Talk:Lisa Simpson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lisa Simpson article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

The Simpsons Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject The Simpsons, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to The Simpsons. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also our guide to sources.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

Top

This article is on a subject of Top-importance within The Simpsons.

Tasks you can do:

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. Please participate by editing the article Lisa Simpson, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Chinese Manual of Style - Naming conventions Indic Manual of Style - Naming conventions Japanese Manual of Style Korean Manual of Style - Naming conventions Tibetan Proposed naming conventions
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Lisa Simpson appeared on The Simpsons Portal as the selected article from 4 May 2007 to 30 July 2007

[edit] Dreams about Hitler

Fairly significant, no?

-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.152.230 (talk) 00:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox

Here's a userbox for Lisa fans: {{User:Gran2/Userbox Lisa}}

Lisa

If anyone wants this user, they'll be in their room...
What kind of userbox is that?

[edit] Lisa's saxamaphone (saxophone)

It says in the article that she plays a Baritone Sax - based on the sound. I believe she has only ever played the Tenor Sax and once or possibly twice the Alto sax. I think this should be based on shape not on 'sound'. Tanru 08:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Baritone sax is an awful big instrument for a girl her age and size as the article mentions. I don't recall them saying what kind of sax she played so baritone seems like an odd supposition unless this is official in the show. Now if she does play baritone she might be the most famous baritone player currently out there. I mean there are real baritone saxophonists who are famous in jazz, but most of the jazz saxophonists who are known to the public are alto or occasionally tenor.--T. Anthony 08:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I Think tenor is more popular. Anyway, Lisa plays Bari. You can tell by listening.AV(207.225.143.253 17:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC))

She's a fictional character and doesn't have to abide with reality. I doubt the creators payed exceptional attention to the type of saxophone she played.--|K.Z|Z.K| Do not vandalize... 04:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

It's always a baritone, apart from the season 1 opening sequence. If you know the instuments you can clearly tell their timbres apart. — Mütze 09:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lisa's email address

I have sent mail to that address it uses invalid characters.

That's mentioned in the article. They purposefully used invalid characters.

[edit] Lisa's IQ

From the episode with Frank Grimes, wasn't it revealed Lisa's IQ is 156? (Although, I do remember a separate 159 IQ reference) Q0 09:38, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, it's mentioned in Smart and Smarter from season 15 that it's 159.
[1] mentions that Lisa's IQ was stated to be 156 in the episode "Homer's Enemy". So Lisa's IQ appears to be two different scores in two different episodes.
- I guess that's just a goof on the writers' part, the same way Homer's age is both 36 and 39 in different episodes. -- Kaizersoze 02:00, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)
  - Actually it was stated on a commentary they intentionally raised Homer's age as they thoght 36 was way too young for his physical apperance.
    - I think it's possible for someone's I.Q. to change 3 points. In a span of one year, mine went up from 129 to 136.

um... IQ never goes up... it actually gets lower as you get older... and as far as Lisa's IQ goes, anyone that watches the show should know better than expect any number for anything to stay the same from one episode to another... - Adolphus79 21:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrong, mate. You are imprecise in your assessment re: IQ: it doesn't get "lower" (theoretically), it norms to a more standardized grade. As I'm certain one with your level of expertise knows, there are variables that produce controversy within the validity of IQ (Gaussian distribution; Stephen Gould's beliefs, etc...), so its difficult for even trained professionals to produce a clear assessment of intelligence. And as far as your "anyone who watches the show" statement re: numbers, please note that Frink's and Comic Book Guy's IQ have remained constant (199 (the "198...197..." was there for comedic effect...)and 170, respectively.) Thanks for the note, though.... --206.40.119.252 10:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC) Aaron 7.21.2006

I took an IQ test twice in two days, the second time it went up 7 points--Andy mci 08:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Middle Name?

Middle name of Marie.. Source??

In Lisa's Wedding, the wedding invitations indicate her name as "Lisa Marie"
It is also confirmed that her initials are LMS in The Monkey Suit... - Adolphus79 09:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
The Simpsons trivia game uses her middle name as a sample question on the box, giving the answer as "Marie."

Although Lisa's middle name is Marie, as shown in Lisa's Wedding, in one of The Simpsons Book, there are interviews with Matt Groening, and he states that everyone in the Simpson's family has a surname beginning with "J"

[edit] Simpson Gene issue

The old version of this article, concerning the simpsons gene, is incorrect. It is revealed that the gene is located in the Y chromosome in one episode; Lisa does not have one, thus she cannot have the gene. I have added a link to the Y chromosome article.

Interestingly, very few disorders are caused by defects on the Y chromosome as it has very few genes. Most are linked to the X chromosome. Women are usually protected from suffering them by having two copies of this (one of them normal). Its hard being a male:D--ChrisJMoor 00:04, 26 May 2005 (UTC)It's especially hard being a male that likes other males and dresses!

[edit] U.S. Character

She is a character in The Simpsons, one of the TV shows made in the U.S. --ZachKudrna18@yahoo.com

Um, duh. tregoweth 03:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC) E-mail MATT GEROENING AT damnyouasholes@yahoo.com

[edit] Intro length

I think the intro, before the contents, on this article is way too long, being more than half the article. Could this be shortened to give a brief description, just like with Bart?

[edit] Lisa's braces

how come noone ever mentions lisa has braces? an entire episode revolves around it!(last exit to springfield)

Very few of the per-episode developments ever show up in canon. Most (or at least many) of the storylines that would change the dynamics or add info to the show ongoingly are just dropped after the episode in question.--Anchoress 13:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

But actually, now that I think of it she got those invisible Calvin Klein braces, so maybe they're just invisibly doing their thing.--Anchoress 13:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject: Simpsons

OK... Anyone interested in helping cleanup the Simpsons information, join the WikiProject... if we can all work together, instead of different editors working on different pages, we can get all the Simpsons information on all of Wikipedia organized... - Adolphus79 10:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smoking

I don't know that it's entirely accurate to say that Lisa tried smoking with older girls in the 'bad girls' bathroom'... to my recollection, when they gave her a cigarette, she tucked it behind her ear and said she'd smoke it in class. Her hesitation to take the cig and reluctance to smoke it with the other girls right then suggested that she didn't intend to smoke it at all. Although it's impossible to prove a negative (that she didn't smoke it), I don't think she's ever been depicted actually smoking.--Anchoress 13:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, in the episode where Moe's bar was closed and Homer re-fashioned his own home, he shoved a cig into Lisa's mouth and also lit it. Lisa doesn't look very happy. I'm not sure whether this already counts as smoking. -- Prorokini 17:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Massive cleanup of Lisa's profile

Dear lord.... I didn't realize how much of a beating poor Lisa's wiki's taken these past couple of months. I'm going to personally concentrate cleaning up...expanding...and at the same time condensing this page as best as I can within the next few days (I'm quite busy at the moment so I have to do it little by little).

Here's some glaring things I want to take care of:

-Proper condensing of information among the sections. Lisa's vegetarianism gets a whole section but its less than two lines long? Meanwhile...that giganormous section over her religion...I'm going to look it over and try very hard to keep as much of the relevant...juicy info as I can. But so far it looks needlessly long...I'm thinking Lisa's "belief's" can all be properly shortened and put into on category.

-Her Profile isn't nearly as descriptive as it could or should be.

-Her acomplishments list has got to be shortened. She does a lot of things...but its not necessary to list absolutely everything. Maybe her most notable actions...and then a blurb about how she does many other things

-Now I like to keep interesting information if I can help it...but there's some stuff on this wiki that not even I can vouch the validity of.

-Lots of grammar, cleaning up of red links, splitting etc.

-Add some additional info here and there to flesh things out if its not too long.

I re-added the Future catagory. I have no idea why this was removed...I had to go really far back to retrieve it. Sounds like zealous, unflattering wiki-cleaning...but regardless its back. I'll clean that up to. I'll maybe add an additional screen shot or two in the end if everything looks nice. I'm basically going to rewrite this whole thing...because this wiki really needs it.--Kiyosuki 00:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Whew, Lisa's a complicated character....this'll take longer than I thought. Heh, give me a bit longer.--Kiyosuki 09:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] shes 9

she has had both her 8th and 9th b-days in the show

Lisa has had several birthdays, but after her eighth they stopped counting.

[edit] Language

I'm not sure what "non-canon" means, but the "swedish" Lisa is supposed to use in "Treehouse of Horror XIV" makes no sense at all and can never be used as a proof for her fluently in swedish.

Non-canon means that it isn't considered as really having happened. There's also the fact that she was reading from a script in the Swedish film, and that the scene was deleted.

it was not swedish, i speak swedish, in that halloween episode it did not sound like swedish, belive me swedish sound much more like english than you think.

[edit] Ambidextrous?

Wearing a watch on the hand you write with is not proof of cross-dominance. Is there any specific time they mention her ambidexterity? --Onorem 18:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Well...I asked 2 months ago and there's been no response. I'm going to take the ambidextrous comment out of the trivia section for now. Feel free to add it back in if there's evidence to support it. --Onorem 11:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lisa is plump?

Where exactly is it said that Lisa is "exceptionally plump?" The episode where she thinks she has a weight problem? I thought the point of that one was to illustrate the problem of young girls who think they are obese and have weight problems, when in fact they do not. I can't think of any example of where Lisa has been called "plump."

There is the episode with Alison i think her name was, (played by that actress from Friends), where she told Lisa she could "Lose five pounds". But I doubt that's important. Guitarhero91 00:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

In the episode "Girls just want to have sums" it is shown that Lisa has a round stomach, as well as this, she is repeatedly shown as being round in her standard swimsuit. Logically, if Bart is overweight, then Lisa, who like Bart follows a mostly sedentry lifestyle, would be overweight too. I think that "exceptionally plump" is too much, "mildly overweight" may be a better way of phrasing it. (J.Benbow, Oxford Brookes 19th September 2007) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.73.40.157 (talk) 21:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] scary.

lisa get a+ in evry school parts, plays an instrument (possibly more) can speak many langues and seems to even smarter than martin (his iq is 216) and more mature than any adults seen in the show, all that in just one little pre-pubertal girl is scary, in fact i like lisa least of all main characters in the simpsons because her completly non possibly skills and behavior. If she had any kind weekness i would like her.

Ok mate, several things wrong with your argument.

Did you not see "Lisa on Ice"? She was failing gym, and sucked at every sport she did, apart from Ice Hockey.
In "Kamp Krusty", she got a B in conduct.
She is smarter than Martin.
Where did you see Martin's IQ? Because I doubt its 216.
If it is then you've defeated yourself because in "Homer's Enemy" her IQ is apparent 156.
I always thought that Professot Frink was the smartest character, as his IQ IS 197.
She's intelligent!
She's a child prodigy!
She's meant to be more mature than most adults

And most importantly....

10. She is a FICTIONAL cartoon character. It doesn't have to make complete sence. By most standards Lisa is incredibly believeable. I mean does bats talking and bears wearing hats seem normal to you? Gran2 14:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

In addition to that, there's the aforementioned self-righteousness Lisa has, her antisocial tendencies, and her sometimes over-the-top rivalry with Bart. She has plenty of weaknesses, and intelligence is no reason to dislike someone, fictional or not. Also, this isn't a message board for the character, it's for her page. If you want to spill your hatred for a character, find a fan site where it's actually suitable. Raenbow

[edit] Eating disorder

Does Lisa have an eating disorder? If not, remove her from that category because being vegetarian doesn't count. - Ndrly 04:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

She had one, but only for one episode.--AmitTheSomthing 22:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

but at the end she sayed it would take a long time to go away after homer was trying to get her to say its all ok before the end --Sailor cuteness

And besides, being a vegetarian does count.=P--AmitTheSomthing 20:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

What eating disorder does she have? Vitual aelita (talk) 00:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mensa

Yes I know she is a fictional character. But wikipedia must be truthful. Lisa is not really, in reality, in Mesna. She doesn't pay dues, never took an IQ test etc. Please discuss this before I edit that category (member of mensa) out. Thank you.Tstrobaugh 01:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe that you should remove her from that category, at least she should be portrayed as a "Fictional" member of Mensa as with other categories. An user 2 PM February 2007

God you people are nerds.

Sensemaker writes: Original text says: "She is a high-ranking member of Mensa Springfield". I have changed this to "She is a member of Mensa Springfield". We do not have ranks in mensa (it isn't the freemasons, you know) and as far as I can make out, they do not have it in fictional Mensa Springfield either. -Sensemaker

[edit] Repetition

Doesn't this article repeat itself a bit? --Taraborn 21:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

This has to be one of the worst wiki pages ever. F- material. A total rewrite is neccessary. I wish the people who did the Jack Sparrow wiki page (which is just incredible) would come and fix this up.

[edit] Birthday

So it says here that Lisa's birthday is either September 28th or May 9th, 1981, which is supposedly two years and thirty eight days younger than Bart. However, on Bart's page, it mentions that his birthday is April 25th, 1979. This can mean one of two things:

Bart's actual birthday is April 1st (quite fitting)
Lisa's actual birthday is June 2nd

sooooo which is it?

Bart's birthday can't be April 1st. If you see "So It's Come to This: A Simpsons Clip Show" where Homer and Bart did April Fool's jokes on each other, it doesn't mention anything about Bart's birthday at all. But it is the Simpsons, anyway... 137.205.24.140 23:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

It is established that The Simpsons is not time consistent, so such calculations are both WP:OR and meaningless. Is Lisa 26 years old on the show (but still 4' tall, in grade school, and living with her parents), or is the show set perpetually in 1989 (with 90s and 00s personalities and situations travelling back in time to interact with the Simpson family)?

This has become an issue on several Simpsons character pages. It's a cartoon. Lisa has had three 8th birthdays. The characters are not real people.

Bart's birthdate was listed in some non-canonical source as April 1 — it's considered a prank, and not to be taken seriously. Pinning down birthdates limits potential storylines; for example, a story with a summer birthday wouldn't be able to have snow naturally on the ground. It is unlikely the producers would limit themselves without good reason. / edgarde 18:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Political beliefs

Can someone help with episode citations for some of Lisa's political beliefs, especially those expressed on more than one episode. I seem to remember her being pro-union^{[citation needed]}. What else?

I'd like to list them here before appending to the article, but whatever is well-sourced can go right in. / edgarde 16:55, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

About Lisa's religious beliefs: I remember an episode in which the family is in the church and priest asks 'are there believers in here?' (or similar) and lisa alone shouts 'No' and all the other people shout 'Yes'. So Lisa could be an atheist (well buddhism is kinda non-theistic religion). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.228.123 (talk) 23:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional President of the United States?

In Bart to the Future, she was POTUS. Anyone have any objection to the category?--Folksong 02:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we avoid adding categories that only relate to one episode. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, same objection, same reason. Because of the quantity of situations over 18+ years, The Simpsons characters can cruft up the categories considerably. / edgarde 02:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category

Any objection to "Characters introduced in 1987"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.62.211 (talk) 22:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The word emotional

"Lisa began to develop into a more intelligent and more emotional character with "Krusty Gets Busted" being one of the first episodes where her true intelligence is fully shown."

I don't see what the problem with that sentence is, and I don't see how it says that "Intelligence equals emotional instability". Is there something I'm missing? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

and thus more emotinal[2] is wrong for the reasons stated in the edit. "Emotional" is just vague. If that's the language in the commentary, I suppose we'll have to use it — might be better stated as a brief quote. / edg ☺ ★ 16:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

I ask for keeping the link to LTS forum (http://www.lisa-simpson.net/). It's important enough for the article since it's the only forum solely dedicated to the character under question, and a part of useful information about the character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.192.27 (talk) 06:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

While I thank you for bringing this to the talk page, you still shouldn't have added the link back; two editors have removed it. Contested material is added after a consensus to include it has been formed, not before. That being said, the link is to a non-notable, fan-run forum and as such is inappropriate for Wikipedia. faithless (^speak) 06:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

NHC isn't linked from The Simpsons and it has its own page. It's just a forum anyway, and generally we avoid linking to them as it often seems like advertising. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 06:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

NHC is a general Simpsons forum, while LTS is a special Lisa Simpson forum. You mentioned WP:EL, forum section. I must note that there is an exception: "Except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article" which allows my link perfectly. Notability of the site is not that important here; it's not a whole article, just a link in the External Links section.

Yes, but the guidelines laid down at WP:RS also count in this matter. The site wouldn't be useable as a source, so it's also not useable as an EL. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 06:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be a reliable source since it's not a part of the article text; the link itself also specifies that it's a fan forum. There is a phrase on WP:SR: "This page is considered a content guideline", i.e. it's applied to the article contents; not the contents of the external sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.192.27 (talk) 06:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a forum that discusses Lisa, not a page about Lisa. It may be relevant to the text, but it's still a small forum with less than 200 members and if we link to it, we'd have to link to dozens of other small forums with 200 members. As well, you seem to be forgetting three VERY important guidelines in the "Links normally to be avoided" section of WP:EL:

Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article

Links mainly intended to promote a website.

Links to social networking sites, discussion forums/groups or USENET.

So there you go. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 06:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I already mentioned above that that section reserves an exception, and this forum falls into that exception perfectly. Please read my comment about WP:EL above. And no, you won't have to link to 200 sites about Lisa because there are no 200 sites about Lisa. And if there are few sites dedicated solely to Lisa Simpson, they should be mentioned in the article dedicated to her, because it's still an important information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.192.27 (talk) 07:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

No it doesn't because the site is not about Lisa, it's for discussion about her. People who go there would not learn anything unless they joined your forum and started posting, so therefore it's advertising. And, by the way, three parts of WP:EL support the removal of the link, whereas only one sorta supports its inclusion. I am finished with this discussion. If you can find an experienced editor who agrees with you, then that's one thing, but before you go asking for people at the forum to come here, read WP:MEAT. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 07:08, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You didn't convince me. Even if a link looks like an advertising, that shouldn't be the only reason for reverting the edit. And your phrase "it's not about Lisa, it's for discussing" is not convincing either. Forums, like Wikipedia, allow posting information. Prove that LTS doesn't have any information about Lisa Simpson and has only discussions about her, then I will agree. Otherwise, I will consider your reverts violations of the WP rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.192.27 (talk) 07:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

First off, policy is against you because somebody would have to join your forum in order to discuss her. The Simpsons Archive is about Lisa Simpson. Your forum is for discussion. As well, two registered users disagree which gives us consensus. Please do not push the issue as you will be reverted and the page will have to be protected. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 07:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You was talking about the information just five minutes ago... a visitor DOES NOT have to register on LTS to read that information.

"Please do not push the issue as you will be reverted and the page will have to be protected." You're threatening me, right? Because you can't formally ground your reverts? It means that you're wrong.

"And, by the way, three parts of WP:EL support the removal of the link, whereas only one sorta supports its inclusion." That's completely incorrect because the exception goes before the list and covers it... read the rules carefully please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.192.27 (talk) 07:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Two users against one is not a consensus! And it doesn't matter who's registered and who's not.

But they have to register to participate. Look, the guidelines explicitely exclude forums. Would you like me to get an expert in such issues to come here and explain this to you? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 07:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'd like to see one. So far, you can't convince me at all, although I try to understand your reasons.

My reasons:

It's a fan forum meant for discussion
Forums are explicitely forbidden at WP:EL
It's advertising (Links normally to be avoided #4)
It could not be used as a source in an FA (Links normally to be avoided #1)
A user has to register to participate in the discussion
It is a small forum with less than 200 members. If it was the equivilant of NHC then it might be different
"What should be linked" says "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews." However, there is no indication that the site provides any of those things, at least, not in a way that would pass WP:RS.
This is an encyclopedia, not an directory to various websites about a subject.

Satisfied? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 07:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

No. You keep saying the same, we already discussed that (I argued #1-#7 already, and #8 alone is not enough).

Forums are explicitly forbidden because all they offer is fancruft and baseless speculation. Nothing written there is acceptable for inclusion into Wikipedia, and therefore should not be linked. Your remarks have been unfriendly, bordering on hostile. You haven't even given a reason why the site should be linked. Do you have one? faithless (^speak) 07:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by no reason? The reason is in my first message. This is a 1) the resource dedicated solely to the character the article is about; 2) the unique resource, i.e. there is no second forum like that. And about hostility... your comments were much more alienating here than mine (and honestly, you can't ground your reasons with WP rules properly). I ask either for a public poll about this link, or some qualified specialist's opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.192.27 (talk) 07:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

That's not true. Your site offers links to several other Lisa related websites. And your misinterpreting the guideline. It says Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews and there is no indication that your site offers those while still passing WP:RS. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 07:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

(sigh) I give up. You couldn't convince me and honestly, I've got a bad impression about Wikipedia with this discussion. Looks like you can't properly interpret your own rules - no offense.

You still have not given a reason. Should every page on the world wide web regarding Lisa Simpson be added to the External links? That's what you're suggesting. Secondly, I have been nothing but friendly to you; I called your original edit good faith in the edit summary, I've been perfectly cordial on this talk page. However, you are an IP editor, clearly unfamiliar with Wikipedia, who has insulted two regulars by implying that we don't understand Wikipedia guidelines while simultaneously suggesting that you yourself are well versed. faithless (^speak) 07:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Not every; but the section shouldn't contain only one link either. External links are intended to provide additional information that doesn't exist in the article; but you decline links because the linked sites are different from Wikipedia. This is not logical... maybe you should try and leave the link and look what happens; if the page gets spammed with links, then you're right, but if there will be only 3 or 4 fair links, that would mean that you're exaggerating a lot.

"clearly unfamiliar with Wikipedia" - you're wrong here again :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.192.27 (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean this as an insult in any way, and hope you don't take it as such, but you think forums are okay to list under external links, you don't know sign your posts with four tildes (even after being asked to), you've flaunted several guidelines and policies (whilst calling them "rules") and according to your contribution history you have made edits only to this article and talk page. All of this indicates an unfamiliarity with WP. But this is irrelevant. I'm replying only to refute your assertion that I am "wrong...again," which is particularly odd as I don't recall being "wrong" in the first place. In the future I would suggest considering the possibility that those of us who are regulars around here might know how things work. I'd say that this matter is closed now. If you have anything further to say to me personally, please feel free to do so on my talk page. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 09:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll chime in. Most every thing has been covered. Heres the policy. Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups) or USENET are not allowed per the External links policy and are Links normally to be avoided. Its not the official page of the articles subject and Fails WP:RS. It appears to have only 158 Members which isn't a unique resource. External links policy on Advertising and conflicts of interest states You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent. Unfortunately your conflict of interest editing here involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote lisa-simpson.net. Such a conflict is strongly discouraged. Your contributions to wikipedia under 87.103.192.27, consist entirely of adding the external link lisa-simpson.net. Looking through your contributions as a whole, the all seem to be lisa-simpson.net related only. Please do not continue adding this link. It has become apparent that your IP are only being used for spamming inappropriate external links and for self-promotion. Wikipedia is NOT a "repository of links" or a "vehicle for advertising" and persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted. Any further spamming may result in your account and/or your IP address being blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please see the welcome page and Wikipedia:Civility. Avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines. You're here to improve Wikipedia -- not just to promote lisa-simpson.net right? --Hu12 08:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.