Family Gay has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 2, 2010	Good article nominee	Not listed
March 26, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Animation: American / Television / Family Guy Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Animated television work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Family Guy work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Animation / Television / Rhode Island Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Animation portal This article is supported by WikiProject Animation - American animation work group.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force.
	Rhode Island portal This article is supported by WikiProject Rhode Island.

Archives

1

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Source

I found a coupla that may help. -- Banjeboi 14:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Family Guy: "Family Gay" Review: Peter gets a horse and becomes gay by Ahsan Haque.
Family Guy Gay Orgy Incites Parents' Ire by Neal Broverman]
Parents Television Council objects to 'Family Guy' by Ann Oldenburg
Fox's "Family Guy" has Parents Television Council seeing red; indecency complaint reflects PTC's renewed activism by Hal Boedeker

Meredith Baxter

Perhaps in the "cultural references" section Meredith Baxter's involvement could be explained. -- Banjeboi 06:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done in the production section, it is a brief appearance CTJF83 chat 08:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Add Emmy nom to lede?

I think the Emmy nom should be added to the lede. -- Banjeboi 06:45, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added CTJF83 chat 08:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Production section

Since this article has been nominated for GA, it's production section REALLY needs to be beefed up. It's currently only three lines, while only two of those sentences have any substance. If it's to meet GA criteria, it needs to be expanded. Ω phois 23:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This also may be useful for the reception section. Ω phois 00:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ophios i now you are trying to help are FG articals but i do not think the producction needs more the reception is good i may add it later but to me the producction is okay.,--Saint Pedrolas J. ^{Hohohohohoh merry christmas} 00:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the reception arguably meets GA requirement. However, for production, that the writers had "fun 'gaying up the episode'" does not meet the GA requirement of being "Broad in its coverage". Ω phois 00:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well what writers say are facyts so if they say that the episode was going to be very gay we have to put it as if not it would be turneing words and thats not what wikipedias about.--Saint Pedrolas J. ^{Hohohohohoh merry christmas} 23:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not saying to remove it. I'm saying that listing that they enjoyed that aspect of the episode does not even begin to cover the episode's production. Ω phois 15:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They mostly just joked around during the commentary. I can rewatch it when I get time, and see if I can expand it. CTJF83 chat 19:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Family Gay/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kaguya-chan (talk) 19:08, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. :) I'll be reviewing shortly. Kaguya-chan (talk) 19:08, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Unnecessary wikilinks in the plot. (For example, horse and muffins) Third sentence of lead jumps into the plot without telling the reader. Try something like "In the episode, Peter..." In the lead, Peter Shin, James Purdum, Brian Iles and Deborah Cone are listed as directing the episode, but are not listed in the infobox. In the reception, "The NBC comedy series 30 Rock was the eventual recipent of the award" The 2009 61st Primetime Emmy Award? Also in the reception, the quote from IGN is very long for a quote.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Most of cultural references is unsourced.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Production section is rather short.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Not sure what the alt text for File:FamilyGay.jpg is about. Also File:SethRogen 7 2007.JPG needs alt text. Caption of FamilyGay.jpg: "Peter, after injected with the "gay gene", exhibits stereotypical gay behavior." should be "Peter, after being injected with the "gay gene", exhibits stereotypical gay behavior."
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

I've put the article on hold so the issues can be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. Kaguya-chan (talk) 19:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I shouldn't have been slacking on the unsourced cultural references section....again. Do you want me to source them to the episode, because the characters all say or set up the cultural references. What needs to be fixed about the infobox alt text? I'll rewatch the commentary tonight (Monday) or Tuesday. CTJF83 chat 21:32, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. If it is obviously in the episode (think the Stratego reference :) ), then source it to the episode with a small quote in the ref. The infobox alt text is not very clear about what is happening in the screenshot. You could try something like "A screenshot from an animated television series. A dog, a woman holding a baby, and two teenagers sit next to a man wearing a purple scarf and holding his hand up in a stereotypically gay manner." Or something like that. Kaguya-chan (talk) 21:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me :). I'll get back to you tomorrow after I review the commentary. CTJF83 chat 22:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm failing this article because it does not meet the requirements of a good article, mostly that it is not broad enough in its coverage. Sorry. Kaguya-chan (talk) 14:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

mentally disabled

I wonder if we should put that in quotes, if it is a quote or instead use something from mental retardation and link there? -- Banjeboi 23:02, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peter calls the horse "retarded" so either would probably be ok. CTJF83 chat 04:04, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest using "retarded" then wikilinking to mental retardation. I think that solves us doing anything but reporting what was used and shows the Peter character as typically being un-pc or at least old-school insensitive. -- Banjeboi 08:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done I didn't put the quotes, feel free to do it if you want. CTJF83 chat 09:05, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Family Gay/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC) Overall, this is a very nice article- it's nicely laid out, well written and it's good to see it doesn't fall into the trap of excessively long plot summaries. My only concerns are that the plot and lead are written in quite an "in-universe" style. I love Family Guy so I know what it's talking about, but it should be written in such a manner that somebody who had never seen it would be able to follow it.[reply]
Other than that, the prose is a little choppy in the "Cultural references" and could use a quick copyedit, and what's going on with the dashes in the second paragraph of the "Plot" section? I suggest using unspaced emdashes since they're interrupting a sentence, though you could use endashes if you want.
Once those minor things are fixed, I'll be more than happy to promote this! Nice work, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

fixed the dash issue, and CE the cultural references section. Can you please explain/give examples of the IN-U in the plot and lead? CTJF83 chat 17:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure, I should have been more specific. Essentially, you should imagine the reader has been living in a cave for the last 20 years (and, miraculously managed to find this article!) so, for example, Peter's surname isn't given anywhere in the article as far as I can see. It could also do with just a little detail about how the characters are related- a cave man wouldn't know that Peter and Lois are married, for example. Just that little bit of context to help readers who aren't familiar with Family Guy! Btw, linking "straight camp" to £ex-gay" is probably overlinking and you've got a dab link that should be fixed. All things considered it's a very good quality article and it easily meets the GA criteria, so I'll pass it once that's done! Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've made some IN-U fixes, specifying who people are. As for the straight camp link, I think it is a necessary link, so people fully understand what it is, thoughts? CTJF83 chat 18:03, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Seems fine to me. I'm happy to pass this now. Nice work. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Actually Season 8

Someone incorrectly tagged this episode as Season 7, episode 8. It is in fact Season 8, episode 12 as can be found out quite easily from the DVD cover or any decent internet search. http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0029F1YW2/ref=asc_df_B0029F1YW22994691?smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&tag=googlecouk06-21&linkCode=asn&creative=22206&creativeASIN=B0029F1YW2 Thanks Jenova20 13:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone also remove this episode from the table at the bottom of the page that incorrectly identifies it as Season 7 aswell? Thanks Jenova20 13:22, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For some horribly poor reason, the DVDs don't follow seasons. Volume 1 is season 1 and 2, volume 2 is season 3 and volume 3 is where it gets messed up, by being the first half of season 4. Due to this, later volumes became the last half of one season and the first half of the next season. For some even more messed up reason, volume 1 in region 2 was 2 separate discs, which messes up the numbering even more. CTJF83 17:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So maybe the article should reflect this by pointing out the actual season for each episode and the one sold in boxsets?

It's one thing to know this but it would be better to point it out to others reading the article.

Otherwise this will keep happening and Wikipedia will appear to be wrong to the 99% of people who buy a series and notice it doesn't tally correctly here?

Tv Series and episode number/actual series and episode number, boxset episode and series number perhaps?

Thanks for the correction Jenova20 11:33, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know....seems unnecessary to me. We should go by the numbering of the show, not the DVDs. Plus it adds clutter to the infobox, plus the DVDs are named "volume" not "season" (least region 1) CTJF83 22:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe so but region 2 is Season not volume and makes Wikipedia appear wrong.

I suggest you split it by region then other than just featuring one region as that can be contested and it's favouring one part of the world over another for the sake of saving an extra 2 or 3 lines in the infobox.

It may be part of a Wikiproject but the article is still viewable in more than just America, that's the point i'm making.

Thanks Jenova20 08:35, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spugizakom

Can somebody please write something about this? Peter says (11:42) that Spugizakom is a sugar substitute from the Czech republic. Then he says 'drovoz nyoshni'. We actually don't have any of this words. Sounds more like Polish, but I didn't find those words, too. 89.103.165.104 (talk) 15:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you propose we write about this joke? CTJF83 20:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anything... Maybe just what did I write. I don't know how to write anything in here.... :x 89.103.165.104 (talk) 07:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Family Gay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:37, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Family Gay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/66qECMGwn?url=http://www.tvguide.com/tvshows/family-guy/episode-8-season-8/100148 to http://www.tvguide.com/Episode-Recaps/family-guy/Family-Guy-Episode-1003802.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]