Template talk:The Simpsons/Archive

suggestion

Have a interwiki to add: pt:Predefinição:The Simpsons
--Vin 2 (talk) 14:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Template edit

Hey I'm the IP that added recently. I think we should work together on this template, its something I've been wanting to get around to for some time. A show as long running and intertwined with modern culture as the Simpsons should have a really nice (and possibly large) Template I think.

I see your trying to separate the family members from the springfield members. Why don't we maybe make two catagories (and move the link to the full character list), one for members of the Simpson family (since its the signature family of course) and another for the secondary Springfield characters (I suggest keeping it to the most prolific though, keeping the majority of them to the lists we could offer the links for.) I'll make a quick alteration now, tell me what you think later.

Maybe we could even split the template's characters further, like one for the Simpson family members themselves, one for the Teachers and the children, one for villain and other misc characters, and another for Springfield's prominant citizens like Quimby, Wiggum, Apu etc. I'll go around putting the template on what I can as well.--Kiyosuki 23:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't like your style. Yellow and purple is a bad combination. My goal for the yellow colour was that is should match the skin colour of the family, but I got a bit lazy - maybe later. The goal for the template is not to include every single character we have an article about. It should just be a quick overview and not be cluttered with to many things. The readers can still access the articles through some of the articles in the template. I would reduce the number of characters mentioned now. --Maitch 00:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah the color I understand, I'm having difficulty with that. But there should be more characters than just the family. I don't want it long either, I'll take some off. But the character section needs some organization and catagorization or it looks just like its separated with a paragraph...which looks a bit amataur-ish.

As for what characters to include. We can get into that later, I have to take off. But I'm going to take off Martin and I'm thinking about Lenny and Carl...although they're characters you see so often. Since the show has such a diverse and well known cast, I think the most prominant characters should be included like Burns of course, Smithers, Chief Wiggum, the Mayor, and Apu and so on. You know, characters that had a major role in at least one or a few more episodes. I'm thinking Snake should probably be taken off although he's seen so often...he rarely has much of an impact on anything.

Also...should the text be centered instead of left-alligned perhaps? I have no "style" as you put it, I'm completely new to this but there are some really nice templates on this site and I think with this show in particular, it demands a really nice one.

Also...I've seen some templates with quite a few characters listed. By no means does every character in this show have to be mentioned but I think it benefits the template to have the characters everyone knows and recognizes also listed. --Kiyosuki 00:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I think we should only mention characters there has been involved in a storyline as oppose to characters who serves as one off gags. I think we should limit the number to "only" 20 characters. If you find somebody more important you exchange it with a less important character. For some reason people had forgotten Flanders.

If we centre the text it will hurt the readability as long as the left categories are left-aligned. The solution to that is to centre the whole thing, but that would make the template way to high. I will try and modify it a bit more. --Maitch 13:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Springfield Police Department needs to be added to the template under locations.208.107.168.154 22:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

New Template suggestion

Yeah this template could be pretty large, and thats why I have a new suggestion. Although I think the selection is pretty good where it is now, the problem is that there's still so many characters people are going to want to know about whom have an article on this website that we're inevitably going to have a problem with people constantly adding a character to this template. I have a suggestion for that, what if we split the template? Like make two separate templates, one for the general information such as the publications, hallmarks, and other general show related information(This one in other words), and another template dedicated just to the characters?

I was looking up information on how to make a template just for my own sake (I even made another version of this one, I'm pretty proud of it considering its my first scratch built but I feel uncertain about it right now.) and someone suggested this idea. What would be nice about it is it would make both the character template and the information template a nice size, and it would be flexible as the only page you'd really have to put both on at the same time would be the main Simpsons page. You can put only the info template on general information wiki's, and only the character template on individual character pages. That would give the freedom to include more info on the character template for better convenience to a browser.

I already made a possible character template, here's the code:

And if the characters are given they're own template, this will free up this template so you can be more creative with it. It also makes it easier to navigate.

Either this (This is in the style of how it is now)...

Or this (akin to the character template example I gave)...

Because the Simpsons has so many details in it, I think its warrented to do this personally. Not only will this satisfy everyone and make it so neither you or I have to reverse names added to the one template because random people don't see their favorite character in the list, but its also highly convenient for people browsing the Simpsons wiki's. While they can go to the big main list of character pages, that page is really long as are some of the other "main" lists of characters. Not only does this highlight the characters with pages so a person can go straight to them quickly and easilly, but it makes less clutter since we don't have to have the character template on information pages like the publications page, and in turn the information template on character pages. We already have a separate template dedicated just to Simpsons video games so I really think its the best way to go. Considering how large this show's cast is, its very justified. I'll go to each character page gradually and put this on if we do it this way.

It'll save you and I a lot of trouble, and it makes it much easier for people to find individual articles among all the information around this show. Can we try it for a few days and see how it goes? We can always reverse it if it doesn't work out but I feel very strongly that this is a great idea. I won't do it until I hear from you, but please consider this.--Kiyosuki 21:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't have any problem with making two templates. I still prefer the wide template to the high template. It is easier to find what you are looking for and it doesn't take up as much space on the page. On {{The Simpsons}} we should include the core family (Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa and Maggie) and nothing else, which also was my original design. The character template should not be featured on the main page. --Maitch 21:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Well I suggested that for just the Simpsons' main article only because if a person goes straight there, that can be the vocal point of the templates so a person can go take their "tour" whatever direction they want to take. I mean, we don't have to do it but we can give it a try. I know you wanted to put the family members only on {{The Simpsons}}. but this show is a cultural icon around the world and while the Simpsons may be the main characters, the rest of the noteworthy cast is undoubtably just as well known now...and people who come and look for the other character pages may want an easy way to access all the characters. Thats what my thought was on that. A show like Family Guy, South Park, or other series' that center more on a few characters (not to mention having been around for not as long as the Simpsons) rather than a huge cast can get away with putting the main characters on one template. But many of the characters in this show have been characterized highly, many of which enough to warrent their own individual article. So I think its a good idea to just put all the characters into their own thing, they're worthy of a mini encyclopedia on their own so it makes sense. Although I think it'd be cleaner and more efficient to put all the characters on a separate template, if you choose to keep the Simpsons family members themselves on though as before, I think for the individual character pages including the Simpsons it'd be best to just have the character list.--Kiyosuki 22:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I made the character template. I'll try and spread it around to all the character pages only, tell me what you think.--Kiyosuki 22:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with the character template. As long as it doesn't go on The Simpsons article. It will take up too much space and it will not be likely that it will pass FA standards, which I'm working to get the article up to. I could compromise and not having the core family in {{The Simpsons}}, because there are plenty of link oppertunities during the article. --Maitch 22:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Related media

Just thinking, should we add Family Guy to the related media, I mean they've admitted it wouldn't be around if it weren't for the Simpsons... - Adolphus79 06:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Question

What happened to the 'writers' section of this template?

What writers section? There is a seperate template for the writers, which can be found here. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Simpsons name origins

Didin't there use to be a page called "list of Simpsons name origins" or something, and it had the origins/inspirations for the names of Simpsons characters. I'm sure I saw it somewhere. Was it deleted (or am I just losing my mind)? Rhino131 00:02, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello? Is anyone there?Rhino131 19:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Navbox edit

• This template should be in 100% view. The 75% view is too narrow to see view at 1024x768 screen. --BWCNY (talk) 06:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
  • My screen is smaller than that and it looks fine to me. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 08:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
    • I also prefer 75%. --Maitch (talk) 11:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, it should be 100%; this template looks stupid underneath other templates, and it should be the same as the rest of Wikipedia's templates. Mr. Absurd (talk) 05:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The Simpsons Ride/The Ride

Ok, to end an ongoing edit war, I would like to discuss here what people think is the best name. I personally believe that "The Simpsons Ride" is the best solution, because we also say "The Simpsons Movie" and not just "The Movie". I will however go with whatever the majority of people thinks. --Maitch (talk) 09:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I think it should definitely be "The Simpsons Ride"—it's the proper title, less ambiguous, and I see no reasoning for shortening it. Mr. Absurd (talk) 00:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hallmarks & Opening Sequence...

Regarding the "Hallmarks" line of the template...

Currently listed are Opening sequence, Theme song, Chalkboard gag, Couch gag, Treehouse of Horror episodes, and Recurring jokes. Considering that Chalkboard gag and Couch gag are both now redirected to The Simpsons opening sequence, should they be removed? - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)