page: :Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for protection Martijn Hoekstra 10:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: and denied, on the grounds that the disruptive edits are good faith. Which they probably are, but that doesn't mean they're not disruptive. I'll see if I can figure out something else. Martijn Hoekstra 17:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi protection 

message: Do you think it would be a good idea to add what every character is supposed to be from, i.e. Eddy is the "know it all who knows nothing" part of Danny, that Jonny and Plank are based off of a kid he knew as a child, etc...? It seems logical, even if we make them seperate paragraphs. Jade Owl 11:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These things are either already stated in the article, or are referenced. It would be mainly POV to begin with. Thanks for bringing it up for discussion. -- Elaich  talk 05:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It wouldn't be POV, though, if we go only by what Antonucci has stated for the characteristics of the Eds. I don't think they're mentioned in the articles. Jade Owl 21:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is self intuitive. And, as I said, much of it is already stated. -- Elaich  talk 04:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Character influence

message: This is a page for character bios. It is not for technical data about the cartoon, like who was the voice actor, Eddy's brother may appear in a future movie, etc. Those would fall under technical details of the show, which belong on the Ed, Edd n Eddy page. Thank you. -- Elaich  talk 02:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What this page is for 

message: Should plank get his own character section? He(it)'s capable of independent movement and thought, etc. He could even be a sub-paragraph under Johnny. Discuss.
2stepMW 13:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Plank has never been seen to move on camera unless launched, and is not capable of independant thought. Jonny uses Plank as a foil and an alter ego to allow/enable his own erratic, often irrational behavior. -- Elaich  talk 04:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plank 

message: :Image:Eddy 1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 02:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Eddy 1.jpg

message: How can it possibly be any longer? It is a sub-page of Ed, Edd n Eddy where all the relevant information is already explained. Are we supposed to restate it here just to satisfy some editor who didn't take a look at the whole picture? I'm removing the tag - if anyone wants to discuss or dispute this, please reach me at my talk page. Thank you. -- Elaich  talk 20:17, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An introduction should at least contain three paragraphs. See WP:LEAD. I'm reinserting it. The Prince of Darkness 13:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather than putting a tag, why don't you figure out how to write a better one? -- Elaich  talk 01:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

text: BRAVO!!  Hats off to Prince of Darkness for "improving" the intro by changing 12 to "twelve" and adding redundant links. Where are the three paragraphs suggested by WP:LEAD? It's not as easy as you think, is it? -- Elaich  talk 13:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Before this arguement {cough cough} sorry, Elaich, I mean, discussion, gets any more rediculious, I would like to point out that the vast majority of television-program-character-listings have incredibly short introductions (i.e. List of characters in The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy and List of characters in Invader Zim), and some don't have introductions at all (i.e. List of South Park characters). None of these pages have been tagged as having too short an intro. The fact of the matter is that it is incredibly hard to properly introduce an article that is basically just a page of smaller articles. In short, my opinion is that Elaich is right and Prince of Darkness is just being nitpicky. Fell free to completely disregard this and go on argueing...er, discussing. --Wack'd Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! 17:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're wrong. To continue an edit war is not appopriate. I accepted the fact that the lead section obviously couldn't be improved, and removed the template. Instead of saying thanks, he/she just mocked me because I did some minor improvements to the article. I have also noticed that he/she thinks he/she owns this article, and as soon as a user/IP address edits it, he/she instantly removes it. I look at this as rude and bad behaviour. The Prince of Darkness 22:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what this is all about, isn't it, Prince of Darkness? If you will look at the history of this page, you will see many edits that I have not deleted. That in itself disproves your claim of WP:OWN. That I delete almost every edit made by an IP editor is because most of these editors add nothing of value to the article. The fact is that you jumped in here as an editor who added mostly fancruft, which I deleted. Now, rather than add content, you add tags. When challenged to live up to the tags you added, you added nothing of substance, and then begged off with the excuse that "you know very little about this article." If you know very little about it, why the hell are you editing it in the first place?????!!!! If you know very little about this subject, you are not qualified to edit it to begin with. If any behavior is rude and bad, it is yours. Don't come crashing into a subject that, by your own admission, "you know little about" and try to impose your will. -- Elaich  talk 07:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the love of Pete, how much longer will this continue? Prince, stop editing this article unless you have useful information. It's that simple. This started out as being about the introduction to this article, and you are turning it into a personal arguement. The fact of the matter is, I'm sure there are articles you could be adding constructive material to, but instead you're choosing to argue with Elaich over little more than a little tag. Elaich, I am on your side, but I do think that your little example of sumugness earlier was unnessicary and innappropreate. I, for one, think this is pointless, and that you both are accomplishing nothing by debating each other. The end.--Wack'd Talk to me! • Admire my handiwork! 13:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry about being smug. I just can't understand why someone would try to edit an article they themselves admit they know little about. I like what he did with the images. Someone else once did the same thing, and they ended up deleted. Maybe these will stay if some image kopp doesn't intervene. -- Elaich  talk 03:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The introduction of this article is too short. 

message: Well, first off, I would just like to say this discussion page is a mess. It's got far too much discussions going on. It will soon be impossible to distinguish what is recent and what is not unless we delete the old discussions. I see some sections of this page that are closed, as in, the discussions ended several months ago, yet the tediously written paragraphs still remain. Should these not be deleted, to make more room on the talk page, and make it easier for people who have just decided to edit this page (like me) to decipher which discussions are still going and which ones are not?
And now, what I was trying to say. Should Plank be included in this article?  If this has been discussed before, I apologize, I probably wasn't able to find it due to the general clutter of this whole page. But, furthermore, should Plank be included? After all, he is a major character. Jonny is considered a major character, and personally I have never seen an episode where Jonny was present without Plank. Plank has also, on more than one occasion, demonstrated the ability to think, act, see, feel, etc. of his own accord. I would consider these actions a little more than just "plot advancers". If one were to consider Plank's existence in the cartoon for the sole purpose of aiding the plotline, then one would also have to consider Jonny and Nazz the same. They are not the major characters in the series, but they do have influence on the rest of the characters, Plank just the same. Some episodes have revolved around a single character (i.e. Jimmy), and likewise, there are several episodes that revolve around Plank. Essentially what I'm getting at is that Plank functions in the series the same way any of the other supplementary characters (supplementary as in, not Edd, Ed, or Eddy)  function. And, if indeed this page lists all the supplementary characters as well as the main ones, Plank would be a candidate then. Cervantes de Leon 17:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you would read the comments about Plank, Plank is not capable of thought, or self movement. Plank exists as a foil to allow Jonny's eccentric behavior, and any movement took place off camera. I sense that this is too much an adult concept for younger people to grasp. Plank is not a character. Also, be aware that removal of content on Wikipedia talk pages is vandalism. -- Elaich  talk 20:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plank