Talk:Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends/Archive 3

Did the specials air in HD?

To prevent a 3RR issue, I'm bringing the issue regarding if two of the special episodes aired in HD as well as SD. I believe they did because of the simple fact of them being in widescreen which I notice was mentioned in the edit summaries. Problem of the text being cut off was to do with how Cartoon Network screened it on their SD channel, during the end credits of Good Wilt Hunting they had a lower third promo for what was coming up next and pushed the screen so some was cut off. It was however played in the clear on their HD channel. treelo _radda 16:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't have HD nor did I watch the finale, so I'm probably not going to be too helpful here. And I'm going to be guilty of suggesting WP:OR, but I think it's not a bad supposition to say that, if a show airs in widescreen format, it was probably produced in HD. Airing versus production may be different, perhaps notate that in the individual episode? Yngvarr (t) (c) 21:28, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, nothing to do with the finale (which was your regular 22 min episode). From my own best guesses, I think many shows have been made in HD otherwise there'd be little content on it and it'd have to air on the SD CN at some point and if its something they made in HD then generally they'll show it a few times in 16:9 and 4:3 otherwise. Both specials which have been listed as 1080i since they aired were produced and aired in that format even if the rest of the series wasn't. Chowder has been made in HD since it begun, we never mention it as CNHD's reach is tiny, still the mention should stay otherwise the parameter is redundant. treelo _radda 22:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then, can you judge from screenshots I made: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=642BBHF5 -- JSH-alive ^{talk • cont • mail} 14:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can read my original statement in the history if you like but I'll tell you this instead, everything I and you provide is original research and us bickering here means squat all unless someone has a source as actual proof. Onus is actually on you prove it, not me as that specific little bit of text stating Good Wilt Hunting and Destination Imagination were aired in 1080i has been there since just before Good Wilt Hunting first aired (and heck, I edit-warred with the person who wanted it in). That reads to me as a community consensus so if you want to take Good Wilt Hunting out because you think it on the basis of a copy you have, you better damn well be able to prove you're right with sources not "here's some pictures as unreliable, conjectural proof to my assumption". treelo _radda 15:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... I din't read your comment carefully. Sorry about those arguments. -- JSH-alive ^{talk • cont • mail} 03:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Season 3 DVD release date

OK, given the editwar of idiocy that happens to be going on here, there needs to be discussion. So, we've got a date for the season 3 DVD release but it's unsourced, I've searched and found nothing regarding that date or that there's even a release to be had so I'm taking it here because someone figures it should be there but can't back it up. Can someone find a source for this or am I stuck in an editwar with no end in sight or at least until December 1? treelo _radda 21:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as this talkpage is a vague unheard of beast, people have taken to putting in warnings inline for some reason towards others. Our favourite IP hopping editor has spoken but again, inline so everyone including people passing by unaware of the issue at hand gets to know, they say "Wikipedia has stated for a long time that Season 3 will be released December 1st this year. When it says it will be released at that date, it must stay with that decision and not be changed back to TBA!". Huh, so because it's been there for an extended time it's gotta stay even if nothing is around to prove the date, right? Whilst yes it has stated that for a long time it's also had several different dates which were changed each time the date came and went without any release since a few months after the release of season two. Because time doesn't turn myth into truth it'd be better to simply not mention a release for any future season boxsets until someone can prove that's the real date (even if a given date has been around for a while). I mean it's been 3 years since the last DVD release, if it doesn't come soon it won't at all. treelo _radda 20:48, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the cat and mouse game continues unabated, things have gotten a little more interesting as the anon IP hopper is now stating the date is now 25th March 2010 based on this though WikiAnswers can be more inaccurate than the good ship Wikipedia as answers are usually guesses, assumptions or unicorn wish farts given there is nothing to confirm that the information is correct and not pulled from the rear end of the proverbial unicorn. Even with little more than some hearsay regarding a release date (bear in mind the last season release was in mid 2007 with the season prior released a few months before) there are little angry messages like [1][2][3] being written because someone at WikiAnswers told them what they wanted to hear and assume that's all the proof they need though it's about as reliable as me making an statement that all remaining seasons will be released on some arbitrary date in 2010 at the same time because I saw it on the internet someplace and it had the word "official" so it had to be real. Sadly, unsourced edits can be challenged if found to be lacking in factual accuracy and the onus is on the content editor who wants it in to verify reliably that their addition is true or can be confirmed otherwise it can be taken out and repeated attempts to readd the content can result in warnings for the edit warrior. To the anon editor, I want to discuss this instead of repeatedly reverting so if you feel this is true, come here and state your reasoning otherwise I'm to assume it's in bad faith. treelo _radda 19:26, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot

I think we should add a plot section that tells of what happened in the first movie. --70.62.142.66 (talk) 02:52, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ages

There is no source for how old these characters are whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atum World (talk • contribs) 23:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC) [reply]

The show is over

I hear there are a few disputes about the cancellation of FHFIF. I am going to be blunt. The show is finished. Production is over. No more eps will be produced. There are no hidden episodes. It's not on hiatus and the ep number will stop at 79. McCracken has left Cartoon Network and is working somewhere else. Rowman (talk) 00:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

I've recently opened a peer review for this article after improving and working substantially on it. Anyone who is interested is welcome to leave comments and criticisms, or even improve the page if so desired. Cheers, Katástasi (κατάσταση) 21:56, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bolder Media removal

An IP user kept on removing Bolder Media from the infobox and claims that we don't talk about overseas studios when we actually do. In addition, he/she refused to discuss his/her objection on this talk page. I also give this two warnings and they got removed. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 13:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FilmandTVFan28 Hey, I'm one of the main editors of this article, but I've been away from it in a while. I just recently saw the fuss and I just looked up the infobox guidelines here, and I believe I understand what the IP meant, even if he was extremely disruptive and didn't think of explaining the removal. I extensively expanded the article in December and early January, and Boulder Media's involvement in the production process is mentioned in the Production section, though I hadn't added it in the infobox. I believe the company would fit the infobox guidelines of the Company parameter. Feel free to read the guidelines and reply. Cheers, κατάσταση 01:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, considering that some of the article's of shows currently airing on television and of movies have some overseas studios mentioned in their infoboxes, I see no reason why we should not include Boulder Media in the infobox if a source can be provided as the guidelines said. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 07:26, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends. 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) 06:12, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Smash linguistic barbarism

If anything, kid-culture articles should be more careful in policing grammatical sloppiness like (trying to reconstruct the wretched syntax from memory, on this iPad II platform) "genuinely developed sympathy", which implies that it is the process of development that is genuine, as if we are expected to value the sincerity (rather than mechanically imitating stages of becoming sympathetic) entailed in perfecting a convincing imitation of "giving a damn" about fictional characters. I do a pretty good imitation (as it were) of respecting humanistic values even tho i'm a pretty shallow tech nerd; it would be really swell if more genuine Renaissance humanists would belly up to the bar, and distinguish between developing apparent sympathy that passes for genuine sympathy, and the however chaotic and unplanned process of being lucky enuf to wander, like the "innocent fool" Parsifal, into the shared suffering we expect when someone acts with authentic "sympathy" authentic "sympathy". Those, whom we should hope to become, are beings who have "developed..." (or just wandered into) "... authentic sympathy". Okay? Cultivate sensitivity to our best instincts, and the development will probably occur, if the hope of compassion being the direction that evolution trends toward is not a mirage.
(Perhaps that diatribe is inspired by the wisdom of Cixin Liu that The Three-Body Problem hints at.)
--Jerzy•t 09:54, 8 & 23:23, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2019

This edit request to Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove 1080i from the Broadcast Format. This has never happened and the 16:9 is also untrue. It was comfirmed by the show creator today https://twitter.com/CrackMcCraigen/status/1101872908220096513 ImPRAGMA (talk) 18:04, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done That's not what the tweet says. Fish+Karate 13:33, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends (franchise) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends (franchise). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:07, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]