Talk:Rude Removal

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rude Removal article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Rude Removal. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Rude Removal at the Reference desk.

Cartoon Network Low‑importance

	Cartoon Network portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cartoon Network, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Cartoon Network 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.Cartoon NetworkWikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkTemplate:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkCartoon Network
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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
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).

Animation: American / Television 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
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).

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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Uncensored" version

Let me make this clear. THERE IS NO OFFICIAL UNCENSORED VERSION OF RUDE REMOVAL. Never was, never will be. So stop adding such unfounded speculation to the article. This short was created during the original run and was indeed scheduled to be included in an actual episode during the original airing of Dexter's Lab. Therefore, they would NOT leave it uncensored because they planned to show it on basic cable. All sources describing its showings at conventions indicate it was censored as well. There was a FAN-MADE "uncensored" version uploaded to Youtube shortly after it was released, but that was FAN-MADE, not official. So, please, just stop it. yonnie (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, alright, alright! Just don't get all so physical. Geez, I'll stop adding "false" information to this article. You don't have to get al physical and stuff. If you really didn't, then please try not to.

189.249.197.164 (talk) 14:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)Can someone confirm the authenticity of the video in Dailymotion by the user MrNorbert1994? A Google search will easily list it and it does sound pretty legit, not fan made dubbing.[reply]

The purpose of Wikipedia talk pages is to discuss changes to be made to the article, not for general discussion of the subject. You're also responding to a discussion that is 2-years-old. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To respond to a discussion that's 8 years old, I remember Pan-Pizza of RebelTaxi claimed there was some sort of VHS by a crew member of an uncensored version, with an update to come that 7 years on, never has. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDPaoMRsEgs This is then complicated by Craig McCracken saying on Twitter that while it was recorded uncensored, he was unsure if it was ever put to picture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ0x7WYG2lM TommyJayey (talk) 03:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convention date

Did anyone ever come up with a source that mentions the July 12, 1998, date? Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 22:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, me, I found it. Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 05:54, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Plot section fabricated?

If there's no readily-available copy of this secret unaired episode, and the existence of the episode is mired in denials and guarded explanations, then from where did the detailed plot summary come from, considering there are ZERO links to reliable sources? I propose cutting this section, unless it can be supported by WP:RS. Only one reference gets into an an episode description, but the source is a n00b on a cartoon forum Surely this does not meet encyclopedic standards. Thoughts? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is no. Here's a copy of it if you haven't seen it. Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 04:37, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thank you Paper Luigi. Is there any way we can legitimize the plot summary in the article by referencing that video? It's a unique situation; the write-up is verifiable, but only as long as a video link stays up. Otherwise, it goes back underground and becomes a cult thing again. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:35, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edited episode

There was going to be a Soul Eater episode called "Death's Rude Removal", but they never created the episode. 97.82.243.133 (talk) 02:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@97.82.243.133: Relevance? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:36, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Season 1 or Season 2

At first glance, one may think this episode belongs in season 1 because "Dexter's Rival" is repeated in the 12th episode. However, "Rude Removal" wasn't copyrighted until 1997, the year of season 2 (I finally got a working link!). Other clues that point to season 2 are the more updated animation akin to other season 2 episodes, the voice of Kathryn Cressida as Dee Dee, and the segment not being seen or mentioned anywhere until early 1998 when season 2 was in full swing. The only thing that makes "Rude Removal" seem to fit into season 1 is the need to place it where "Dexter's Rival" is. If you think about it though, "Dexter's Rival" isn't the only segment that reruns in that season; the pilots do too. "Dexter's Rival" is also the first segment in an episode where the third segment, "Mandarker", focuses on the rivalry between Dexter and Mandark. It's entirely plausible that it was reran there to give a more cinematic feel as opposed to just having three unconnected segments ("Dexter's Rival" was one of Genndy's favorites). My best guess for what happened to "Rude Removal"'s slot is that it went to "Dexter and Computress Get Mandark!", the segment narrated entirely by a 6 1/2 year old boy and drawn like it was done by a child. Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 07:54, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Potential expansion

This A.V. Club article may prove useful for a reception section or something: [1]. Whisternefet (talk) 05:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Butler Rote as writer

Re: these good-faith edits [2][3] submitted by BeepBorp, unless there is a reliable source that credits Jason Butler Role as a writer for this episode, it is entirely deductive and/or speculative that he had anything to do with it, even if there is a history of his involvement. The issue isn't whether or not you are right (and you very may well be), the issue is about whether or not the information can be verified by reliable published sources, which is extraordinarily difficult to do in this case, since we don't even have a reliable primary source from which to get the information, only bootlegs (which, AFAIK, don't contain closing credits). It's nothing personal; Wikipedia has a core content policy against original research, and that is what this is. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:55, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Parental rating

Hi Grapesoda22, nothing personal, but I plan to remove the parental rating again, for a couple of reasons: Firstly, it does not meet WP:V. The ep isn't (as far as I know) posted at the Adult Swim website and we can't verify a memory. Unless there is a lingering, reliable source for this, it should be excluded as WP:OR. Secondly, the indiscriminate addition of parental ratings is discouraged by MOS:TV#Parental ratings, so unless we can find a reliable source that comments on the parental rating being notable for some reason, it should be removed. I'm sure there are plenty of shows on Adult Swim that are rated TV-14-L. So, I plan to remove that content for the reasons stated above. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that's fair. Grapesoda22 (talk) 20:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This aired on CTN in 1998

Everything I have read said this never aired on CTN but I saw this episode on CTN in 1998/1999 prior to Adult Swim.com, which I've never even been to. This episode also repeated with Season 2 reruns at least 1 time. I remember being astonished that they were actually showing it on TV considering the content of the episode. I've never gone to the animation conventions so I did not see it there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.117.165.215 (talk) 23:37, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of content by an LTA user

See this diff where an LTA user, OtterSeal, removed content from this article. Should any of the content removed be restored? I wanted to start a discussion here so that this can be looked into. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:05, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]