User:BradFraggle/Talk Archive 02

Archive of Brad's talk page.

Imaginary Uprights
Hi, Brad. Why was Imaginary Uprights blanked? — Scott (talk ) 07:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I merged the information in with the Uprights back when I cleaned-up The Song of the Cloud Forest characters because the term "Imaginary Uprights", as far as I could tell, was a made-up term for the animals' vision of the humans. For some reason I goofed and did put in the redirect. If you think this alternate version of the Uprights warants their own article, feel free to recreate it - but without a source for "Imaginary Uprights" I would rather see it be "Uprights (puppets)" or something like that. -- Brad D. (talk ) 08:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Book characters
Brad, all those characters you're moving to a new Book category already exist in a category created expressly for them. — Scott (talk ) 03:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well my goal was to move them out of Category:Sesame Street Characters while keeping them grouped as "sesame" - since we don't include characters only from the films (such as Miss Finch) or specials (such as Joe Marley), it seems odd to have characters only from books (such as Daisy) in there. -- Brad D. (talk ) 03:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Dude, please stop. We'd decided a long time ago that book characters still belong in the Sesame Characters category. Please stop doing this -- we're going to have to undo all of that. -- Danny (talk ) 03:15, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't know a discussion had been made on this subject. But why don't characters films or specials belong in the Sesame Characters category? I see Miss Finch or Lightning the reindeer as more of a Sesame Street character than Elmo's sister. If it is for characters from the Sesame "universe" it should be all of them. If it is for characters from the Sesame TV show it should only be them. It seems like an odd line is drawn as to what is/isn't a Sesame character here. Sorry for the extra work in reverting, if I was wrong, I just don't understand what makes, or doesn't, make someone "Sesame" now. -- Brad D. (talk ) 03:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think specials characters do belong in the SS Characters category. But that conversation should take place elsewhere. Generally, it should be noted that any large-scale changes should be discussed first so as to save us all from extra work later. — Scott (talk ) 03:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Ugh. I really wish you'd asked before you did that. You're a fantastic contributor, and you add all this great stuff -- but every once in a while, you get a wild hair to make some big category change, and then you just go ahead and do it without asking anybody. I ultimately agree with the way the Muppet Movie categories shook out, but it really wasn't in the wiki spirit to make such a sweeping change without even telling anybody what your plan was. You ended up creating category names that I don't think work, and I had to spend an hour this morning cleaning it all up and getting everything in its proper place.
 * Your question of why some characters are in one category and not others is a very good question. But it should be asked on Current events first, before you come up with your own answer and start moving stuff around.
 * So I'm going to ask you, please: Before you make any other category change of any kind -- especially huge sweeping ones like the ones you've done over the last couple days -- please post on Current events first. In fact, I'm going to propose that as a guideline from now on, that nobody can create or significantly alter a category without asking about it on Current events. I think we need a better system than the one we have now. -- Danny (talk ) 03:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Again, I'm sorry. After looking at the discussions to exclude movie characters and special characters I didn't think I was out of line for taking out the book characters would - in fact, based on the past precedents and reasoning I thought that was the desired set-up. As the characters, were never used again and tended to be isolated in a way from the larger 'universe', seemed to make a separate category worthwhile (at least for browsing), and were not featured in the show. Clearly there is a discrepancy on the definition and it should be brought up on Current Events or somewhere to discuss and define. I apologize for overstepping my bounds and getting carried away before getting a full "go-ahead" from the entire community. I try to bring up discussion on change, but when I get a burst of time/energy are there appears to be a clear and accepted decision, precedent or organizational standard used elsewhere in the wiki I get, well, "carried away" (such as last night, when I added to The Muppet Movie, while matching the form Dark Crystal had been using for 11-months). I apologize for this, and will from now on bring up all changes in formal discussion directly before instituting any change (and not waiting months to enact old discussions or concepts, or follow the form of other similar sections or decisions). Again I'm sorry for the extra work and stress – I didn't mean any harm. I'll stop moving stuff or organizing stuff with out a full discussion. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 03:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm sorry to get huffy; I know how easy it is to get carried away with a new wiki idea. I've done it myself. I think it'll help if we try the guideline that I suggested on Current events -- to talk about any category change before it happens. That way, it's not personal; it's just the system that we use. -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * This should be discussed in general, but there's never been any "rule" about seperating Sesame Street characters. For myself, I try to keep the one-off specials and movie characters seperate when possible, just because several such characters or puppets have sometimes been recycled on Sesame Street proper and I like to keep such a distinction clear (Board of Birds were all reused while Miss Finch was not, and so on, and I just kind of like to keep The Monkey King and so on and especially alternatue universe things like King Fred Cahrming, in a world where Baby Bear and Telly are brothers, seperate in some way). But that's mostly a personal thing for me which has come up for discussion in specific instances, and is certainly always worth discussing. Not a rule or trend or a reflection of consensus by any means. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC) 04:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And just a general friendly note, Brad. Just because something, like The Dark Crystal categorization thing, has been around a few months doesn't make it a "precedent." It just means either nobody noticed or nobody really knew what to do about it, and no discussion was raised to address how to deal with the issue. Just like pages which use "epsiode" or "Sal Manillia" aren't precedent, they just slipped through the cracks,. or reflect one or two user's idiosyncracies. :) -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Movie categories
Hey, Brad -- In general, our guidelines are that a category should either have articles or subcategories, but not both. I notice that you're adding a lot of movie categories right now that include both. The Muppet Treasure Island category says that it's only for subcategories, but you've added some articles to it... -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And now I see that you've created the Movie Categories category. Can we all talk about this before you go further with it? I'm not sure that the structure that you're creating makes sense. -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * My idea was to group articles by production using categories. If someone is interested in The Muppet Movie or The Dark Crystal they should be able to find all the articles on topics uniquly and directly related to the said production easily in one spot. In doing research on The Muppet Christmas Carol I hate having to go all over the wiki to find products, productions, and articles specifically tied to the production. I know we don't like mixing sub-cats and articles but it seems silly right now to create Muppets Take Manhattan Culture to house 1 article (Manhattan Melodies) or Dark Crystal Documentaries just for World of the Dark Crystal; but it also seems silly to have to not categorized in a way to associte them with said production. I didn't think I was out of line, since Category:Dark Crystal has been in a similar mixed state of sub-cats and 4 misc. articles since January (over 11-months) and no one has objected. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * That does make sense. It occurs to me that it might be easier just to turn Muppet Movies into the top category, rather than "Movie Categories". I'll show you what I mean... -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * My gripe is that it should only be done if there's no alternative. I agree it works with Manhattan, and I never really liked the Dark Crystal set-up (though in fact now there's enough, with the developments, for a "Dark Crystal Productions" or something). But it just always seems silly to have the parent production subcategorized, when it's easier to just link the text at the top of the category, and we always include links to related categories (and when we don't, we should) as See Alsos anyway. I also don't think Dickens, Stevenson, and other literary stuff should be dumped in. They're related, but it seems to me it opens the door for too much mixed bag stuff; since one could just as easily categorize Jerry Juhl in Muppet Christmas Carol as Dickens. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I just made The Muppet Movie as a subcat of Muppet Movies, to show what I was talking about. But I should probably stop messing around, since now there's two of us working in different directions. That's why I was saying let's talk about this before we do all the work of changing everything, because it's possible that then we'll have to redo it all. -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, sorry. I just took a few out from Carol and Oz, I didn't mean to add to the problem. I'll leave it alone, I need to panic about other things anyway. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I see what you did Danny and I like that. And I buy the Dickens/Stevenson thing, Andrew (just like we don't put Kermit in characters for every film, there has to be a line drawn as to what is/isn't associated). But with things such as "Inside the Labyrinth" or "Frogs, Pigs and Humbug: Unwrapping a New Holiday Classic" it seems odd not to have them associated in a way with their production in some way. It would be silly to create "Very Merry Muppet Christmas Songs" just for Everyone Matters but it also seems wrong for someone looking for things assocated with VMX to have to find that one article by diving into "Muppet Songs" or having it as an awkard tacked on "see also". -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:52, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Santa Baby is also in Very Merry Christmas... -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I moved the categories to Muppet Movies. The Dark Crystal and Labyrinth are their own categories. -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 13:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks good. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 18:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Humans
I'm just curious as to what your reasons were for removing the link to "Uprights" from "Silly Creatures" and vice versa. I kinda like the idea of linking together different names for the human species (and now that I think about it, Peeps would qualify too). But I'm sure you had a good reason -- what was it? :) --GrantHarding 23:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Henson Kids Cameos
I didn't want to put this on a talkbox, since I'm not sure how answerable this is right now and there's still plenty of talkboxes floating with discussion stalled or semi-abandoned, but according to the ever-fallible IMDb listing, Lisa Henson is one of the beauty pageant contestants in The Muppet Movie. As always with IMDb, there's no source, no mention of it anywhere else, and while I'm still less certain of the "Prince Kermit" thing, that makes more sense as an assumption given that there were only two other live actors in the special, whereas with a movie with tons of extras, and with such a vague title, it's harder to be sure. Thought I'd let you know, though, should you come across any further hints, or next time you rewatch the film itself, if you think you can spot her (since, on the whole, drawing conclusions from images where a potential can be pinpointed tends to work better for us than just a written claim or a broad crowd scene), assuming we have any reference for how she looked circa 1979. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 21:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I just looked a the scene, and none of the 5 contestants really look much like Lisa. Now I am going off pictures of her between the ages 10-17 and 35+. So I'm not going to say she wasn't there, without seeing an exact picture of what a 19 year old Lisa would look like. But I'm going to say it's not likely. The only places I've been able to find it listed or mentioned is on imdb (or sites that draw information from it, such as Amazon). So without any further proof, I'm gonna say not likely. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 00:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I did read that Heather Henson played a young patient at the dentist in Little Shop of Horrors... is this true? -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 00:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I didn't believe it myself, but I thought I'd park it here, in case someone else mentions it, so we know the source. As for Little Shop of Horrors, now that one is true, and verifiable by both credits *and* image. I have it in my NetFlix queue, and hope to grab that scene after Christmas (and also Mak Wilson as a streetcorner singer). She's also apparently in John Landis' Spies Like Us. Quite an interesting mini-career. I'd also really like to be able to check the "Prince Kermit" thing, but there's at least a chance of that one, and we're noting that it's not our claim. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 00:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Postage?
I like the new theme categories, Brad, but why "Postage" as opposed to mail? Since the former has a connotation more directly tied to stamps. Even Wikipedia uses mail when discussing the topic. That, or Postal System, if need be. Postage just sounds odd. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 03:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I have no idea why I choose "Postage" over "Mail". If you think changing it I would be better, I would not mind. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 03:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The three themes I created today (for military, prehistoric and postage) I had thought of a while back but just got around to doing now. I'm also thinking about a "Farm" or "Farming" one too (but I'm not sure if I'll do that one tonight or not). -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 03:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, actually, I thought Postage was an unusual term to use too, but was going to let it go. <font color="Blue">George B. ''(<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The more I thought about it, the more right you are. I'm switching it over to "mail". -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Goat
Hey, Brad, quick question. Did you contact James Wojtal about the goat image? Since if you recall the Michael Schupbach situation, portfolio sites are the only verboten area for image gathering, unless the designer has given us permission, to prevent a repeat. Just a reminder. Wojtal has edited the Wiki himself in the past, so it's *probably* okay, but it might not be a bad idea to send an e-mail if you haven't, just so he knows. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, my bad. I'll shoot Wojtal an e-mail, but if you want to remove it until "cleared" then go ahead. I totally forgot about the whole portfolio issue (boy is my face red). Sorry. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 05:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Not a biggie, necessarily. That's the only time we've actually gotten into trouble for being image pirates, though (since almost everything else falls under fair use and all), so it's pretty clear that's an area where we need to be a little more guarded (that and Muppet Central). It also increases the likelihood of people working with us. That's the only image taken from his site, so if he says yes, no harm done. If he says no, it's easy to remove. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 05:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanksgiving Picture
Hey Brad! I was just curious where our nice Main Page picture came from. I hope its not something obvious now that I ask :) --Cantus Rock 07:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The Muppet's spoof of Norman Rockwell's "Freedom From Want", which is what the picture is, was made for, and featured on, a 1981 cover of the Saturday Evening Post. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 08:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sweet. --Cantus Rock 08:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Digital Muppets
Nice idea, Brad, but just so you know, Rhubarb, Sam, and the Twiddlebugs are not done via Waldo. They were all animated by Magnetic Dreams, as basic CG characters. No puppeteer input to control the movements at all. On the other hand, Computer and the other Elmo's World characters would fit. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 15:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I'd missed your category description. I'm tired. Plus, I'd just had that discussion with Danny about it. Anyway, I get it now. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 15:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I created it as a complement to "Muppet Characters" (puppets), "Human Characters" (people) and "live animals" (animals) for digital/animated characters in Muppet productions (not including those in inserts that are in their own "animated world"). Originally I thought of just Waldo-controlled Muppets, but thought any digital character integrated into the Muppet world would be fun and I didn't want to include something like Frances, which is all digital puppets in an all-digital world.
 * Regarding the Sesame Christmas Carol characters: They are traditionally animated (if we want the category to only have Waldo-Muppets we can cut them out); but as for them being done by Magnetic Dreams, they are in a Muppet production (I mean one is a grouch), they have the Muppet look and we established with Muppet v. Creature that it is not always about where the character was made, but rather the role, relationship and design/look. If Muppets can only come from JHC and Disney alright, but I think Sesame Street puppet and digital characters (excluding independent insert animations and "celebrity" guests) are Muppets too (even if JHC didn't make them for Sesame Workshop. My intention was to group digital characters integrated into Muppet productions. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 20:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah. I'm on the fence, I understood your explanation sort of, but Scott already took it out on those he noticed, since he felt, and somewhat justifiably, that "Digital Muppets" is misleading in these cases, implying Henson involvement. The Muppet vs. Creature did prioritize aesthetics, but you yourself pointed out that shouldn't apply to Puppet Up! characters, and in this case, applying it to completely non-Henson characters, I can see how it's iffy. Creature Shop was at least Henson; in the case of Magnetic Dreams, while I definitely agree that there's the "aesthetic", it's also not unlike the Leonie Löwenherz situation, a puppet character who appeared in a Sesame Street co-production but was never designed by the Muppet Workshop and developed more or less independently (the big difference here being, of course, the fact that obviously Sesame Workshop had involvement). Since it's clear at least three of us (you, me, and Scott) have opinions on this so far, it might be worth bringing it up in the category talk page. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal  (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 20:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Laugh Pad
Wow. What a find. Though looking at the images, it may be just as well that it never aired. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * After watching the YouTube clip I could care less what happened to it (way too baby-ish for my liking). But I can't take all the credit for finding it - my RSS reader brought the news right too my desktop via Muppet Newsflash. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Unfinished Late Night
Hey Brad, I saw how you've categorized Delbert Kastle and the other Late Night Buffet characters. I see how it was a response to our discussion on Category talk:Unfinished Characters, but unless we have evidence to suggest that Late Night Buffet has officially been abandoned or shoved into the vault, it seems misleading to list the characters as "Unfinished" while the project is "Still In Development." Unfinished in general basically makes a historical distinction, of projects or characters which either never aired or were never completed and to date, are done. For a project still indicated as being in the planning stages, this seems a bit disngenuous. I made a slight clarification to the category description (changing unaired to "never aired.") So, either a Late Night Buffet category, or a "Henson Puppets" category would be better; we discussed the latter re [[Category:Puppet Up! Characters], but since at the time it was the only project we had any characters for, it didn't seem worth doing. Now, it probably does. -- [[User:Aleal|<font color="Blue">Andrew Leal ]] (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Initially I put them in there, because at the time there was nowhere else (and putting the character in "In Development" seemed odd) and at the time they are part of an unaired pilot. (And I see, and agree with, your point of "Unfinished" being more of a "historical" thing not a "being worked on" thing). I later added a "Late Night Buffet Character" category tags to them, so keeping them in "Unfinished" is not needed as they have a home. I would be fine with putting "Puppet Up! Characters", "Late Night Buffet Characters" and any others in a "Henson Puppet Characters" category or something (maybe just putting the two categories in as sub-cats would be fine for now). -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I took out the Unfinished tag for now (if the pilot(s) never air, it can be put back in, or at some point, I might talk to Danny again about characters in unaired pilots being "unfinished"; I wasn't big on it at the time, and it did seem to cause some confusion). You can either create a Late Night Buffet category or we can do the Henson Puppet Characters thing. The fact that TBS is airing the Puppet Up! special does potentially indicate that they're merely biding their time re Buffet. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, and as a random aside, as you may have noticed, we finally filled in Iowa, and I'm checking up on an appearance with an Arkansas senator. So we might still get all 50 states yet! -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Sesame Street Babies
Man, Amazon really needs to update their indexing to better categorize this stuff. I first came up on the Too Big for Bottles and then found Too Big for Diapers from there, but that was it. Well, I guess that's the good thing about the Wiki --- we can do this category stuff better... <font color="Blue">George B. ''(<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 12:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Galley-oh-hoop-hoop
Hi Brad, do you have any input for the source on Talk:Galley-oh-hoop-hoop? — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 16:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

World of the Dark Crystal
Yon Brad! May I presume that you have the Dark Crystal DVD? Because we could use some images of Fred Nihda and others (a better picture for Lyle Conway's page wouldn't hurt either). -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, you may presume that I have Dark Crystal on DVD. I'll see what I can do in getting some pictures. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Henson Films
Hi, Brad! I know we agreed to start adding Muppet and Creature films for Oz and Henson, but I kinda think that should still be limited to theatricals only for the latter category. Since really, Henson directed a ton of Muppet stuff for television, compared to the theatricals. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 01:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Well including all of Henson's theatrical films, tele-films, and independent films (Muppet or non-Muppet) would only add about an additional 6-7 articles to the current limiting of just theatrical films, non-Muppet tele-films, and non-muppet independent films (also Shrinkel and Stretchel is a Muppet independent film...so, umm..). I think keeping Muppet commercials and any TV show episodes out is alright but I fell that some Muppet tele-films (such as Emmet Otter or Muppetland) are more notable to Henson's body of directorial work than some of his recurring Sesame Street inserts. Commercials, episodes and even videos compilations are different, but Henson's films (theatrical, tele-, or independent) are all his films (regardless of Muppet/non-Muppet) and I thought that's what the debate early cleared up - Muppet films were okay here now, I wasn't aware it was just "Muppet theatrical films" but if that was/is the consensus I'll except the ruling. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 01:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The thing is, I'm concerned all the Muppet specials would overwhelm his independent stuff, which is the main point of a seperate category from Muppet specials; The Cube was the only purely TV thing there (since the inserts were shot as films), and that's a special case. I mean, if you'll noticed, I'd carefully rewritten the category definitions of both Henson and Oz precisely to prevent this sort of situation, carefully limiting them. Otherwise, I'm inclined to just take the Muppet/Creature stuff out of both Henson and Oz. Sorry if I seem cranky, by the way (I'm way behind on a more important academic thing, and really shouldn't be here), but I don't really see a benefit to flooding the category in such a way. And Shrinkel and Stretchel ain't independent in that sense; it was an industrial film project, just like Muppet Meeting Films. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think including Muppet tele-films and independent film would overwhelm things; it basically would just be adding 7 things - Hey Cinderella!, The Frog Prince, The Muppet Musicians of Bremen, Emmet Otter's Jug-Band Christmas, Muppet Meeting Films, Rocky Mountain Holiday and The Tale of the Bunny Picnic. The rest of Jim's directorial work is either already in the category already or is small stuff like commercials, TV episodes or other works that are clearly not films. "Tele-films, independent films and theatrical films" (Muppet or non-Muppet) I think is a clear and balanced line. I don't think things would become unbalanced (but if we included TV episodes and pilots, commercials, video inserts and such it would). However limiting it to all films Jim directed I think would be fine. But again, if the general consensus is otherwise I'll accept that. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * GAh. There's alreayd Muppet specials category and a listing on Henson's page. What's the point? You know what, when I get a chance from trying to finish this bally proposal, I'll just yank out all puppet stuff period on both. That will make it pretty clearcut. Sorry to sound so frustrated, I've got other problems going on right now, but really Brad, I triesd to make the dxefiniteions as cloear as possible, and it wouldn't hurt to begin this as a talk question on the category before making changes. Impulsiveness is fine and good, but sometimes it's also frustrating... -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal  (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'm feeling better this morning. Apologies for losing it on the Wiki (school stress, health, lack of sleep, and writing assignments dealing with psychological breakdowns in film melodrama all ganged up on me). That said, it still wouldn't hurt to bring things like this up on the talk page first, so everyone else is aware of what you're doing and why. Peter noted the same thing regarding the attractions moves. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 18:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry for jumping the gun on things. When the discussion on Frank Oz film's said "'Henson Films' should have all of the films that Henson directed" I wasn't aware there was a more specific guide for what a "film" was (I should have checked). I'll try to be more collaborative and open before dumping articles into a category. Oh, and don't worry about "losing it"...we all have days like that. I just hope you're feeling better. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 01:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

All rise
Aw, I was hoping Big Bird's Court would be, like, the Sesame version of Judge Judy. Oh, well. -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Katie Couric and Motown
I found this press release regarding the images you uploaded. — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll start a page up. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The Daily Show
You're quick -- the episode hasn't even finished yet! — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I post 'em when I sees 'em. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Good work, sir. And now, your moment of zen. — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Halloween
Hey, Brad. While I agree the stuff you added is Halloweeny, it raises a problem, as now Category:Halloween is a hodgepodge, with categories and articles spread together, and not in a particularly coherent way. Is there a way we can fix that? A Halloween References category or something, for example, would take care of a few. Unless your goal is the reverse, to delete all the categories and leave every item in together. Which I'm not so sure would work here. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 20:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Well the category was a hodgepodge before I started adding stuff (about 6 sub-categories and 5 loose articles). A "Halloween References" sub-category could be done but still would leave some loose and random things: Costume Craze Muppet costumes, Countdown to Halloween, Muppet Halloween Special, Muppet Monster Adventure and The Muppets' Haunted House. Right now there are 53 Halloween articles total. The only real substantial subcategory is "Episodes" (with 13 articles) and "characters" (with 10 article). Unlike "Christmas" which was getting huge and out of control, I'm not sure if the subcategories to compartmentalize everything up is necessary for Halloween. And I don't really like having "Halloween Stage Shows" with just one article (that seems pointless) and "Misc. Halloween" seems dumb too.
 * Christmas has 2 stray articles right now and Birthdays also has a mixture of sub-categories and articles. All the other holiday categories don't have subcategories and just mix all the related articles together. I think Halloween could survive without all the subcategories and work fine. But I'm not going to change anything if I'm the only one. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 21:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Just so long as I understand what you're doing. It's mainly episodes I wasn't sure about merging. And in general, the holiday categorization needs to be fixed, yeah. Part of it's because people forget there are subcategories, when applicable, and just add them. Birthdays definitely is small enough that it needs to be all one category. I think Christmas should stay all categories, though. The loose articles are two references and one merchandise item, and I'm sure there's a way to clean those up (there's more Christmas references, for example, from It's a Wonderful Life to Rankin/Bass). -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 21:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see you're already dismantling the Christmas categories. At this point, I'd suggest raising the issue at Category talk:Holidays, so we have a clearer idea what you're proposing, and can have a wider discussion of category cleanup. I tend to agree with Danny on this, that a bunch of subcategories and articles crammed together looks messy and disorganized (in cases like Birthdays, several of the items could be put in existing subcats, or it could all be merged). It also helps to have a clearer definition of exactly why The Twilight Zone is Halloween-related (i.e. specify that any general horror or even just non-alien eeerie scifi will be included; I personally don't consider Twilight Zone to be especially horror, and Psycho and possibly The Birds aside, Hitchcock primarily did mysteries and thrillers). -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 21:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm actually gonna bring up some discussion on the Holidays talk page now. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 22:01, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Today on Muppet Wiki
Hey Brad, thanks for helping us catch up! However, until Danny resurfaces from the ether anyway, I'd appreciate it if you leave it to us admins. Peter and I have discussed our own ideas for what to put up there, and in particular, I have something in mind for tomorrow, and don't want you to beat me to the punch again! Thanks! -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 03:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

press release
Hey, Brad! Where can I find that press release you spoke of at Image talk:Sesame 1973.jpg? — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sadly, I can't link directly to the press kit anymore because Sony rearranged their press section and I can't find (or can't access) anything on "Sesame Street Old School" anymore (maybe Sesame Workshop's newer "Old School" press pages absorbed the content). However The Washinton Post picked it up and used the picture (complete with the "circa 1973" caption Sony provided). I guess that the press folks at Sony just had their facts wrong (not a first)...still, its a cool cast pic. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 05:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Jimmy Dean on Sullivan
Wow, where did you find this? — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 00:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It was in Dean's autobiography (Thirty Years of Sausage, Fifty Years of Ham: Jimmy Dean's Own Story by Jimmy Dean). I also got this picture and a bunch of insider information and quotes that I've added to The Jimmy Dean Show page. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D.  (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 00:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Nice job! — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 00:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Henson and Non-Henson
Now, you're confusing me again. The new category is fine, but what's up with Construction Site? Or are you planning to merge everything in Category:Muppet TV Shows with Henson Shows? That's confusing in light of that category's current content and definition, and there should be more discussion on our definitions in that case. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 17:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The world of Construction Site hasn't been developed on the Wiki yet. But are the characters from that universe Muppets or are they something else? If they are then put it back in Muppet TV shows. If they are not Muppets keep them in Henson TV shows. I wasn't sure if they were or weren't Muppets. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 20:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * According to Muppets vs Creatures, they're Muppets, based on the aesthetic argument we've been making, though in light of Puppet Up! discussions, that seems to be less than fully agreed upon months after the vote. But if they're not Muppets, they're Creatures. Currently, the Henson category is for oddities like Family Rules, weird live-action things. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 20:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Kermit's Name
Hi, Brad! On this article, you wrote, "Henson said Kermit was named after one of his childhood friends." Can you tell me where Henson said that? I'd like to source the article. — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 04:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, I can't recall where I got that from. I just ran some searches and couldn't pull anything up. But a lot of press articles and "the childhood friends" University site that note the fact as a trivia bit. But I wouldn't blindly trust those any further than I could throw them. If you want to remove/reword it go ahead. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 05:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Presskit Plagiarism
Hey, Brad! I just noticed the pages you created for the Puppet Up! people. Don't forget, if you're going to copy a presskit word for word, like on Patrick Bristow, to set it off in quotes or otherwise, and also to supply a link, so it's clear where the "official bio" comes from. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 22:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I got the bios from a promotional Puppet Up! e-mail (so I didn't have a link to the text). I thought I had put the "official bio" headings on them all, I guess I missed it on Bristow's page. Sorry about that. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 23:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Voting
Hey, Brad! Just a heads-up, you have two votes down on Main Page Picture Nominations (while multiple nominations are allowed from the same person, only one vote at a time). I'm assuming you probably want your vote to go to the hot dog (especially as someone just voted for Sesame Goes International, so that image is safe as well), but thought I'd check with you. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 21:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Whoops, sorry. I didn’t realize I had a vote on the page. I'll fix it. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 22:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, Brad? Why did you nominate a picture of a penis? -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 22:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It's actually one of the members of Frankie Frank and the Footers. But I will admit that it does look very much like a…um, well you said it. Maybe that's why I think those puppets' designs are so amusing. I wonder if Henson had that in mind when creating them… I mean, a hot dog puppet? Really, come on! -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 23:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Cantus Cove
Holy crap, that's amazing! How'd you know where to find it geographically? — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 01:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I found this article which gave me the idea to make the page. I did some Google searching, found some other site that mentioned the cove that gave the proximity to some Caspar "landmarks". I found where they were and then did some Google Earth searches to find them, read the map out and bam... I got a photo from above. It was a fun little hunt. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 01:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Nice work. I had just such a fun little hunt trying to find the location of the Einstein statue. So many weblogs have contrasting ideas about where it is. Anyway, I nominated Cantus Cove for Today on Muppet Wiki. — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 02:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Attention
Hey, Brad! Just a reminder, we're not simply adding pages to Category:Attention. The thing to do on The Fix-It Shop is to add the attention tag, and write an explanation on the talk page clearly detailing what sort of attention you think the article needs. -- <font color="Blue">Andrew Leal (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 13:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, sorry. I'm just starting to explore the "Attention" category. Hopefully I'll start tackling some of them soon. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 14:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Who needs Ventnor?
Hey Brad -- The Monopoly article is fantastic. The table is really clear and easy to follow, and the colors along the side look really cool. Putting the two versions on the same page makes a lot of sense, and makes for a fun comparison. The image of the Kermit money and the Big Bird money is really classy, and it looks great centered at the bottom there. An awesome page overall. I just put it on Today on Muppet Wiki... -- <font color="Blue">Danny (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 10:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Here, here -- fantastic! — <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 13:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Galley-o-hoop-hoop
Hey Brad, where does the bit about Martian Landing come from? Is there more information we could use for an article? -- <font color="Blue">Scott (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 16:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it was from the season 1 Muppet Morsels. -- <font color="Blue">Brad D. (<font color="Blue" size="1">talk ) 16:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)