Talk:Stench and Stenchibility

Okay, I think there valid goofs as they break continuity or realism. My first one about it breaking natural response I suppose that counts as under humor, but I still think it should be included. My second one, I think its a serious breech of Continuity to have a dead character alive, normally in this show if they come back, they give an explanation why. So him just appearing out of the blue is a breech. My final point is what happened, defied what he said, and that sort of error is included for other episodes. I have to leave now, so I won't reply to your response till later today.


 * They are not mistakes "made by the episode". Plots holes, [1] for example, are goofs, but bad storytelling isn't a goof. Sanfazer (talk) 17:02, 30 August 2013 (CEST).


 * 1. ^ Plot holes. Sanfazer (talk) 21:10, 30 August 2013 (CEST).

Okay lets go through them, the first (her not being able to tell bad smells from good, due to never learning) is physiologically inaccurate. The Second (Roberto being alive when he's already died,) I think that counts as a plot hole, as it breeches continuity, and its not for a joke, he is simply alive again, doesn't that count as an error? My Third one (Randy claiming there was no prize for the tap dancing contest, when at the end there is a prize) surely counts as an error, as goes against what he previously said. I would like to add another potential goof to the this list, the fact Bender casually dances on top of people with them receiving no damage, despite weighing so much he should flatten them, shouldn't that count? --86.157.186.168 17:35, 30 August 2013 (CEST)


 * Whatever mistakes Marianne and Randy make, they are not goofs. Characters can be wrong.
 * Roberto's appearance is not a plot hole in this episode. It may be a plot hole on the show.
 * As for Bender dancing on top of the others, maybe he is not as heavy as we think he is.
 * There's almost always an explanation. It's a matter of using your imagination. Sanfazer (talk) 17:44, 30 August 2013 (CEST).
 * One thing we can do is acknowledge mistakes made by characters in the trivia sections. Sanfazer (talk) 17:47, 30 August 2013 (CEST).
 * Also, Roberto's return is already mentioned in the continuity section. Sanfazer (talk) 17:51, 30 August 2013 (CEST).

Fine I give up, I personally think these standards are confusing, but okay.--86.157.186.168 17:54, 30 August 2013 (CEST)


 * Here's something I think sums it up. If it could happen in a real-life situation, it's not a goof. Sanfazer (talk) 18:02, 30 August 2013 (CEST).