1441:
But if you really feel this is not the case, then you can check the edit history of episode articles that include such reviews, and see which editors added them in order to see if there is some sort of illicit pattern. If it turns out that those reviews are added by multiple editors with long-standing contribution histories, then this makes the theory of an AV Club writer doing this himself less likely. If it's one editor, especially an anonymous IP editor or someone without a great deal of standing in the community, then that might bolster the theory. But without bothering to do that bit of checking, it's just a lazy accusation.
1399:. Now, Nightscream has declared that the AV Club is "a notable website of a notable publication," and also implies that they may be mentioning AV Club reviews only by virtue of the sheer difficulty of finding reliable sources for reviews ("the number of sites considered reliable that provide reviews of TV episodes may be limited"). I find that notion to be either willfully misleading, deliberately ignorant or downright stupid. It is incredibly easy to find valid, reliable sources of reviews for one of the most famous cartoon shows in the history of television, as one would expect.
224:
765:
730:
1497:, sites whose content is user-generated, such as blogs, open forums, other wikis, etc., are not reliable sources, since anyone can post material to those sites. IMDB's content is indeed user-generated, as it comes from uncredentialed visitors to the site, which does not exert editorial control over that content. Knowledge (XXG) is obviously not in the business of including the comments of uncredentialed, anonymous nobodies in its articles, and this is widely known on Knowledge (XXG), where
200:
402:
381:
904:
698:
775:
507:
486:
916:
628:
1451:"Nightscream has declared that the AV Club is "a notable website of a notable publication," and also implies that they may be mentioning AV Club reviews only by virtue of the sheer difficulty of finding reliable sources for reviews ("the number of sites considered reliable that provide reviews of TV episodes may be limited"). I find that notion to be either willfully misleading, deliberately ignorant or downright stupid."
868:
176:
940:
244:
297:
92:
952:
276:
53:
1403:, for example, has reviews and ratings of every South Park episode ever released, and is highly regarded by WP. That's just the tip of the iceberg. Certainly there are more prominent and "reliable" sources for these reviews, and most certainly said reviews are anything but "limited," to the point where we need not rely on AV club to tell us what the public thinks about entertainment media.
880:
102:
1146:
is "ultra dense", and that being informed of the site's rules is "unwelcoming" (as if one can only be welcomed if they are implicitly allowed to break the rules), then the problem is not the note above, it's the editor who reacts to it as you did. Anyone who really wants to contribute should be willing to learn the site's rules as I did. Those who don't want to shouldn't be editing here.
1346:. You've offered nothing in the way of answers to any of my questions, or solutions to the issue of sourcing, you refuse to do any checking regarding your stated concerns, and you contribute little to begin with, and denigrate editors who contribute more than you, while simultaneously coming here to express a supposed concern over the quality of articles. If you bothered to just go to
517:
412:
618:
591:
307:
22:
1269:
be in the extreme minority. More to the point, by dismissing it as "tired" without answering it, you sidestep the point entirely: Again, why can't you fix these problems? If you're not willing to do some searching for other reviews, then what obligation do the others here have to do so? What do you hope to accomplish by complaining about it on a talk page? I do
1087:, the plot summary is an overview of a work's main events, so avoid any minutiae that is not needed for a reader's understanding of the story's three fundamental elements: plot, characterization and theme. This includes such minutiae as scene-by-scene breakdowns, technical information or detailed explanations of individual gags or lines of dialogue.
1288:. Since the number of sites considered reliable that provide reviews of TV episodes may be limited, this will naturally limit the number of reviews that can be added to articles. Since IGN and the AV Club regularly provide such reviews, naturally, it's easier to add them to articles. But when other sources do become available, they are added.
1440:
say. And my reaction is the same: I do not have any affiliation with The AV Club or the Onion, and sometimes add reviews from that source (as do other editors) because I happen to know that they regularly review this series. It is likely that this is the same reason that other editors do so as well.
1268:
I think you have it backwards. It is the constant whining by people like you about the content of the South Park articles, who seem to do nothing about it, that is "tired", since I'm constantly coming across these rants. By contrast, those like me who point out that you yourself can fix it, seem to
1145:
It's actually three paragraphs, not one, took far less time to write then everything else in the article, and much of my other contributions to WP, and it's necessary because of editors whose additions often violate the site's policies and guidelines. If you really think that three brief paragraphs
1394:
editor (most likely someone from AV Club) is salting and/or peppering the South Park episode articles with "plugs" of his/her website in the form of reviews that no-one would otherwise read or care about. RichJenkins wasn't accusing editors as a whole of bias toward or against a certain reviewer;
1248:
He DOES have a point though. The A.V. Club's review of a South Park episode is cited in just about every episode's wiki page. That seems a little odd to me. And instead of giving me a tired "why don't you fix it and find more reviews?" response. Doesn't it seem a little odd it's cited EVERY single
1366:
or any other publication whose reviews I add to articles. None of this has anything to do with "having all day to make updates constantly", since I don't either. It has to do with you whining about something while choosing to do nothing about it except make false accusations, and remain willfully
1165:
The guy from the A.V. Club gave the episode "an 'B'"? Surely his opinion is so vital to our understanding of humanity (who is he, again?) but you can't give someone an B. You can give them a "B," or a rating of B, but not an B. Oh, and good thing the article is locked! We wouldn't want anyone
1457:
as to the possible reasons for the frequent inclusion of AV Club reviews in articles, provide examples of articles with reviews from other publications, some of which I mentioned that I added myself, and stated the need for editors to commit to do some searching instead of just coming here to
1322:
Oh for crap's sake, grow up. I said "I would guess." That's hardly an accusation. I'm glad you wrote a dissertation of a response to me saying I agree with someone though. And yes, your links prove you're more of a
Knowledge (XXG) nerd than I am. Most of us don't have all day to make updates
1195:
reviewer - obviously someone trying to get publicity and pushing their agenda. Please at least just add some other sources/reviewers, the A.V. Club guy under every article makes it look like he's Roger Ebert or something, which is obviously not the case and very misleading. Thanks.
1226:? Find those other reviews, sign in for an account, and add them! Why do so many people come to these talk pages to whine about this or that in the article, when they can just fix it themselves? And if you don't care enough about the matter to do so, then why come here at all?
1516:
That's just the tip of the iceberg. Certainly there are more prominent and "reliable" sources for these reviews, and most certainly said reviews are anything but "limited," to the point where we need not rely on AV club to tell us what the public thinks about entertainment
1056:, it is not enough to cite a primary source for material that constitutes an analytic, evaluative or interpretative claims, such as cultural references in works of satire or parody, because in such cases, such claims are being made on the part of the editor. This is called
1490:
It is incredibly easy to find valid, reliable sources of reviews for one of the most famous cartoon shows in the history of television, as one would expect. IMDB, for example, has reviews and ratings of every South Park episode ever released, and is highly regarded by
1296:, for which one IP editor complained that the one review by IGN was biased, and pointed to a review by an NCAA critic as one that would make a good addition. Why that IP editor couldn't just add that other review himself, he never said. So I did it myself.
1249:
time? I've never even heard of AV Club other than from South Park
Knowledge (XXG) pages. I would guess that the editors of the site edit this each time and put links to their own review which seems like biased editing to me.
929:
744:
209:
67:
1434:
editor (most likely someone from AV Club) is salting and/or peppering the South Park episode articles with "plugs" of his/her website in the form of reviews that no-one would otherwise read or care about.
893:
740:
233:
185:
71:
63:
707:
601:
1395:
he's saying that AV club may be surreptitiously advertising their site under the guise of some pseudo-legitimacy, which would indeed violate the
Knowledge (XXG) guidelines regarding objectivity and
1169:
Seriously, do people run to the internet after their favorite shows air so that they can trash the relevant
Knowledge (XXG) articles? Humanity is certainly doomed if that's the case. Dear god...
1390:, and to find them named in the majority of WP articles related to one of the most successful television comedies of all time is a bit suspect. I think what RichJenkins was trying to say was:
1766:
1382:
Alright, ladies. Save your nails. I didn't mean to start a cat-fight here. I think RichJenkins has a valid theory, however - though it was obviously misinterpreted by
Nightscream. The
805:
1781:
253:
75:
1771:
1651:
1505:
policy, one of the most fundamental policies we adhere to. That you are apparently unaware of this is rather interesting, given your tendency to chastise others for being "ignorant".
1367:
ignorant of any relevant facts. Either step up to the plate and offer some ideas of actual value to the issue you believe exists, in a transparent and civil manner, or go elsewhere.
1611:
1214:
He is not referred to as the "only" reviewer, he may simply be the only one referenced in some of the articles, but that doesn't imply that there aren't other reviews out there.
822:
1636:
214:
1023:
Please do not add mention of pop cultural references, continuity notes, trivia, or who the targets of a given episode's parody are, without accompanying such material with an
1621:
190:
573:
1741:
712:
858:
1786:
1716:
1641:
563:
1656:
1626:
1761:
848:
812:
688:
1796:
1776:
1746:
1721:
1631:
539:
166:
1646:
1616:
468:
1806:
1731:
1666:
678:
258:
1479:. Disagree with other editors if you must, and explain why you disagree with a given statement, but please do so without such pejorative comments. Thanks.
817:
1736:
1606:
156:
363:
1711:
1701:
1299:
And as far as your accusation of editors adding "their own reviews", either substantiate that accusation, or go elsewhere for your web hobbies. False
458:
1338:
I don't care if you phrased it in the form of a
Broadway sonata, a TV jingle or a dirty limerick. The fact is, you suggested that editors are making
1751:
1064:, and is strictly forbidden on Knowledge (XXG), regardless of whether one thinks the meaning of the reference is "obvious". Sources for such claims
650:
530:
491:
128:
1756:
1686:
1676:
1671:
353:
654:
132:
1102:
I'm not normally one to call people's names, and I won't join in the profanity, but I will agree that that paragraph is a pretty ultradense and
1801:
1706:
970:
995:
788:
735:
434:
1107:
1726:
1691:
1661:
1519:
We don't rely on the AV Club to tell us what the public thinks. We rely on the AV Club to tell us what that publication's reviewers think.
1467:
That said, accusing another editor of being "willfully misleading, deliberately ignorant or downright stupid" is a violation of the site's
1124:
New users are prone to adding such trivia to these types of articles, Nightscream is correct in trying to educate them on
Knowledge (XXG)
329:
1601:
1410:
1176:
1079:
information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, per
1541:
Can any one explain why they're making fun of
Natalie Portman in this episode? why are they saying she needs to open her "warm hole"?
641:
596:
1791:
1696:
1548:
1197:
800:
115:
58:
1000:
964:
748:
425:
386:
1681:
796:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
1293:
320:
281:
33:
1476:
1191:
Can someone PLEASE do something about the guy from the A.V. Club? He's being referred to in every Season 15 episode as the
124:
522:
1111:
1222:
different reviews. As for whether "someone" can "do something" about this, why can't the "someone" in question
1133:
39:
1552:
1414:
1201:
1180:
1544:
1406:
1172:
1052:
While a primary source (such as the episode itself, or a screencap or clip from it at South Park
Studios)
1569:, in which Portman was the female lead, and which involves characters traveling among the nine realms of
1033:
1582:
1524:
1372:
1328:
1312:
1254:
1231:
1151:
1092:
538:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
433:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
328:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1323:
constantly. You still didn't even establish who the AV Club even is or why their reviews are relevant.
1053:
1324:
1250:
780:
21:
1362:
1129:
223:
1125:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1342:
violations, and without any substantiation for that idea, which violates this site's policies on
1292:
is an aforementioned example of an episode article that cites five different reviews. Another is
1498:
1494:
1103:
1057:
1046:
1037:
source. Adding such material without such sources violates Knowledge (XXG)'s policies regarding
764:
729:
991:
921:
633:
1458:
complain, which is neither "willfully misleading, deliberately ignorant or downright stupid".
1223:
1586:
1578:
1556:
1528:
1520:
1418:
1376:
1368:
1332:
1316:
1308:
1289:
1258:
1235:
1227:
1215:
1205:
1184:
1155:
1147:
1137:
1115:
1096:
1088:
885:
401:
380:
107:
1502:
1472:
1468:
1343:
1339:
1304:
1300:
1281:
1061:
1042:
1028:
199:
1106:
mess of bureaucraticese. It saddens me someone spent a portion of their life writing it!
957:
646:
535:
417:
1024:
1274:
1270:
903:
697:
1350:
article, for example, you'd know that it's a notable website of a notable publication,
1038:
1595:
1347:
975:
793:
312:
915:
627:
506:
485:
1565:
1307:, and do nothing to improve individual articles, or Knowledge (XXG) as a whole.
867:
649:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
175:
939:
645:, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Knowledge (XXG) articles about
1303:
accusations by people who barely contribute to articles serve only to violate
947:
911:
875:
770:
623:
512:
407:
302:
243:
97:
1387:
1352:
879:
296:
275:
120:
101:
91:
52:
1054:
is acceptable for material that is merely descriptive, such as the synopsis
1019:
Please read this before adding pop cultural references and continuity notes
792:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
516:
411:
1574:
1356:. I myself have no affiliation with that publication, any more than with
978:
306:
1383:
430:
617:
590:
1570:
1386:
is a pretty obscure reviewer irregardless of their affiliation with
325:
1400:
1396:
1357:
123:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, you can
15:
1068:
in which reliable persons, such as TV critics or reviewers,
938:
902:
866:
696:
242:
222:
198:
174:
119:, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to
1493:
IMDB is not "highly regarded" by Knowledge (XXG). Under
1083:, and this includes the plot summary. As indicated by
894:
WikiProject Animation - American animation work group
127:
the article attached to this page, help out with the
534:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
429:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
324:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
969:, our collaboration to improve, create, and update
1430:I think what RichJenkins was trying to say was:
1767:C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
990:For questions about, or to make suggestions for
1782:Unknown-importance American television articles
653:. To improve this article, please refer to the
1772:Unknown-importance American animation articles
1652:Unknown-importance Computer animation articles
8:
1612:C-Class Animation articles of Low-importance
1637:Low-importance Animated television articles
548:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Science Fiction
1622:Low-importance American animation articles
984:To comment about this article, select the
724:
585:
480:
375:
270:
47:
833:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject United States
1742:Low-importance Episode coverage articles
1787:American television task force articles
1717:Low-importance science fiction articles
1642:Animated television work group articles
726:
587:
482:
377:
272:
49:
19:
1657:Computer animation work group articles
1627:American animation work group articles
663:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Television
1762:Low-importance United States articles
141:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Animation
7:
1797:Unknown-importance Colorado articles
1777:C-Class American television articles
1747:Episode coverage task force articles
1722:WikiProject Science Fiction articles
1632:C-Class Animated television articles
786:This article is within the scope of
639:This article is within the scope of
551:Template:WikiProject Science Fiction
528:This article is within the scope of
443:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Holidays
423:This article is within the scope of
318:This article is within the scope of
113:This article is within the scope of
1647:C-Class Computer animation articles
1617:C-Class American animation articles
38:It is of interest to the following
1807:WikiProject United States articles
1732:Low-importance television articles
1667:Low-importance South Park articles
836:Template:WikiProject United States
338:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Comedy
210:the Animated television work group
14:
1737:C-Class Episode coverage articles
1607:Low-importance Animation articles
234:the Computer animation work group
186:the American animation work group
1712:C-Class science fiction articles
1702:Low-importance Holidays articles
950:
914:
878:
773:
763:
728:
626:
616:
589:
515:
505:
484:
410:
400:
379:
305:
295:
274:
100:
90:
51:
20:
1752:WikiProject Television articles
1294:Crack Baby Athletic Association
853:This article has been rated as
708:the Episode coverage task force
683:This article has been rated as
666:Template:WikiProject Television
568:This article has been rated as
463:This article has been rated as
358:This article has been rated as
161:This article has been rated as
1757:C-Class United States articles
1687:Low-importance Comedy articles
1677:WikiProject Animation articles
1672:South Park task force articles
1563:The episode parodies the film
930:American television task force
144:Template:WikiProject Animation
1:
1802:WikiProject Colorado articles
1707:WikiProject Holidays articles
1587:22:34, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
1557:22:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
1436:" And indeed, that's what he
1419:22:57, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
1377:21:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
1333:19:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
1317:20:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
1280:Editors add reviews from the
1259:14:30, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
1236:14:00, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
1206:12:14, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
1185:05:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
1156:13:12, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
1138:02:46, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
1116:01:34, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
1097:03:57, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
963:This article is supported by
927:This article is supported by
891:This article is supported by
705:This article is supported by
542:and see a list of open tasks.
446:Template:WikiProject Holidays
437:and see a list of open tasks.
332:and see a list of open tasks.
251:This article is supported by
231:This article is supported by
207:This article is supported by
183:This article is supported by
1529:22:26, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
1727:C-Class television articles
1692:WikiProject Comedy articles
1662:C-Class South Park articles
531:WikiProject Science Fiction
341:Template:WikiProject Comedy
1823:
1602:C-Class Animation articles
1166:correcting any of this.
859:project's importance scale
689:project's importance scale
574:project's importance scale
523:Speculative fiction portal
469:project's importance scale
364:project's importance scale
167:project's importance scale
1792:C-Class Colorado articles
1697:C-Class Holidays articles
1066:must be secondary sources
946:
910:
874:
852:
789:WikiProject United States
758:
704:
682:
611:
567:
500:
462:
395:
357:
290:
254:the South Park task force
250:
230:
206:
182:
160:
85:
46:
1573:via a device that opens
1001:We invite you to join us
971:Knowledge (XXG) articles
794:United States of America
554:science fiction articles
1682:C-Class Comedy articles
131:, or contribute to the
943:
907:
871:
839:United States articles
701:
642:WikiProject Television
247:
227:
203:
179:
28:This article is rated
1218:, for example, cites
1126:policy and guidelines
1060:, which is a form of
942:
906:
870:
700:
657:for the type of work.
246:
226:
202:
178:
116:WikiProject Animation
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1477:WP:Assume Good Faith
1043:No Original Research
966:WikiProject Colorado
781:United States portal
426:WikiProject Holidays
1473:No personal attacks
1363:The Huffington Post
1344:Assuming Good Faith
996:project's talk page
807:Articles Requested!
669:television articles
651:join the discussion
647:television programs
1104:deeply unwelcoming
1070:explicitly mention
944:
908:
872:
702:
321:WikiProject Comedy
248:
228:
204:
180:
147:Animation articles
34:content assessment
1547:comment added by
1501:is a part of its
1409:comment added by
1175:comment added by
1062:original research
1016:
1015:
1012:
1011:
1008:
1007:
992:Colorado articles
979:State of Colorado
922:Television portal
723:
722:
719:
718:
634:Television portal
584:
583:
580:
579:
479:
478:
475:
474:
449:Holidays articles
374:
373:
370:
369:
269:
268:
265:
264:
1814:
1577:between worlds.
1559:
1503:Reliable Sources
1471:, in particular
1421:
1282:reliable sources
1187:
1004:
987:
982:
960:
955:
954:
953:
924:
919:
918:
888:
886:Animation portal
883:
882:
841:
840:
837:
834:
831:
783:
778:
777:
776:
767:
760:
759:
754:
751:
732:
725:
671:
670:
667:
664:
661:
655:style guidelines
636:
631:
630:
620:
613:
612:
607:
604:
602:Episode coverage
593:
586:
556:
555:
552:
549:
546:
525:
520:
519:
509:
502:
501:
496:
488:
481:
451:
450:
447:
444:
441:
420:
415:
414:
404:
397:
396:
391:
383:
376:
346:
345:
342:
339:
336:
315:
310:
309:
299:
292:
291:
286:
278:
271:
149:
148:
145:
142:
139:
110:
108:Animation portal
105:
104:
94:
87:
86:
81:
78:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
1822:
1821:
1817:
1816:
1815:
1813:
1812:
1811:
1592:
1591:
1542:
1539:
1537:Natalie Portman
1469:Civility policy
1453:What I did was
1404:
1170:
1163:
1108:207.181.228.210
1072:the reference.
1025:inline citation
1021:
999:
985:
974:
958:Colorado portal
956:
951:
949:
920:
913:
884:
877:
838:
835:
832:
829:
828:
827:
813:Become a Member
779:
774:
772:
752:
738:
668:
665:
662:
659:
658:
632:
625:
605:
599:
553:
550:
547:
545:Science Fiction
544:
543:
536:science fiction
521:
514:
494:
492:Science Fiction
448:
445:
442:
439:
438:
418:Holidays portal
416:
409:
389:
344:Comedy articles
343:
340:
337:
334:
333:
311:
304:
284:
146:
143:
140:
137:
136:
106:
99:
79:
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
1820:
1818:
1810:
1809:
1804:
1799:
1794:
1789:
1784:
1779:
1774:
1769:
1764:
1759:
1754:
1749:
1744:
1739:
1734:
1729:
1724:
1719:
1714:
1709:
1704:
1699:
1694:
1689:
1684:
1679:
1674:
1669:
1664:
1659:
1654:
1649:
1644:
1639:
1634:
1629:
1624:
1619:
1614:
1609:
1604:
1594:
1593:
1590:
1589:
1538:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1445:
1444:
1443:
1442:
1423:
1422:
1336:
1335:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1209:
1208:
1162:
1159:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1130:TriiipleThreat
1119:
1118:
1020:
1017:
1014:
1013:
1010:
1009:
1006:
1005:
989:
983:
962:
961:
945:
935:
934:
926:
925:
909:
899:
898:
890:
889:
873:
863:
862:
855:Low-importance
851:
845:
844:
842:
826:
825:
820:
815:
810:
803:
801:Template Usage
797:
785:
784:
768:
756:
755:
753:Low‑importance
733:
721:
720:
717:
716:
713:Low-importance
703:
693:
692:
685:Low-importance
681:
675:
674:
672:
638:
637:
621:
609:
608:
606:Low‑importance
594:
582:
581:
578:
577:
570:Low-importance
566:
560:
559:
557:
540:the discussion
527:
526:
510:
498:
497:
495:Low‑importance
489:
477:
476:
473:
472:
465:Low-importance
461:
455:
454:
452:
435:the discussion
422:
421:
405:
393:
392:
390:Low‑importance
384:
372:
371:
368:
367:
360:Low-importance
356:
350:
349:
347:
330:the discussion
317:
316:
300:
288:
287:
285:Low‑importance
279:
267:
266:
263:
262:
259:Low-importance
249:
239:
238:
229:
219:
218:
215:Low-importance
205:
195:
194:
191:Low-importance
181:
171:
170:
163:Low-importance
159:
153:
152:
150:
112:
111:
95:
83:
82:
80:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1819:
1808:
1805:
1803:
1800:
1798:
1795:
1793:
1790:
1788:
1785:
1783:
1780:
1778:
1775:
1773:
1770:
1768:
1765:
1763:
1760:
1758:
1755:
1753:
1750:
1748:
1745:
1743:
1740:
1738:
1735:
1733:
1730:
1728:
1725:
1723:
1720:
1718:
1715:
1713:
1710:
1708:
1705:
1703:
1700:
1698:
1695:
1693:
1690:
1688:
1685:
1683:
1680:
1678:
1675:
1673:
1670:
1668:
1665:
1663:
1660:
1658:
1655:
1653:
1650:
1648:
1645:
1643:
1640:
1638:
1635:
1633:
1630:
1628:
1625:
1623:
1620:
1618:
1615:
1613:
1610:
1608:
1605:
1603:
1600:
1599:
1597:
1588:
1584:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1567:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1558:
1554:
1550:
1546:
1536:
1530:
1526:
1522:
1518:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1456:
1452:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1439:
1435:
1433:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1420:
1416:
1412:
1411:76.119.76.228
1408:
1402:
1398:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1374:
1370:
1365:
1364:
1359:
1355:
1354:
1349:
1348:The A.V. Club
1345:
1341:
1334:
1330:
1326:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1297:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1278:
1276:
1272:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1242:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1207:
1203:
1199:
1194:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1177:76.119.76.228
1174:
1167:
1160:
1158:
1157:
1153:
1149:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1078:
1075:In addition,
1073:
1071:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1050:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1039:Verifiability
1036:
1035:
1031:, published,
1030:
1026:
1018:
1002:
997:
993:
980:
977:
972:
968:
967:
959:
948:
941:
937:
936:
932:
931:
923:
917:
912:
905:
901:
900:
896:
895:
887:
881:
876:
869:
865:
864:
860:
856:
850:
847:
846:
843:
830:United States
824:
821:
819:
816:
814:
811:
809:
808:
804:
802:
799:
798:
795:
791:
790:
782:
771:
769:
766:
762:
761:
757:
750:
746:
742:
737:
736:United States
734:
731:
727:
714:
711:(assessed as
710:
709:
699:
695:
694:
690:
686:
680:
677:
676:
673:
656:
652:
648:
644:
643:
635:
629:
624:
622:
619:
615:
614:
610:
603:
598:
595:
592:
588:
575:
571:
565:
562:
561:
558:
541:
537:
533:
532:
524:
518:
513:
511:
508:
504:
503:
499:
493:
490:
487:
483:
470:
466:
460:
457:
456:
453:
436:
432:
428:
427:
419:
413:
408:
406:
403:
399:
398:
394:
388:
385:
382:
378:
365:
361:
355:
352:
351:
348:
331:
327:
323:
322:
314:
313:Comedy portal
308:
303:
301:
298:
294:
293:
289:
283:
280:
277:
273:
260:
257:(assessed as
256:
255:
245:
241:
240:
236:
235:
225:
221:
220:
216:
213:(assessed as
212:
211:
201:
197:
196:
192:
189:(assessed as
188:
187:
177:
173:
172:
168:
164:
158:
155:
154:
151:
134:
130:
126:
122:
118:
117:
109:
103:
98:
96:
93:
89:
88:
84:
77:
73:
69:
65:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1564:
1549:84.110.17.43
1543:— Preceding
1540:
1515:
1489:
1454:
1450:
1437:
1431:
1429:
1405:— Preceding
1391:
1361:
1351:
1337:
1298:
1285:
1279:
1273:. Why can't
1267:
1219:
1198:82.45.125.47
1192:
1171:— Preceding
1168:
1164:
1144:
1074:
1069:
1065:
1051:
1032:
1022:
994:, go to our
965:
928:
892:
854:
818:Project Talk
806:
787:
706:
684:
640:
569:
529:
464:
424:
359:
319:
252:
232:
208:
184:
162:
114:
40:WikiProjects
1579:Nightscream
1521:Nightscream
1369:Nightscream
1325:Richjenkins
1309:Nightscream
1251:Richjenkins
1228:Nightscream
1148:Nightscream
1089:Nightscream
986:New section
1596:Categories
988:tab above.
973:about the
745:Television
660:Television
597:Television
133:discussion
129:open tasks
76:South Park
68:Television
1575:wormholes
1455:speculate
1388:The Onion
1353:The Onion
1286:available
1284:that are
1085:WP:TVPLOT
1081:WP:TRIVIA
1058:synthesis
1047:Synthesis
1034:secondary
741:Animation
138:Animation
121:animation
59:Animation
1545:unsigned
1499:WP:USERG
1495:WP:USERG
1407:unsigned
1173:unsigned
1029:reliable
749:Colorado
440:Holidays
431:holidays
387:Holidays
72:Computer
64:American
1517:media."
1384:AV Club
1271:my part
1161:An "B"?
1077:trivial
857:on the
687:on the
572:on the
467:on the
362:on the
165:on the
30:C-class
1571:Asgard
1340:WP:COI
1305:WP:AGF
1301:WP:COI
1224:be you
1045:, and
823:Alerts
335:Comedy
326:comedy
282:Comedy
36:scale.
1027:of a
1583:talk
1566:Thor
1553:talk
1525:talk
1491:WP."
1475:and
1415:talk
1401:IMDB
1397:NPOV
1373:talk
1329:talk
1313:talk
1255:talk
1232:talk
1220:five
1202:talk
1193:only
1181:talk
1152:talk
1134:talk
1112:talk
1093:talk
1049:.
976:U.S.
125:edit
1438:did
1360:or
1358:IGN
1277:?
1275:you
1128:.--
849:Low
679:Low
564:Low
459:Low
354:Low
157:Low
1598::
1585:)
1555:)
1527:)
1432:An
1417:)
1392:An
1375:)
1331:)
1315:)
1290:1%
1257:)
1234:)
1216:1%
1204:)
1183:)
1154:)
1136:)
1114:)
1095:)
1041:,
998:.
747:/
743:/
739::
715:).
600::
261:).
217:).
193:).
74:/
70:/
66:/
62::
1581:(
1551:(
1523:(
1514:"
1488:"
1428:"
1413:(
1371:(
1327:(
1311:(
1253:(
1230:(
1200:(
1179:(
1150:(
1132:(
1110:(
1091:(
1003:!
981:.
933:.
897:.
861:.
691:.
576:.
471:.
366:.
237:.
169:.
135:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
