Talk:Waylon Smithers/Archive 1

Mess

This article is a mess, full of inaccuracies and missed information. I'll tidy it when I've got the energy.... Martyn Smith 18:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jaylord????

24.161.100.215 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) made an edit changing "Waylon J. Smithers Jr." to "Waylon Jaylord Smithers Jr." and this was unnoticed for over a month until I reverted it. Obviously the "jaylord" is vandalism. I also took off the "jr.", as the Simpsons website lists him only as "Waylon Smithers." I'll delete all the J's and Juniors's until someone can find an official source using that title. JianLi 22:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The jr. obviously comes from his father's name being also Walyon Smithers. Zé da Silva 17:33, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ya but if his father is dead than he isn't a jr anymore hes the ONLY waylon smithers

Your still a Jr. or III or IV wether the number before you is alive or not. if his father's name is Waylon Smithers then his son is Waylon Smithers Jr. assuming they have the same middle name also Trey 06:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Like Freddie Prinze Jr, his dad died but he still keeps the name.Davie4264 23:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Top picture

Shouldn't the top picture be of Yellow Smithers? Black Smithers only exists for one episode. Lenzar 17:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AT or ATO?

Nitpicking here perhaps but this wikipedia article says that Smithers is a alum of Alpha Tau Omega. While on the list of Fictional fraternities and sororities he is listed as being a member of Alpha Tau. While there are many character bios of Smithers that say he was in a fraternity i can find none that list the name of the fraternity. Since i know that usually becuase of licensing rights most fictional characters are usually made to be members of fictional fraternities and every other greek organazation listed in the Simpsons are fictional i'm inclined to belive that this article is wrong and he is a Alpha Tau and the editior simply assumed Alpha Tau Omega. So for now I'm removing the ATO link and will re-write to indicate that he is simply a alum of a Greek organazation. However, hopefully someone can dig up a reference on the name of the Fraternity i think it's an intresting peice of trivia.Trey 17:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no Idea what you are talking about. Care to explain? Emi211Emi211 06:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

in the personal life section of this article it has Smithers listed as a member of Alpha Tau Omega a national men's college social fraternity. In another article listed on wikipedia Fictional fraternities and sororities it has Smithers listed as a member of Alpha Tau, which doe not exist in real life. I was wondering which it was, if either, and if anyone had a reference to prove it. Untill this is resolved i removed the info from the article. The Sentence now currently reads He is an alumnus of a college Fraternity second line of the personal life section. does that clear it up?Trey 16:25, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why was he black in the skin with blue coloured hair? Why is he not a black man now! Did he turn yellow when he started falling in love with his boss? Dying to find out, good day.

Contradiction

Waylon's dad is Waylon Sr. or Wayland? The article contradicts itself currently.

It's Waylon Sr. not Wayland. Its been fixed and i removed the tagTrey 21:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is one episode in the Simpsons where Professor Frink welcomes Bart and Lisa to a machine based on astrology. Future Bart meets up with Smithers after saving Burns from Snake. Smithers is with a lady and Bart says something to the effect of "I thought you were...you know..." to which Smithers replies "Not as long as I take this shot," to which he promptly injects himself, flailing his arms and screaming "I LOVE BOOBIES!" I forgot which episode this is but if you can find out which one I think it would be an excellent addition to the "evidence" for Smithers' homosexuality. 70.252.14.113 12:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Repetition

Is it ok to remove the large number of "gay allusions" from the Personal Life section since there is a whole separate section reserved for them anyway?

Changed "homosexual" to "gay"

"Gay" is the preferred term by the gay community to refer to its members, especially male ones. "Homosexual" is generally disfavored. This is in line with Wikipedia's policy of using terminology favored by a group when referring to that group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kabanks (talk • contribs) 06:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possessive case

The correct way to make a singular noun possessive is to add 's to the end. This is true even if the original word ends in s. Thus: Smithers's and Burns's are the correct possessive forms of the names Smithers and Burns. I'm about to correct these in the article and am puttingvthis note here so folks will understand why. :) Aleta 03:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...Are you sure it's not: Smithers' ? --Tyrfing 15:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll quote my trusty Strunk & White (3rd ed., page 1):

"1. Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's.

Follow this rule whatever the final consonant. Thus write,
Charles's friend
Burns's poems

the witch's malice"

-Aleta 19:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I'm a sad product of the American educational system and will continue to make that mistake. Although I'll try to overwrite my coding feel free to revert as needed. Benjiboi 21:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"...whose handful of members meet at Burns' creepy mansion." -- the use of 'creepy'.

There's something not right about the use of 'creepy' here as an adjective. It is a matter of opinion whether a thing is 'creepy' or not, and so it isn't fact. The view that Burns' mansion is 'creepy' would vary among one reader to another.

Duplicate Info

There are a lot of duplicate facts and information in this article. If someone was so inclined, pehaps they could clean it up?Bahamut0013 19:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT Project Banner

A user has removed the LGBT project banner twice, even though he's obviously in love with Burns, who is a man. If you have a reason for removing the banner, please post it here for discussion. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completely forgot about this... Wow. Anyway, Smithers has never been confirmed to be gay, so it's speculation. Would you tag Justin Timberlakes articles just because some people think he's gay? No. Besides, the LGBT project has played no part in the maintenance or expansion of this article, and what importance could Smithers have to the overall LGBT project? It's like The Simpsons WP taggimg every movie that The Simpsons has ever parodied. Grampa is the president of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance (Homer the Great), so you had better hurry and tag that article too. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 05:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Snarkiness aside the article clearly delves into why this character of one of the world's most popular shows in considered a gay icon (although a closeted one). Wasn't aware that a wikiproject had to demonstrate active members had contributed to the article although arguably we have as there's not a system for tracking which editor is working a behalf of which project so there's your speculation. As for tagging the article even if there's yet to be any confirmation of Smither's sexuality the tag covers articles of interest to LGBT people's issues not signifying the subject of an article is themselves LGBT. Benjiboi 00:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's the problem right there. If a WikiProject is going to add a tag on an article, it should be because the project is going to help clean up and maintain a page, however there are far too many projects that tag pages simply to make their project bigger or because an article has reached GA/FA/FL status. In a project as widespread as the LGBT project, how can a character on a TV show have any kind of importance? For example, Flanders is just as famous for being religious as Smithers is for liking Burns, and yet, the Christianity WikiProject hasn't tagged it or any of the episodes that focus on Christianity. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:26, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProjects aren't necessarily about contributing to an article. The LGBT banner specifically states This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. While the LGBT project does contribute to many articles, it can still just simply tag articles that, as it says, fall within the scope of the project.. that scope being all things LGBT, which unfortunately includes many things some gay people don't want associated with the gay community. It's a balancing act of sorts. A lot of the LGBT project is spent watching articles for LGBT-related vandalism, LGBT-related exclusion and deletion, etc. It's a novel concept, I know, but people do have agendas of trying to remove anything gay on Wikipedia and as such the LGBT project is a watchdog for such activities, in addition to its other functions of article creation, article contributing, etc. Further, I recognize several names in the history of this particular article of people who have contributed to the article, again, not that THAT is a requirement for the LGBT banner. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 01:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe so, but if I improve the article to GA or even FA status, it would quickly find its way to the list of LGBT project "accomplishments". -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't even know we had one and frankly we've done so much it's rather meaningless. Also wikiproject tags like so many tools are here to help organize articles, in the case of wikiprojects to suss out which ones are within the projects scope and depending on the project which ones are targeting for improving. As alluded above we spend an unbalanced amount of energy fighting LGBT related vandalism and drama (from pure juvenile homophobic nonsense to fighting to keep our usertags (they were all deleted) to simply justifying that our project tag should be left on an article).Benjiboi 02:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to AGF and assume that your not taking a shot at me here, but I have removed project tags from many pages, not just this one. [1][2] -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you may notice that many of those same tags have been restored. I suggest that unless you are considered a relative "expert" in a project you may want to hold off on removing a tag (like, what the harm if a talk page tag is put on in error?) and let someone from that particular project determine in it truly meets (or may one day meet) the scope of a project. Benjiboi 19:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since you all seem to be fighting so hard to keep the article as part of your project, I don't suppose any of you would actually like to HELP clean up and improve the article? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already have but will look to doing more. Benjiboi 02:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give it a shot. I love Smithers. Give me a couple days to see what kind of information I can dredge up. (And surely a forum as accessible and ephemeral as Wikipedia is not the best place for individual editors or wikiprojects to attempt to take credit for any articles within. There doesn't seem to be any glory in a free encyclopedia.) --Moni3 02:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)Moni3[reply]

Generally how I start is I do a google search of some big media sites and see what I get. Here are some search results for "Waylon Smithers" at EW.com, IGN.com, CBC.ca, canoe.ca, thestar.com and cnn.com. I have to get some shuteye, so I'll continue work tomorrow. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Smithers has never been confirmed to be gay, so it's speculation." I do recall the episode Future-drama (set in the future) Bart meets Smithers: "Mr. Smithers, I always thought you were, you know..." "No, I'm straight, as long as I take these injections every ten minutes. *injects* I love boobies!"--Tyrfing 15:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recall as well but do you remember which episode? It may speak to the characters life-long suppression or closet-ness. Benjiboi 19:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was Future-Drama. There was another episode where the gay pride parade goes past the Simpson’s house, one of the floats is a closeted float and has two people waving from inside a closet saying "We're gay, we're glad. But don't tell mom and dad." One of them is Smithers the other one is Patty or Selma (I forget which one is which). That's going by voices alone, and I can't remember which episode it's in. --Tyrfing 22:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant. Anyone know what episode the above ref gay parade was in? We might as well get it all in one go if possible. Benjiboi 23:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After a little searching I think it's the episode called Jaws Wired Shut. The episode does mention the Pride parade, Homer loses his patience with the parade after seeing a group of dogs wearing leather then starts a riot in the cinema before breaking his jaw on a statue. (I only mention it because it's so hard to link the main part of an episode with the set up.) --Tyrfing 23:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will this [3] do as a reference? --Tyrfing 23:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially, it at least asserts that fans have labeled him a closeted gay man. Benjiboi 00:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Future episodes aren't considered canon and thus usually aren't mentioned in profile sections. And, the reason I didn't add the Jaws Wired Shut reference is because you can only hear is voice. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree that future episodes are considered non-canon but even if they were the content can certainly be included. No one is disputing it's Smithers' voice coming out of the closet. Benjiboi 13:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hair Color

According to the character box, Smithers' hair color is blue in ONE episode. The image and section on "Black Smithers" show that he was black and had blue hair in Homer's Odyssey. However, I recently saw There's No Disgrace Like Home. In this episode, his hair is blue as well - and this clearly comes after Homer's Odyssey, as proven both by the episode list and the fact Smithers is not black here. So, to the best of my knowledge, Smithers' hair is blue in the first TWO episodes. 70.111.0.219 22:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

allusion missing

There was one allusion to Smithers' homosexuality in which Burns is washing his car and for some reason, Smithers catches fire, he screams to Burns to spray water on him screaming "I'm flaming!". Burns looks less than surprised. I can't remember this episode bu I know that I have seen this before. Reginmund 07:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Source for the name

Is it possible that Smithers is named after Wayland's Smithy, or is the similarity just a coincidence? 195.137.79.247 14:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess they went first with "burns" and "smithereens", names that fit people (badly) running a nuclear plant, and then they indulged themselves when choosing Smithers's first name, which is quite rarely used. This hypothesis looks quite obvious to me but then again I cannot source it. elpincha (talk) 05:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to one of the commentaries, they got his first name from Wayland Flowers. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there is a source for his first name in the commentaries, is it to far fetched to wonder if his last name came from Leonard Smithers? There is no reference in the article to that Smithers being gay, but he did publish John Addington Symonds book Male Love —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.180.156.58 (talk) 14:34, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another allusion?

In "My sister, my sitter" (S08E17), when Lisa visits Dr. Nick's confidential clinic and asks Mr. Smithers if she could go ahead of him, Mr. Smithers is shown to be the only waiting patient who is standing right in front an empty seat on the bench on which all the other patients are sitting. When he notes that he would rather have "this" taken care of as soon as possible, he is looking in the direction of his buttocks, possibly an allusion to anal stimulation with unintended results.--80.145.64.41 18:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First appearance

Currently the first appearance section of the infobox says ""Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire" (Voice only) "Homer's Odyssey"", but I think it's unnecessary to mention both episodes. Which should be the one we mention? The first time we hear him (which aired first) or the first time we say the character? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasies

The phrase Smithers has occasional fantasies about Burns seems misleading, haven't most (all?) Smithers' fantasies been about Burns? Benjiboi 16:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and he has them occasionally. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then it would be more correct to state something like all of Smithers' fantasies are about Burns...unless we want to imply he fantasizes all the time. Benjiboi 19:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Malibu Stacey

In the 1994 episode "Lisa vs. Malibu Stacy" When Lisa seeks Smithers for help in contacting the inventor of Malibu Stacey, Smithers gets the information from his home computer. Smithers is president of the Malibu Stacy Fan Club and has the largest Malibu Stacy collection in Springfield and even shoved kids out of the way to get the new Malibu Stacy doll. In "Homer vs. Dignity" Smithers asked for a week off to "make my dream come true" and mount 'Malibu Stacy, The Musical' at the Albuquerque Theater in New Mexico. With himself in the role of a Ken look-alike Smithers and a Malibu Stacy look-alike actress sit on the hood of a pink Corvette for their duet "Sold Separately"

Smithers: Sold separately, Sometimes I feel like I've been Sold separately. But out of the box I find you poseable ... [turns to Stacy] Stacy: Loveable ... [turns to Smithers] Both: Just ... like ... me. [cut to a bored man in the audience, and his wife] Man: This is better than a movie ... why?

There was no closure or any other reference to the musical so the audience is left to assume the musical had its run and closed within the week with Smithers able to be back to the nuclear plant for the following week's episode. Benjiboi 18:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have a good point, I guess I should add something about his Malibu Stacy obsession. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Documenting deleted material

The following has been removed and I imagine will get re-removed so will hold out re-adding for the time being but did want to document it rather than having to dig through the history to find it. During the thirteenth season, in "Jaws Wired Shut", a gay pride parade went past the Simpson’s house with one of the floats, "Stayin' in the closet", showing two people's arms waving from inside a closet stating "We're gay, we're glad. But don't tell mom and dad." The voices are of Smithers and Patty Bouvier. In "There's Something About Marrying" Bouvier came out. Benjiboi 19:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this should be mentioned somewhere. I recently added a couple sentences noting this, as well as the scene in Homer's Phobia where Waylon was upset that John had broken their date, but my edit was immediately reverted with the explanation that I'd given these scenes "undue weight". So I'll throw it out to the general public: Is there a place in the article these events can be mentioned with appropriate weight? This article is pretty much one long string of small examples (the dream of Burns flying in through the window, the computer-Burns saying "You're quite good at turning me on", etc etc). Mentioning each of these once seems appropriate to me, and the same should apply to the gay pride parade and Waylon's broken date with John. Thoughts? -Seansinc 15:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why it's that notable. Smithers' "in the closet" nature is discussed at length in the article, and I'm not sure why discussing a 2 second joke is really necessary. After all, it is supposed to be a brief overview of Smithers' character, not an in depth analysis of every reference to him being gay. As for Smithers' "date" with John, it is speculation because the word date is never used. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't use the word "date" in the sentence that was deleted. My exact wording was, "On one occasion, though, Smithers becomes very upset when an openly gay character, John, cancels plans to spend an evening with him, so Smithers does apparently show at least occasional interest in others besides Mr. Burns." I was careful to include only what is observably true from the episode in question, and I related it to the subject under discussion as a counter-example (noting that non-Burns interests are "occasional" -- I later stated explicitly that the majority of Smithers' attention is directed toward Mr. Burns).

The main reason I think these two examples are noteworthy is that the surrounding material notes that some Simpsons writers consider Smithers to be "Burns-sexual", a special orientation that is completely devoted to Mr. Burns, but other writers consider him gay. The closet-float scene is certainly germaine to that.

It is true that this article is about Smithers' character, but I respectfully disagree with your point about not including brief jokes. As Smithers is a supporting character, the vast majority of what we know about him comes from just such brief jokes. This is obvious from the fact that the bulk of the article is made up of them. How are the ones I mentioned above (Burns flying in through the window and "You're quite good at turning me on") more substantive than the gay pride parade and the scene with John? Other examples include Smithers kissing Burns on the lips and saying it was just a sign of respect, playing a Ken-lookalike in the Malibu Stacy musical, acting disgusted when Burns pursued a female love interest, and so forth -- they're all quick jokes lasting only a few seconds, and they're all quite relevant to the subject of the article. -Seansinc 20:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you folks were more interested in finding sources so that the page could possibly become an FA rather than trying to add as many references to his homosexuality as possible. The section is already long enough (perhaps even too long, as I have been considering trying to trim it down) and it does a pretty good job at establishing that he might be gay. Like I said, the section is supposed to be a brief summary, not an in depth analysis of every joke. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really consider one sentence an "in-depth analysis". And I did source the scene with John by putting in a link to Homer's Phobia, the episode it took place in. But you're entitled to your opinion, although I personally think you're way offbase on this one.

Anyway, that's two people who feel the gay pride parade scene should be included and one who feels it shouldn't. Anyone else want to chime in? -Seansinc 16:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I vote yes, it should. It was the only time Smithers acknowledged in a public way that he is a closet homosexual. What's more if you view every episode he's been in since 1989, and weigh all of the references to his closeted homosexuality with any other relevant aspect of his character, you'll find they far outweigh anything else. To say that these specifics are, therefore, 'undue weight' is just not credible from a totally objective standpoint. What's more, if you want the best sourcing, the series itself is all you need. And unless you cite the examples, you are not doing your job here. This reference is, I think, unquestionably important. NYDCSP 17:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The section already establishes that he is possibly a closeted homosexual, so what's the point of diving into specific jokes? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current page is fine, referring to too many one-off jokes is really to indiscriminate. Gran² 21:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If specific references are noteworthy because they marked a significant moment in the character's development, they should be included. Also, if those references had a significant tie-in to a major social or cultural trend of the times, and/or were tied to a significantly discussed event (by the writers and producers especially), they should also be referenced. The reference being discussed at this moment, in this thread, is the one time that Smithers explicitly admits his homosexuality, and the context of it being from behind a closet door on top of a gay pride parade float draws in several cultural ironies that are unquestionably topical. And there was a later incident (as already mentioned here) where the writers and producers announced one of the characters would be coming out, and it gained substantial media coverage. It was no accident that speculation fell on the two characters (Patty and Smithers) who were part of this precise reference being discussed as 'one-off' - it was not. Therefore, the reference Seansinc is defending has proper weight, does meet the test of relevance, and should be included. If some of you feel this adds to an overall volume of gay content issue, then propose trimming something less relevant? (But again, if you were to weigh every time Smithers has been referenced or seen on the series, the majority would be connected to homosexuality. That's the canon. If that's what you have a problem with, then that's something else.) 201.6.69.127 20:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the speculation about Smithers coming out in that one episode is discussed extensively in the Reception section. Besides, it wasn't that one moment that made people suspect Smithers, even if it wasn't for that Smithers still would have been the most suspected character. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Status

The article has achieved GA Status after being deemed as having passed the GA Criteria

Congratulations,

Tovojolo 12:47, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The road to FA

Any ideas? Based on Troy McClure (which is an FA), I think the article needs some copyediting, and a better cultural influence section would be handy. He's had to have had some kind of positive impact on the LGBT community, so I guess we need to start looking. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As well, I'm not sure about this sentence: In many ways, he represents the stereotypical closeted gay man. He has gay friends and hangs out in Springfield's gay village, and goes on a vacation to a male-only resort." That sentence makes it seem like having gay friends and hanging out at a gay village are stereotypes. There has to be a better way that can be said. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smithers' Malibu Stacy collection (and Burns' screen saver greeting), his association with known gays, and his habit of vacationing at gay resorts were all listed in maybe the 25 different news stories I pulled for the paragraph about the press involving who was coming out of the closet in Springfield. How about writing it as: Smithers' habits 1 2 3 have been used by news outlets as evidence that he is a closeted homosexual.(ref ref ref) --Moni3 12:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Moni3[reply]

Do you have any specific sources that could be used? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A source

No time to look at it now, will get to it later. [4] -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weyland the Smith

Anyone got any info about the name relation between Waylon Smithers and Wayland Smith? Could just be a coincidence, but vaguely interesting (to someone like myself who spents far too much time reading about the long dead people). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 03:27, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's just a coincidence. The producers say his first name came from Wayland Flowers. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:29, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see this discussion has been here before above. Slightly strange coincidence, but alright. I wonder if Waylond was a gay smith (all the Simpsons metal workers seem to be gay). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 03:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smithers' Commitment Ceremony

The episode Sex, Pies, and Idiot Scrapes mentions that Smithers is about to have a commitment ceremony. I added a brief mention of this fact, and it was immediately removed. This is a pretty huge event in Smithers' life, and although we only know of it from a quick mention by Marge, it is canonical that the ceremony is planned. If he's planning a commitment ceremony, he's in a relationship (albeit off-screen). It should be mentioned. What do others think? Seansinc (talk) 05:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless they actually show it, or it is mentioned again, I don't think it should be mentioned. As Scorpion0422 mentioned in his edit summary, if it is just a brief one time joke, we don't ever list that kind of stuff. CTJF83Talk 05:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Smithers.jpg

The image Image:Smithers.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:00, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion in Category:Fictional LGBT characters

One thing that I'm always astounded by this article is that the category structure doesn't include one of the fictional LGBT character categories. While I am aware that, "officially", he is "Burns-sexual", exclusion from these categories for this fact to be unwise for several reasons:

There is considerable debate among the production team whether Smithers is gay or Burns-sexual.
The show is not subtle with the homosexuality hints to men other than Burns; see "Homer's Phobia", "Jaws Wired Shut", "Three Gays of the Condo" (and, I think, Future-Drama).
Smithers is arguably one of the most influential LGBT characters in contemporary fiction, even if he isn't "officially" gay.
The article is already included in the LGBT project and List of LGBT characters in film, radio, and TV fiction.
Even were the second point invalid, there is a, as I've observed, unwritten low bar for characters to be included. Hell, the LGBT project

was the second example I would've given in this WikiProject Council thread. The sexual/romantic attraction to Burns would certainly qualify it for categorisation.

The issue of Smithers' sexuality is inseparable from the character as a whole; this is more of a fact than opinion (when was the last time Smithers had a meaningful presence in an episode without a sexuality reference?).

Therefore, I propose that the article be included in one of the categories, at least. While I think that a case could be made for the "Fictional gay men" category, it would be acceptable to put him in the wider ranging "fictional LGBT characters" category because he's never officially come out. Sceptre ^(talk) 23:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need to go through this again? These debates are an annoying waste of time and nine times out of ten go nowhere. In the show, he's strongly hinted to be gay, but not "officially". Yes, they make dozens of jokes about it, but they have insinuated that practically every character in the show is gay (hell, Homer has kissed more men than Smithers has, so why don't you campaign to have him added as well?). In the end, do the categories really matter? The article already acknowledges that he is, most likely, gay and it's not like being in a category will make any kind of difference. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 23:48, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Scorpion, and adding we need to wait till he comes out on the show to add any LGBT category CTJF83Talk 00:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does, but my assertion is that the strong hints by themselves—backed up by the 2008 GLAAD list (though, bizzarely, not the 2006 list)—do qualify Smithers for being in one of the categories. Seeing as he's already included in on-wiki and off-wiki lists, and on-wiki LGBT projects, I don't think we should prevent the article for one of the most prolific LGBT characters in fiction from being in a category just because he's not "officially" gay; sexuality is more fluid than "gay", "bisexual", "straight". Smithers is beyond a doubt an LGBT character, even if he doesn't fit snugly into one of those three labels, so should be categorised as such. That, and I prefer lists and categories to have a fair amount of synchronicity. Sceptre ^(talk) 11:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I checked, GLAAD had nothing to do with the actual show, so why should their interpretation hold any weight here? Smithers probably shouldn't be in the list either, and if I wanted to get into a long headache of a debate over it (I don't) I'd try to remove his name. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 15:39, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother Scorp, I tried and was reverted a few times by User:Otto4711 CTJF83Talk 16:22, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think, however, we should get community consensus in this discussion instead of the same few people. Sceptre ^(talk) 18:08, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]