Talk:Fry-Leela relationship

From The Infosphere, the Futurama Wiki
Revision as of 21:37, 8 September 2013 by Sanfazer (talk | contribs) (→‎Clean up)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Featured.png Fry-Leela relationship appeared on the Infosphere's Main Page as the featured article for Fortnight 18, 2010. This article (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best produced by the Infosphere community. If you can update or improve it, please do.

...do any of you want me to rant forever about their relationship? i do that on every other website, but everyone here already knows everything i could say. obviously, it is the most influenced relationship, and i am very glad to hear david x. coehn say that "rebirth" would mainly focus on the relationship of fry and leela, instead of jumping right into a random adventure, or taking an entire episode to revive the characters. finally theyre just getting right to my favorite parts of the show. -- -awedfrgt: possibly the biggest AFI/Futurama fan/ranter on the internet. 04:55, 28 April 2010 (CEST)

Generally speaking, articles should avoid a nature of 'ranting'. They should be precise, in detail and as much as possible, objective. While articles will no doubt be written by people who care about the articles' content, it should not be obvious.
If you think you have more to add to the article, please do. But avoid inserting your own opinions on a matter. That is not what this wiki is about, there are plenty of other Futurama sites for that purpose. --Sviptalk 10:58, 28 April 2010 (CEST)

yeah i know, i completely trashed an article on another wiki because i didnt rant on gamespot enough. ranting is just my thing. i also seem to notice way too many things about futurama. i do understand what you said, and i have no wish to add my opinions into any of your articles. -- -awedfrgt: possibly the biggest AFI/Futurama fan/ranter on the internet. 02:30, 29 April 2010 (CEST)

i just added a small section about the continuation of the relationship in season 6. It's all facts, just wanted to make sure it was okay. or is that really something i should be asking?:P -- -awedfrgt: possibly the biggest AFI/Futurama fan/ranter on the internet. 03:09, 5 June 2010 (CEST)

Do you think an infobox could be added? Like a character infobox, but for this?-Not awedfrgt 22:51, 20 June 2010 (CEST)
I cannot really see the need for an infobox. What sort of data could be available in it? Other than first appearance and such. --Sviptalk 23:02, 20 June 2010 (CEST)
I don't really either. I was just wondering if that was something you had wanted done.-Not awedfrgt

Hey, so there were a few things missing from this article that I'd like to see added, but I don't know where they belong. Most importantly, the episdode where fry and bender and leela join the army and fry starts discussing having a thing for a girl at work and leela starts to get excited, and the first episode with the what if machine that hints at fry and leela having a future together. -- the preceding unsigned comment was written by 71.185.36.96 before 23:38, 8 April 2012 (CEST).

They should probably go in the "Initial development" section. Sanfazer (talk) 23:38, 8 April 2012 (CEST).

Season 6

There is a whole lot of nitpicking in the season 6 section of this article, including her comment in "That Darn Katz!" and so forth. A lot can really be cut, even if we discuss the status of their relationship mentioning this as well. Aki 23:28, 5 September 2010 (CEST)

31st Century Fox

Near the end where the Hunts Master is holding the rifle at Bender. Both Fry and Leela are seen holding each others arms (Fry's protection for her). Can anyone add that. -- the preceding unsigned comment was written by 95.142.138.38 before 21:02, 25 December 2012 (CET).

Added it. Sanfazer (talk) 21:02, 25 December 2012 (CET).

Clean up

Could we keep only the episodes that are strictly focused on this relationship and remove the ones that only allude it? 189.81.77.113 22:31, 8 September 2013 (CEST)

Maybe the ones that only allude it can be noted as only alluding it. Sanfazer (talk) 22:33, 8 September 2013 (CEST).
In the appearances section, I mean. Sanfazer (talk) 22:37, 8 September 2013 (CEST).