Talk:Toothpaste for Dinner

Clean-Up

Yeah this is definatley one of the ugliest and most poorly structured articles on Wikipedia. Someone fix this already.

Absolutely

I cleaned this up a whole lot. There definitely needs to be a much more descriptive intro, and more details in the "Art" section. Describe the art style, the nature of the humor, etc. —tilde 01:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Just added some citations. --Jlencion 01:02, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Added in some details about what the art style looks like —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.94.238 (talk) 19:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Toothpaste Userbox

' .
-This user is too tired to go to the grocery
(looks like toothpaste for dinner again...)

I made this for all you Wikipedians who like toothpaste for dinner! If you have edited this article or just love the comic then put {{User:Aeon1006/Userboxes/User toothpaste}} on your userpage! -EdGl 05:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Edit War

I'm trying to be judicious here, but anon IP addresses keep reverting the internal link to The Vancouver Voice they think its "vanity" for me to include the internal link. I admit I work for the paper, but its a page there bc of legitimate qualifications per Wiki rules for inclusion. and not to mention, one of the goals is to make clear internal connections between clearly related topics. Toothpaste for Dinner being syndicated in a paper like the Voice is A: part of what makes Toothpaste for Dinner notable and B: part of a way to show the general feel of the paper. if it is mentioned in the Vancouver Voice page, it seems to me that The Vancouver Voice article should be in the See Also section of Toothpaste for Dinner. VanTucky 03:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I have requested informal mediation. VanTucky 02:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I wrote Drew and told him that you keep reverting my edits. He'll be in contact with your paper. Breadmold 19:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Mediation

In order to present the views of the parties involved, please present your ideas regarding whether the wikilink should be included or not below. Shadow1 (talk) 21:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

VanTucky: I no longer think mediation is required, I'm not contesting the objections to the content I previously wanted to include. I think we resolved this on our own. thanks, VanTucky 21:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok then, I'll close the case. Shadow1 (talk) 00:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Breadmold:

Chinese Illustration Firm

Hi, I checked the citation for the "interview given in 2010" last night, and while it was an interview given in 2010 (and quite interesting to read on a number of notes), I see no mention in that interview of Drew saying he no longer personally draws Toothpaste for Dinner, and especially not a specific mention of a chinese illustration firm. I have already edited the article to add Template:Failed verification though I'm not sure if I can say without bias that it really passes the fourth criteria for that template. I will say that the statement saying Drew has contracted Toothpaste for Dinner to an outside company seems almost accusatory in a tabloid sort of way, especially when given with a citation that doesn't support the statement. Not able to sign in right now because the password reset email has yet to hit my gmail account. 74.67.17.69 (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Just re-signing the above now that I've logged in. Insidious611 (talk) 22:36, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Illustrated by conctractors

He must have said this as a joke, right? Prezbo (talk) 23:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)