Talk:Pinky Show

	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).

In the world outside of the USA "liberal" would be an very tame but essetially accurate description of the Show. But i guess that this is meant as an insult.

I don't understand the above statement. At all. Does "the world outside the USA" simply mean all other nations? Moreover, is the above comment an insult? Or is the description -- "liberal" -- and insult? Is it a tame insult? But accurate? I don't understand. At all. Alright then, I can agree that moral standards in the United States, and the culturosphere for which it stands, are substantially different from other nations. In some cases, I must confess I watch the goings on in open mouthed amazement. But still, the above don't make sense. 82.181.197.172 (talk) 21:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I consider myself very liberal if not bleeding heart, and I find the pinky show so inaccurate in general that I cannot find them very liberal. "Us liberals" like to believe in reality and the pinky show is often about 20-30 years behind the times in terms of their research. Their shows on free trade are completely bogus and attack strawman that no economist has believed in since 1995. I consider them damaging to liberal causes, not because I disagree with the thrust of many of their shows, but just because they usually just spit out the usual "common wisdom" which involve lots of factually wrong conclusions. I think "annoying" is a very tame but essentially accurate description of the show. 75.208.25.102 (talk) 06:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Can you give specific examples of the mistaken or factually wrong conclusions derived from the usual "common wisdom"? Or was that just your opinion? I watched the Iraq War and the Viet Nam War episodes, and they seem quite good, though I understand why they would be upsetting to US audiences. 200.89.148.92 (talk) 04:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Voice actors

The voices of the characters are unusual: Are the voice actors known? Are they children? --Thenickdude 01:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the voices are foreign voiceover artists. 75.57.162.209 14:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Find the pinky show right on with the facts and without judgement when the facts are presented. The show on Vietnam was the first time I ever heard the war summed up so precisely with the truth. Good for Pinky & Buny. kmvjazz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.94.142 (talk) 07:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

This article needs a rewrite. Bad. -SAB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.248.206 (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pinky Lee

Is there a relation between the name of this show and the one in the 1950s by Pinky Lee?--Brz7 (talk) 14:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.234.164 (talk) 02:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

specific political viewpoint

I'm not sure that I could agree with the statement that the show expresses a specific political viewpoint in the context of politics the pinky show is beyond the spectrum of what is politically acceptable in mainstream media. It's also produced with Final cut pro thus I don't know if low tech is accurate either, perhaps a production quality rather than a technological one.

Alaskanwarrior (talk) 08:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Liberal?

After watching a few of their videos on Youtube.com, I believe it is pertinent to add to the article that the show, website and organization are only putting out liberal views and finding biased research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.122.45.208 (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In what way is their research biased? Unless you are referring to their openly stated mission, to present "marginalized perspectives as a means of challenging individuals to consider realities that lie beyond their own lived experiences". 201.216.245.25 (talk) 21:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does this need an article

I don't think every show on youtube needs an article or at least not one this long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.143.150 (talk) 00:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Format?

Nowhere in this article does it describe whether this is a TV show, an Internet show, or what. Details on the broadcast medium are crucial to understanding what the show is. -kotra (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe if the Pinky Show was in the public schools, kids would be capable of critical thought, instead of the drones we're producing today. KMV — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.94.142 (talk) 07:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I put a {{notability}} tag on this article as I have not seen anything stating its notability in the article. May I remind you of the following, taken from WP:WEB:

The content is distributed via a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster; except for trivial distribution including content being hosted on sites without editorial oversight (such as YouTube, MySpace, GeoCities, Newgrounds, personal blogs, etc.).

As such, merely being a YouTube channel does not establish notability. If this notice is being neglected by editors, I have any right to nominate this article for deletion for a lack of notability.--Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 04:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Merely being a Youtube channel does not establish notability but having over 11,000 subscribers and millions over views. Over

two million views for one particular video episode does establish notability. We live in an online digital world and, I think, Internet phenomenon (that have garnered popular attention from Youtube, MSNBC, and other publications for their art exhibit) deserves a place in this online body of knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.102.222.82 (talk) 02:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- The Pinky Show has produced artwork of a political bent that has been exhibited by independent sources, eg. the University of Winnipeg, (http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/index/artgallery-the-pinky-show). The Press & Quotes section of the Pinky Show website has a number of quotes from real media institutions recommending the website (eg. MSNBC, Art Threat). Seems notable to me. six.oh.six (talk) 23:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Greetings,

I made a few edits to the page. I would argue that the Pinky Show is notable enough to be on Wikipedia.They are more than just the online show. They have a travelling art show that has received aclaim in Belegrade and at Winnegeg University. Their art exhibit was coverd by two publications in Winnepeg.

The Pinky Show is also very popular on Youtube. They have over 11,000 subscribers and each of there video episodes have received thousands of views. There most popular video on Youtube, "The Iraq War: Legel or Illegal?" has gained over two million views on youtube. It has stimulated a great deal of intense debate.

There is no question that they are far left, left outside of anything you would see in the mainstream media, however they are hardly radical. They are not nearly as radical as many professors teaching across academia in the United States.

I cited all the claims made in the improved article from sources from Youtube.com, The Pinky Show site, and the Winnepeg publications.

The previous article was very bad, but I think my changes were all appropriate. I think the notability and citation charge should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.102.222.82 (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.nowpublic.com/pinky_show_cats_ask_was_u_s_invasion_iraq_legal_or_illegal_under_international_law
Triggered by \bnowpublic\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 18:31, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]