Table:Additional Info needs moderation

Discussion
I've been reading a lot of the newer episode "Additional Information" sections, and I see that a lot of these things are just squabbles between people. For example, someone puts something there (That probably shouldn't be), then there's an indented entry that's arguing this fact on how it can't be true. This type of discussion should be left in the Discussion Pages. Someone on the Staff should be watching these newer episodes for these types of situations because they don't belong there, they belong in the Discussion Pages.

Example: A Clockwork Origin page, the 3rd bullet under Additional Info - Trivia is the following: Professor Farnsworth's statement that his father wasn't actually his biological father would seem to imply that he is related to Fry through his mother.


 * Although, the milkman may have been Yancy's descendant. Farnsworth didn't seem to know he was related to the Philip J. Fry that was Yancy's son, although he was famous enough to be remembered in the 31st century.
 * We're talking about a thousand year span between the two. That's 30 generations between them. Unless EVERY descendant only had one child, it's likely there were hundreds of descendants, and only in the year 3000 was it down to one. Being the great^30 grandson of a famous person doesn't mean anything to anyone other than a genealogist.

This does not belong here. When I'm reading these topics, I expect concrete information. This is basically another user going "I don't like what you put here so I will contend it!" That doesn't belong in the article itself. Polantaris 07:04, 20 August 2010 (CEST)


 * I'd recommend you remove then. Add a reasonable entry in the summary.  And be done with it.  I was thinking of going through the new episodes' articles after the new season had been out for a bit, so the editing frenzy had died down and then remove and add and fiddle with whatever was required to tidy up the articles.  I'll admit they are kind of messy at the moment. --Sviptalk 10:16, 20 August 2010 (CEST)

Hi, I'll put this here, seems related;

There seems to be an increasing amount of numerology in the Additional Information e.g. 2-D Blacktop;

"The episode was originally supposed to be the second episode of its broadcast season. The Beast with a Billion Backs, which also features characters in two dimensions, is the second film. "Reincarnation", which, too, features characters in two dimensions, is the second segmented episode of the second run."

Is this relevant information? Numerology is highly subjective and the production of each episode can relate to dozens of numbers, if not hundreds, especially lower numbers.

Numerologists cherry-pick whichever numbers they want to infer a trend or relationship.

Why not highlight certain grammatical words that are used? Or indeed, the frequency or recurrence of individual letters?

I hoped to highlight numerology by appending to the above fact that 'Television is a two dimensional medium.' This was quickly removed for 'not being relevant.'

I would suggest that all numerological facts are irrelevant unless a deliberate system by the producers can be proven.


 * It's just trivia.
 * Feel free to reinstate your addition and explain its relevance in the . Sanfazer: [ talk] 14:50, 6 December 2014 (CET).

I agree that it is trivia, but it is wholly irrelevant to episode production and broadcast.

If I provide a similar numerological connection to four random episodes of your choice would you agree to remove all such examples that have no clear, deliberate relation to production and broadcast?


 * Episode production and broadcast are not the point of the "Trivia" section.
 * I propose we have both this connection and the one you provide. Sanfazer: [ talk] 21:10, 6 December 2014 (CET).

Please do not reinstate 'Television is a two dimensional medium.' That was supposed to highlight (perhaps poorly) the arbitrary nonsense of numerology.

If the author of the quoted piece had simply linked the episodes that featured two dimensions then I would accept that as relevant, but he has gone out his way to crowbar in other random occurrences of the number two:

'supposed to be the second episode' 'the second film' 'second segmented episode of the second run'

Is the recurrence of an arbitrary number the sort of information that you want on an episode page?

This was maybe the fourth or fifth time I had noticed numerology in Additional Info, as I come across them in the future I will post them here. Like the original poster, I feel that additional info would benefit from some careful pruning.


 * I don't see why you wouldn't want this sort of information in an article. This bullet is simply stating a fact that people may find interesting. Sanfazer: [ talk] 22:58, 6 December 2014 (CET).

Are you the numerologist that added the quoted information, and other examples of numerology that I have read in Trivia?


 * I added this one yes. Sanfazer: [ talk] 00:12, 7 December 2014 (CET).

Took a while for me to twig. If only some random numbers could have alerted me...

I hope I wasn't too harsh, but I stand by what I have said.


 * No. Not at all.
 * Don't be afraid to . :) Sanfazer: [ talk] 00:52, 7 December 2014 (CET).