Jump to content

Talk:Here Comes Honey Boo Boo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UK

[edit]

TLC was relaunched in the UK and Ireland on April 30 2013

Premieres on TLC in the UK 14th May 2013. Lmcgregoruk (talk) 16:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for edits

[edit]

I couldn't edit article, someone more experienced please fix this: > [3] ^ a b Hickman, Matt (September 27, 2012). "Honey Boo Boo's Guide to Thrifty Living". Mother slutish Nature Network. Dead link, and I couldn't find the right one in Matt Hickiman's articles for Sep 27, 2012 at Mother Nature Network.: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.210.46.118 (talk) 14:03, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone fix this article!

[edit]

Reading this article has given me a giant headache. I couldn't even count all the grammatical errors. The entire article is written in the intro section. Categories need to be created, such as reception. I would do it, but I don't want to read any more about this monstrosity of a show, so I'm never going to visit this page again, hopefully. -PUNKMINKIS (CHAT) 00:45, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. At least I'm not the only one who looked at the word 'Hilarouse" and wondered where QA and proper editing went in my hiatus from Wikipedia. I'll do my best to fix some of it. Centrisian (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And by fix, I mean grammar, spelling, and usage. Centrisian (talk) 01:06, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, it was written [obviously] by one of the show's fans. Grammar and spelling are unfortunately not their strongest characteristics, and anyone that actually knows how to write clearly doesn't want to have to sit through an episode of this show to try and understand it enough to write an article about it. WTF? (talk) 18:35, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I'm not even a fan of the show have never seen it, I was just trying to find information on these people and what they are about, instead I see a bunch of people whining and complaining, but not offering any real corrections or info. That's not what Wikipedia is for, if you have complaints put it on your blog, or facebook page. You who aren't offering a real contribution are as bad as the people you speak of, thanks for taking up space. Before you call me a hypocrite remember I'm only responding to your banal diatribe, which is more than you are doing!
The talk page is actually EXACTLY what this is for; to discuss the topic unofficially. If you want info on the show, that's what the article is for. Also, remember to sign your posts on the talk page. And if you have something to say, don't just throw your statement at the top of the page. Put it under the proper section, or start a new section. -PUNKMINKIS (CHAT) 00:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried

[edit]

This is absurd. It's barely even editable. I don't know much about the show other than it is highly offensive and reinforces negative stereotypes of the Southeastern USA. I will leave it here for the next person but will continue to watch and help in any way I can. For now, this page remains a train wreck. Centrisian (talk) 02:03, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

`hands you some brain repair` Looks much better already. -PUNKMINKIS (CHAT) 19:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate it. It's been a very long time since I've made any edits anywhere, and rewriting this is brutal. I have little first hand knowledge of the show itself, and I'll work on formatting it to look better than it does now. Nevermind, someone put it together with sections and less clusterfsck. Centrisian (talk) 04:58, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Series overview

[edit]

The entire section is un sourced and reads like a promo piece directly from the producers of the show. I dont like section blanking but there needs to be some serious thought and review as to how much of this is encyclopedic and can be referenced by reliable thrid party sources. 108.172.114.141 (talk) 02:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compensation section removal

[edit]

I have decided that the compensation section should be removed. While sourced it is written as a news article and is trying to create a convertversy where none exists. (Saying the family is under compensated, when the sources suggest that the compensation has jumped up dramatically when the show became popular.) Furthermore all the sources are rumors and not actual statements from the any of the people involved. I see no reason for this section to reamin in the article. Lotu (talk) 04:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Not needed at all. TheMesquito (talk) 12:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rumor: more viewers than the 2012 Republican National Convention

[edit]

After I read this rumor, I went looking for facts (the rumor isn't true), found them, and contributed what I found. It wasn't complete, but I forgot until a newspaper columnist confessed her guilty pleasure. So I went searching again and thought I had found something. I'm at home and don't wish to search here even though most news sites (and certainly the ones Wikipedia would accept) are perfectly safe. But the text I emailed myself is still missing some of the details, and contains some dubious assertions, so I didn't add those. I'll be looking harder next time I go to a library.

Someone took out what I had added before, but this rumor seemed to be quite a big story and I think the facts should be known.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:24, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, at long last, I think I found the truth.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 13:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Huh??? If your coherence is any indication, I think you had more than one drink. Cresix (talk) 01:21, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That was vandalism.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:23, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! Apologies. Thanks for the clarification. Cresix (talk) 19:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really slow getting through old Washington Post TV columns. I'm just now reading about how well the Democrats did. I frequently check back to make sure this section is still here. And I actually decided to verify something which turned out to be a mistake.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected what seemed to be my final mistake. And a month later someone reverted what I did. Whoever did this, you're contributing to a hoax. It is not true that this show had more viewers than the Republican National Convention. I put back the details--total viewers for the convention, and the second- and third-place networks. The ones that by themselves were behind this show, but added up to more than this show even without the other networks that were also airing it.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:04, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently characters from her show keep making news. Anyway, I did my latest check and my total number of viewers from Wednesday night of the 2012 Republican National Convention was missing. At the time I added that, I knew nothing about The Daily Mail not being considered reputable. I asked for help the last time I checked on this and a Google search turned up nothing. The Daily Mail got it from somewhere but wherever that is, it's nowhere to be found, at least online.

Copied from User talk:David Gerard:

My concern is an urban legend that Here Comes Honey Boo Boo had more viewers that night than the convention. I added enough information to the article to show why that's not true, but it would be helpful to have some evidence that yes, the convention's total number of viewers was higher than Honey Boo Boo. It's still a milestone for the series.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is why I'm super-cautious about Mail claims of audience numbers - like every other area of "gosh, isn't that interesting" content they run, you can't tell what's made up and what isn't ... - David Gerard (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear: The Daily Mail had the truth, if in fact it was the truth. The urban legend was not created by them, but rather the fact that if each network's coverage is considered a separate program, Honey Boo Boo was the number one show in that slot with that audience. And that's the story that got out.
The way the article stands now, there's no evidence the convention had more viewers. I could find all the networks that aired it and add up their numbers, if I could even find that now. And it would still be WP:OR.
The best I can do from the reliable sources is a statement with wording similar to "obviously, more people than that watched the convention", which isn't useful. I wish someone could help with this. You'd think such information would be out there.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:59, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good question. I'd think adding up totals would be reasonable, but I'm not familiar with how much editors fuss about application of simple arithmetic in article text - David Gerard (talk) 17:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alana Thompson

[edit]

I'd like to re-create this article, and re-direct the fan-created Alana Thompson (Honey Boo Boo) there, so we can start editing a decent article about her. I think, since she's had articles in reliable sources about more than just one TV show, she's notable on her own. (Cross-posted at User talk:Faithlessthewonderboy.) What do folks think? Bearian (talk) 17:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand correctly, what you really mean is that you want to move Alana Thompson (Honey Boo Boo) to Alana Thompson. I have no opinion on whether there should be an article about Alana Thompson, but as long as there is an article, the correct title would be Alana Thompson, so I'm going to post a request to speedy-delete the redirect there so the article can be moved. Theoldsparkle (talk) 19:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, I don't think there's a need for a separate article, or enough to say about her to justify one. She can be perfectly easily covered as part of this article. Robofish (talk) 23:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree with Robofish that a separate article is superfluous, but don't feel strongly either way. faithless (speak) 02:46, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

[edit]

I think Honey Boo Boo should be merged into this article. The child is known primarily for this show, and all that needs be said about her can be said here. There's no need for a separate article. LadyofShalott 01:10, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Nightscream (talk) 04:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed x2. joepaT 17:27, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on this aswell. Mikeydunno 03:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Support No reason to keep them separate. Nick Garvey (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Given the overwhelming support for it above, I've carried out the merge. There wasn't much content to add, most of it was duplicated/superfluous. Robofish (talk) 01:11, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 6 January 2013

[edit]

Jon Stewart of the 'The Daily Show with Jon Stewart' on Comedy Central points out the irony, saying (paraphrasing) that a show of such low IQ and caliber is on 'The Learning Channel'. Creators of the show 'South Park' in one of their episodes, point to the lowering of the bar of quality television and American morals. It is however noteworthy how rich and powerful exploit the poor not only in terms of making enormous sums of money from poking fun at poverty, ill educated and downtrodden but also the disparity in the sharing of the wealth with the 'boo boo' family which enables the producers of the show to generate the revenue. It is disturbing that 'boo boo' is a child incapable of making rational decisions due to her extremely young age is systematically fed unhealthy foods especially not suitable for a child that could provoke severe early and late childhood and adulthood illnesses and possibly resulting in early death of a child. It is to be noted that the District Attorney of McIntyre, Georgia or any other law makers have not taken any action to halt physical and mental exploitation and a possible euthanasia of a child for entertainment purposes against the 'boo boo' family or the producers of the show. It is ironic that the very nation that is a beacon for other nations for human rights is shamelessly failing to protect it's own children from exploitation and possible death in broad daylight. Sxponia (talk) 21:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC

Networth?

[edit]

This appears in the lead with only a single source being celebritynetworth.com which, as I understand it, is not a reliable source. The website itself has a disclaimer stating its contents are simply estimates based on what they can find in the public domain. With there being that much uncertainty should this really be included in the article? 108.172.113.23 (talk) 23:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 18 July 2013

[edit]

Praise: Hank Stuever of the Washington Post notes that although the show has been mocked far and wide "...it’s not really Alana’s show anymore. The real find was June Shannon, Alana’s 33-year-old mother. Although she has been mocked far and wide, there is pleasure in encountering someone so comfortable being herself. At its heart, “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo” is a show about a family that enjoys being with one another" and "When people launch into one of their tirades against “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo,” I listen and then ask them to think about the show’s solid — if un­or­tho­dox — family values. The father is employed. The mother works hard, in spite of difficulties that include legal blindness, and remains remarkably good-humored, eager to describe her life and share what she has with strangers. A gay relative, “Uncle Poodle,” is accepted with a refreshing, egalitarian joy. The more we hang around the Boo Boo clan, the less they seem like ogres and the more they serve as a fascinating entree into America’s most pressing concerns: economy, employment, equality, health, community."

Citation: http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/tv/the-newsroom-vs-honey-boo-boo-which-one-really-gives-us-more-to-think-about/2013/07/11/8d011ca6-e422-11e2-80eb-3145e2994a55_story_2.html 20.137.2.50 (talk) 13:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. Also, that's already mentioned, and I don't see a need to quote the whole thing. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:21, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another Parody

[edit]

CollegeHumor has been doing a parody web series based on Honey Boo Boo and her mother that I think should be mentioned under the parody section[1].Sivos909 (talk) 21:38, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


References

  1. ^ http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6891840/precious-plum-honey-boo-boo-parody-series
Already done "and in an online spoof uploaded on CollegeHumor called "Precious Plum."" Stickee (talk) 03:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2014

[edit]

I located the correct URL for footnote #19, and accessed it a few minutes ago. 

 http://www.forbes.com/sites/juliabricklin/2012/08/12/tlcs-here-comes-honey-boo-boo-isnt-all-that-bad/

thanks, levinel@northcoast.com

64.194.164.175 (talk) 01:08, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed. Thanks for pointing this out!.--Auric talk 01:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable quoting of MNN as praise

[edit]

The article cited is clearly tongue-in-cheek at best. Cherry picking a quote from it as praise seems a bit dishonest; I'd suggest either removing the relevant text and citation or at least mentioning the not-entirely-positive thrust of the article referenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enormity (talk • contribs) 07:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, MNN is part owned by same company that owns TLC, which is Discovery Communications. So clear conflict of interest that should be disclosed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.99.133.32 (talk) 16:36, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

[edit]

There's a typo in the paragraph http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_Comes_Honey_Boo_Boo#Cancellation: That man was probably a sex offender not a sex offer. Couldn't edit, so I posted it here, hope this is no problem.

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2014

[edit]

69.203.106.77 (talk) 13:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 14:07, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Extreme Couponing?

[edit]

How can they be starring in another show that also isn't even being made anymore? The article as of this writing claims the family is starring in Extreme Couponing as of November 2015, when the show's last episode aired in December 2012. They can't both be true - since the sentence in this article has a {{fact}} tag, I'm removing it until someone can prove it should stay. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 22:28, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Baby?

[edit]

The article currently states that Anna Shannon's baby Kaitlyn "has since been repatriated to Child Protective Services," but there is no source cited, and no indication of what "repatriated" means.Sadiemonster (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Botched

[edit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3720204/Mama-June-claims-doctor-SLICED-daughter-Honey-Boo-Boo-s-head-twice-C-section-appears-Botched-fix-scarred-stomach.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mplungjan (talk • contribs) 10:58, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. 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) 11:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not called "swamp mama" in the UK

[edit]

This article has been edited multiple times to add that "its is called swamp mama in the uk" when this is not true. If you see that added in, remove it. Notswampmama (talk) 20:41, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The vandals are minions doing the bidding of a youtuber they worship who requested that they spread this lie in the following video at the 13:00 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeKU-0GFFl0&t=13m00s john factorial (talk) 16:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WHAT Gabethestrong2 (talk) 01:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2023

[edit]

Remove euphemisms; Change "before she passed" to "before she died" or "before her death". MOS:EUPHEMISM. 2603:6081:893D:13AC:3D16:39A0:45B7:D97E (talk) 22:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Question: Which sections and/or paragraphs are they in? Shadow311 (talk) 22:36, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's on the Post-cancellation section that says about Anna Cardwell's recent death. 2603:6081:893D:13AC:3D16:39A0:45B7:D97E (talk) 22:52, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Shadow311, you can usually use the find tool (often Ctrl+F) in your browser to locate passages in the text of an article, for future reference. Tollens (talk) 01:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Here_Comes_Honey_Boo_Boo&oldid=1256746392"