Talk:List of American Dad! episodes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of American Dad! episodes 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

Contents 1 New style 2 To be announced 3 Next episode/new season? 4 Season two episodes 5 Let's keep this correct 6 The picture of anorexic Stan is a spoiler. 7 Merge discussion per AfD 8 Season division of episodes 9 Why Elvish? 10 Fix episode template? 11 Season 3 Episodes 12 Episode notability 13 "Cultural references" 14 episodes from copyright database 15 Future episodes 16 Season 1 Episode 17 "Rough Trade"

[edit] New style

Having a different article for each season is ennoying. It does not seem neccesary as there are not that many episodes that it makes it too long. It is not like for example the simpsons. The 2nd and 3rd season are not fully aired so no-one is going to be looking that far down the page. But I would like to see all the episodes together in the meantime.

All the episodes are together on the main page. If you want to see pictures for each episode then you need to go to the season page... Grande13

[edit] To be announced

Would changing 'TBA' to 'To Be Announced' improve things? Mind you, if I was making a TV show I'd put an acronym as the names of four consequent episodes... -- Kizor 19:30, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Next episode/new season?

Does anyone know when the show will be back, and whether it will be a new season? The Futon Critic says it's back on April 16th and the next episode will be episode 201, ie the start of season 2. I'm not familiar with this site, though, is it reliable? If it's as (un)reliable as TV.com maybe we should wait for another source before updating the episode list.

it probably should still be considered season 1 despite the production codes. Then when new episodes start again this fall those should be considered season 2.

thats probably a smart move, assuming the show takes another break for the summer.Grande13 03:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Season two episodes

I found these by searching copyrights (http://www.copyright.gov/records/cohm.html).

2AJN01 Roger 'n Me, 2AJN05 The American Dad After School Special, 2AJN06 Camp Refoogee, 2AJN07 Failure is not a Factory-installed Option, 2AJN08 Dungeons and Wagons, 2AJN09 Iced, Iced Babies

These 3 were also found but without production numbers. They appear to be 2AJN02 - 2AJN04. Is Helping Handis a typo?

With Friends Like Steve's, Helping Handis, Tears of a Clooney

Someone should add these but I guess the 3 without production codes should be ignored until they can be confirmed. Generalleoff 04:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

NM. I saw they were added now. Generalleoff 04:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Let's keep this correct

Why was the first 4 episodes of Season 2, as confirmed by Fox, aired on Sunday as the new Season and with Season 2 in the production code number put at the end of the Season 1 listings? LEt's keepit right people. Roger n' Me is the first episode of season 2.

ACtually it isnt. the official season 2 starts in the fall, while these are production season 2 episodes they are still part of season 1, as production codes dont always line up with broadcast seasons. Things became messed up because season 1 started in the summer instead of teh fall so extra episodes were needed, regardless this should now be considered season 1 til the end of the may episodes

[edit] The picture of anorexic Stan is a spoiler.

The picture for Season 2 Episode 2, "The American Dad After School Special", is a spoiler and should be changed. In that episode, they build up to that scene, with Stan getting fatter and fatter, and finally it is revealed that he is horribly emaciated and that it was only his perception that he was gaining weight. By showing a screenshot from this scene, Wikipedia effectively blows half the story. Maybe it could be removed and switched for some other screenshot? Gary 22:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge discussion per AfD

Per the discussion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of American Dad! episodes expanded, the List of American Dad! episodes expanded needs to be merged into this article. Please discuss any specific of the merge and then merge the articles. Thanks! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 21:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Season division of episodes

According to commentary of the DVD, the first season is only the first 7 episodes, while "Bullocks to Stan" is the second season premiere. 206.66.217.140 22:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

just look at the official american dad site for your answer. It has a different orderGrande13

[edit] Why Elvish?

Why does the text for episode 10 of season 1 say that the "strange alphabet" is elvish? I haven't seen the episode, so I don't know if they are referring to the letters as being elvish in the episode, but the letters are clearly japanese kana, or to be more precise hiragana. It reads: "ryorora. sori (next line) riromerenyayo (next line) rayari(unsure about this symbol, could be a fast written 'hi')eyayu (next line) ryururutsuyamome (next line) wororirame (next line) eyoyamoya (next line) menyutsuri (next line) rarureyuya". There are several points in the text which have no meaning. In fact, to me it seems that the text doesn't make sense, as it is just gibberish. But maybe my japanese isn't good enough. :) I'm quite sure however that it has no meaning in japanese, as I can't see any sentence structure whatsoever. So I suggest that the text for that episode gets changed.

The episode states that the note is in Elvish, which I why imagine the author wrote "Elvish", since as you say the symbols are Japanese. It's actually somewhat of a spoiler that the note is Elvish, so I'll remove it. PGingell 19:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fix episode template?

does anyone know how to keep the current template the same, but but the total episode number as the last column and not the second?

So the order should be ep number, title, airdate, production code, then total ep number, with the summary on the bottom Grande13 16:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Season 3 Episodes

It should be noted that the episode House of Horror will most likely air in mid-October. To that effect, FOX has only one LCS to worry about and a possible game six or seven of one series will likely take place during the late afternoon on that Sunday while freeing up primetime for new episodes.208.107.168.154 01:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

episode order isnt confirmed, although you are right there should be more episodes this fall than compared to previous years Grande13 01:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Episode notability

this discussion is over for the time being with really no consensus reached. for now the tags should be removed, and if this issue is brought up again in the future then the tags could be re-applied, but for now they are serving no purpose. Grande13 (talk) 17:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Cultural references"

Today I tagged all those articles with a "Cultural references" section with the references-needed tag, this was later removed by Grand13 (under his IP). I've again re-tagged the articles as per Wikipedia's sourcing policies.

A secondary source will be needed to backup the claim that x is a cultural reference. For example, "This episode's title is a play on the song or film When a Man Loves a Woman", who says this is so? A Wikipedian editor? Who of course isn't a reliable source. For all this Wikipedian knows it could be simple coincidence (ergo the need for a source).

Rather than simply removing I tagged the articles that require citations, policy would support me if I decided to remove them verbatim. But I didn't, and I'd rather not, but they still require sourcing.

---

Applicable: WP:RS and WP:V

Thanks, Matthew 15:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your concerns but please stop spreading false rumors. As we've discussed in the past I do know Grand13 and am in touch, but am not him. This was my doing, but your tagging was incredibly unncessary and lazily done. I loved how you tagged about 10 or so articles that didnt even have cultural references. This conversation has already occurred a few times on different shows, and those times it was decided you're point wasn't valid. While im sure you have good intentions, please dont suggest things that arent warranted. thanks 68.72.139.134 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Rumours? What's rumours? Read the policies, not difficult. And thank you for reminding me to revisit the production code debate, I was on semi-wikibreak at that time while most shows were on summer break. I tagged the articles for upcoming episodes because they had the section :-). Could you point out where this conversation has been held before? Matthew 16:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] episodes from copyright database

I'm adding back info from remaining third season episodes that comes from the copyright database as its an acceptable form for source material as was discussed in the past and agreed upon. Numerous articles, some featured, or close to featured, for a show that utilizes the copyright database as a reference use this as well. Main example, the Simpsons [1], check on one of the discussion pages for the lengthy conversation between some of their editors and a few admins for how this came to be an acceptable source if you have any qualms about it.

Also, if you would have done some more research you would have noticed that more than half of the previously aired episodes on the copyright database have the word screenplay, which is just the style that american dad seems to be registering some of their more recent episodes. There hasn't been a situation where a title has been mislabeled yet, and in the rare occurrence if some situation should ever arise there is a upcoming television show disclaimer located above the current season.

I've also added back the season 4, as its properly sourced, and is setup in a way that discourages vandalism and people adding false material.

and its not too crystalballery as you noted, as the dates are left off and episode order left blank for the time being as I am only including the verified and sourced material. If you've noticed in the past i've removed peoples attempts at ordering and speculating dates as that is a bit crystalball-ish, but with this compromise they are in an acceptable form

Now regarding the episodes. Regardless of whether the discussion decides to delete some of the later upcoming episodes, they have a valid place on the episode list as they all have sources, and are labeled with that source and detailed info on how to confirm the existence of the episode. If it is decided that the episodes are to be merged/deleted later on then the episode pages can be kept although a redirect link can be implemented that just redirects it to the season 3 part of the episode list until further more concrete info becomes available on the episode. Also some of these episodes have been confirmed in articles/interviews. Im in the process of adding the sources to each episode that has such info. I've started with 42 year old virgin which had a live table read at comic con 2007. Grande13 01:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The movie info was completely false, and made up by a repeated vandal that actually hasn't made any positives contributions to wikipedia. No info exists on that article anyway that can be found. The movie section needs to be removed. Grande13 19:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Future episodes

I'm going to remove another incarnation of this section, again. Grande please stop re-inserting it, it's been made explicitly clear to you that the source you have provided is disputed. If these are future episodes then you'll have absolutely no problem in providing another source, will you?

Remember that the onus is yours to adequately source the section as you are the user restoring content.

As it stands you've still not proven how these are future episodes, "it's very likely" is not reliable. The copyright database has indexed scripts, that's not proof these will ever become episodes, nor does it state what season they have been written for. It's original research to speculate on the season (exactly what you're doing) and that they are "future episodes".

   * Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, nor a forum for promoting one's own point of view; all material must be verifiable
   * Facts must be backed by citations to reliable sources that contain these facts
   * Interpretations and syntheses must be attributed to reliable sources that make these interpretations and syntheses

As I say, if the information is accurate then provide a reliable source that can also backup your claims. Policy and guidelines very clearly support me (WP:V, [[WP:NOR and WP:RS). You've yet to provide anything to back you up other than "some users and an admin [wow!]" think it's reliable, the fact that some other people are confused does: a) not make the source any less disputed or b) any more reliable. Matthew 07:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

sceptre was in agreement with this setup if you had checked....It seems you are the only one currently going against this. Grande13 12:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe Sceptre is trying to compromise with you. I myself am only interested in getting a reliable source. If they will be real episodes you'll have no problem providing another source, right? Matthew 12:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

All it states here is that to include things you need an official source. While it might be recommended that you have additional outside sources to back the claim, there is nothing saying it MUST have multiple sources to be included on wikipedia. As long as its a respectable source and not just some fansite. Over time additional sources will be available, but for now we have one valid source, so its enough to at least include their titles. This is not OR, as its coming from a reliable database. This is not an an interpretation of the ideas from that site either. While its not definitely clear what season they fall under on the copyright database, you can be sure anything on there will be an episode at some point down the line. Since the production cycle for these cartoons is approx 9 months, you can make conclusions, which is interpretation, but leaving them in the future episode category is legit. Grande13 19:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Grande, listen to yourself. I've not asked for multiple sources, I've asked for a different source (which would need to be a reliable source). You're clearly incapable of doing this, ergo I will continue to believe you can't provide one.

What you don't seem to understand is this: assumption is original research. However much you try to sweetcoat it with more assumption…

You say "[Y]ou can be sure anything on there will be an episode at some point down the line", why can I be sure? Because you say so? You know that you are not a reliable source. You're assuming that because the script (not an episode) is listed in the database that it will become an episode, that's fine and dandy but you can't prove it. Can you–without a doubt–prove that American Dad! will not suddenly be cancelled? No you can't, ergo your reassurances mean nothing to me.

To quote policy: "Facts must be backed by citations to reliable sources that contain these facts." (WP:NOR). The copyright database does not confirm that listed scripts will become episodes, or that they are potential episodes and it also doesn't confirm the season. You say there will be reliable sources in the future, well lets wait for them… unless there's a policy saying we MUST include the information now? There's no rush. Matthew 20:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

this isnt some database that some kids just threw together. This is a government run database. As policy states, facts must be backed by citations. Fact is an episode was registered with the database. It is merely being cited and placed on the episode list. If the info is available there is no reason not to put it on. Also, there are quite a few people that know its available and its found easily on other sites as well, which is just going to lead to people attempting to add it in their own way here. This can all be prevented by just including it now. If we weren't using a real reliable source then i would just say wait til something more concrete is out, but registering the episode in the copyright database is a valid representation of that episode existing by a reputable place that can be cited and traced. Grande13 22:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

A script may have been registered, not an episode (more of your OR assuming it will be). It doesn't matter if it's gov't run, it still doesn't backup your claims. All the registration proves is that copyright is important. I'll repeat myself again: if true you'll have no problem in providing another source. If you don't they'll just be repeatedly removed, you can moan about what you think and what your emails says all you want. Matthew 22:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

its not necessary to have multiple sources when there is one valid source, I dont see how you dont see it being valid. Its not OR, its legally registering episodes into the database, which counts as a reliable source for future episodes. If it had been wrong multiple times then maybe I could somewhat see where you are coming from, but your assumptions that just because its in the database doesn't mean anything has no merit. Its a quality source, that can be backed with reliable results. You seem to make quality contributions to wikipedia, so please take your efforts elsewhere where they are actually needed. Again, in time other reliable sources will surface, but there is nothing anywhere saying that multiple reliable sources are needed to add content. One quality source is enough, while multiple just supply verification. Grande13 07:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not asking for multiple sources, I'm asking for a different source (one that can backup your claims that: they will be episode and the season they will be a part of). You can moan and groan all you wish saying it's a "quality source" (which you've yet to prove), or you can provide another source.

I will repeat myself again, but patience can only go so far: The copyright database lists registered scripts, not episodes. You cannot prove these will actually be episodes, for all you know the show will be cancelled during production and they will simply remain scripts. Grande you need to listen to yourself because you make some absurd claims which you clearly can't backup.

If you can provide a reliable source then please do, if you can't then please don't re-introduce the content as you will just be reverted. Your source will also need to backup the claim they are possible episodes/will be episodes (WP:V). Matthew 08:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

So they need to claim only what we know, that they are scripts and nothing more. -- Ned Scott 10:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess that works, and yes Matthew i understand you are asking for a different source, but im saying it doesn't mention anywhere that multiple sources are needed to back up an already reliable source. Grande13 13:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Season 1 Episode 17 "Rough Trade"

Stan and Roger do not experience "a Freaky Friday type switch" - they merely swap roles, not bodies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.74.165 (talk) 15:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)