Jump to content

Talk:The Far Side

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted image

[edit]

The image of "Gary Larson's take on Creationism" seems to have a bad link. In the face of the current controversies over Evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design, is this really the appropriate cartoon to post? I can think of others that are more indicative of The Far Side. Too, do we have rights to post that image? Removing image tag for now. -Fuzzy 15:13, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"In the face of the current controversies over Evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design, is this really the appropriate cartoon to post?" I don't see anything wrong with it. Dante (Δαντε) 00:37, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You're absolutely right that there's no particular problem with the specific cartoon. I'd been through a long day of people arguing about the whole Kansas evolution bit and having the image tag come up bad as well... just bad timing. I thought nothing of it until now, when I saw the reply. -Fuzzy 13:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Far Side Uncertainty Principle

[edit]

Can someone provide a source for this information. The phrase "Far Side Uncertainty Principle" has zero Google hits. Is this original research? --JW1805 00:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • So, does anybody have a source for this? The original "Far Side Uncertainty Principle" article was created by an anon user. If no one can provide a source, I'm going to delete this section. I just think it is somebody's original research. --JW1805 03:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What cartoon was this?

[edit]

"Another famous example requires the reader to know obscure facts about sea life, a comic that was misunderstood by a marine-biologist friend of Larson's."

I haven't read the cartoon, but would like to request that the user who added the above information to the article please explain which cartoon he is talking about, i.e. why it was so confusing. Scorpionman 13:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Cartoon is January 14, 1991, (Vol 2. Pg 302, The Complete Far Side) It is also discussed in the 1991 introduction. The cartoon depicts two shipwreck survivors clinging to a small island. One survivor tells the other, “Well, we’ll never want for food, Doris. ... This rock is absolutely encrusted with oysters and muscles – all the way to the top!" The joke is that these creatures live below high tide.

Now it's not funny...

It sure isn't! I can't understand that kind of humor. Scorpionman 22:35, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's irony. The couple has enough food to survive, but they'll be dead when the tide comes in.
"Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes." If the reference requires that much information to be understood, the explanation should be in the article itself. Please clarify your additions to the article. It's bad enough that there are no specific citations or references, don't compound the problem by throwing in unexplained trivia as if the larger world is somehow supposed to know what you are thinking. 71.204.204.249 13:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy

[edit]

I just read a collection of Far Side, and there were definitely some entries with more than one box. I'm going to change the article to reflect this truth.Tix 21:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Goodall?

[edit]

The link "Jane Goodall Controversy" just leads to the Jane Goodall page, and there's no mention on that page of any Far Side related controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.222.188.230 (talk) 05:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we just describe the controversy here on this page? I think it relates more to Larsen than it does to Goodall, it has so little on her page that we should just do it here.

Mbatman72 23:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


This really wasn't much of a controversy. One individual who worked for Goodall took offense and wrote Larson an angry letter, purportedly on Goodall's behalf. It later turned out he hadn't checked with her and that she was very fond of the panel the letter had attacked. One person's reaction does not a controversy make, especially when that reaction is based upon a mistaken assumption about someone else's feelings. The word "Incident" seems more appropriate than "Controversy". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.144.201.12 (talk) 00:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Inspiration" Section

[edit]

I've severely edited the "Inspiration" Section, because I believe the dependency is far from obvious. e.g. Larson didn't invent the idea of monsters in closets. I was going to delete the whole section, except the added "homage" was interesting. In any case, I still propose the whole section is deleted. Rocksong 02:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citations or Deletion of References in other Media

[edit]

The 'References in Other Media' section seems highly speculatory. It needs citations showing a definitive link. The only 'reference' cited that seems convincing as an actual reference to Far Side is the Toy Story one, the others seem to be coincidences, if even that. I doubt Chicken Farm was inspired by Far Side. I'll give it a few days for someone to find citations, but otherwise it needs to be deleted. --The Way 08:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Repeat comic?

[edit]

In The Complete Far Side, Gary Larson says that he drew the same comic twice. However, he doesn't list which one it is. Does anyone know which one? Thanks.

"This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Far Side article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes." 71.204.204.249 13:07, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, like you did? Jmdeur (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List?

[edit]

I think that what it features is just stupid. You could go on forever saying the contents, the point is that the far side does not consistently focus on the same thing. I think it needs some major edits.

Mbatman72 03:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean the "Recurring themes" list, totally agree. This whole section could be reduced to a couple of paragraphs, and the list is neither truly comprehensive nor cohesive anyway. Gut it, describe those features that are truly and frequently recurring (cows, anthropomorphism and anti-anthropomorphism, etc.) and discard the rest. For instance, "scientists in labs" probably don't appear any more frequently in The Far Side than they do in Frank and Ernest, The Neighborhood or Alley Oop, so it doesn't merit mention here. 71.204.204.249 13:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes, yes, YES, that needs a revamp. A list of recurring themes shouldn't be longer than maybe 10 items, or 20 if you stretch it (and I mean total). Really, that is WAY too long. 24.16.135.149 (talk) 23:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mistakes section

[edit]

This section is lifted almost verbatim from the book The Prehistory of the Far Side, except here the cartoons are described rather than shown. This really should be attributed as a quotation. Dmccormac 19:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just going to make the same comment when I saw that someone already had. It clearly hasn't been acted on. So what's the solution?149.159.109.122 03:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm removing the mistakes section, unless anyone objects. Bkatcher (talk) 17:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Wdogart.jpg

[edit]

Image:Wdogart.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Available source for finding strips, dates

[edit]

For the record, I have The Complete Far Side sitting menacingly on my bookshelf, featuring within every last Far Side strip, but for those in the Prehistory of... and the book-specific specials. I can provide descriptions, dates etc. of specific strips for improving the article if given enough data for a search. Give me a hoot on my talk page if you need anything. --Kizor 07:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I have all the cartoons and caption and cross-referencse for The Complete Far Side and the books, and History of The Far Side, on a CD with a search engine and database, so if anyone would like information on Far Side Cartoon, drop me a line on my page Whereiswally 01:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that's illegal... 216.232.154.4 (talk) 23:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My massive edits

[edit]

I have deleted a lot of this article for the various reasons:

Original research, things copied directly from Far Side books, LONG descriptions of single panel cartoons, and personal POV. Please comment here if you think I've errored. Bkatcher (talk) 17:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Linking

[edit]

I was searching for this page under the farside. should farside (with no space) redirect to this page? Iron Dullahan (talk) 02:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, there are several other articles with 'far side' in the title, let's just leave it as with the disambiguation page. Bkatcher (talk) 16:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is critisim bigger than description?

[edit]

I find it odd that the critism section which is ill sourced except for the Jane Goodall controversy is larger than the description of Larson's style influence etc.

Does every single wikipedia article need a critisim section? Does this balance articles or does this systematic adding of criticisms sections become a bias in itself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.108.31.36 (talk) 19:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Gary Larson's book The Prehistory of the Far Side, he shows controversial strips he published. I believe whoever did this section was trying to explain them, but never sourced the book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.212.111 (talk) 13:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Online"

[edit]

The article says, "It is difficult to find many Far Side cartoons online..."

What? Was this written before Google Image Search or something? It's simple to find many Far Side cartoons online. Try it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.159.56.2 (talk) 06:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Far Side. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:05, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Far Side. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:50, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The "notable cartoons" section is heavily biased towards controversial cartoons

[edit]

There are seemingly more well-known and notable Far Side cartoons than those listed in the "notable" section (for instance, "Midvale School for the Gifted"). The article seems rather unbalanced, given that so much of it is dedicated to a couple of interesting, but non-representative comics. Khromegnome (talk) 16:02, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We can add others that are not as controversial as long as there are reliable sources providing commentary on them. I am absolutely sure more people know of the School for the Gifted -- but has anyone actually written about it? Labeling the section as "notable" rather than "controversal" keeps the tone in balance without other examples to work from. --Masem (t) 16:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We can only mention individual cartoons that have sources; it has nothing to do with bias. Controversy tends to be covered more than non-controversy. freshacconci (✉) 16:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm arguing the opposite. I think that these are a good representation of controversial cartoons (one way to be notable), but a poor representation of notable cartoons. Hence, calling the section "notable" instead of "controversial" gives the wrong impression. It'd be an improvement to change the name of the section, and even better to add some examples of notable cartoons (googling, there seem to be articles written about "Midvale school for the Gifted"). (And sorry to use the loaded word "bias" - I meant it only in the literal sense that one subcategory is overrepresented) Khromegnome (talk) 06:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agree Khromegnome - someone seems to have conflated controversial with notability - they are not the same. The Midvale cartoon is definitely "notable". I'm not sure how you would populate the rest of it without becoming an OR fest of personal opinion. As such I would suggest changing the section title to "Controversial" and calling it good. Ckruschke (talk) 18:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Ckruschke[reply]

School for the Gifted

[edit]

Could someone update the "Notable cartoons" section to include the "School for the gifted" cartoon? The Mo-Ja'al (talk) 22:32, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We need a reliable source to state it is a notable cartoon. It's common knowledge that it is, but I haven't found any reliable source that actually says that. --Masem (t) 22:35, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New cartoons

[edit]

Is anyone working on something about the new cartoons being released Right Now? Thmazing (talk) 04:22, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Already updated that he started putting out new cartoons this month. --Masem (t) 04:56, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Return of the Killer Windshield" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Return of the Killer Windshield. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 2#Return of the Killer Windshield until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Bacon 02:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Midvale School for the Gifted merchandise

[edit]

The last sentence of this section was "The legacy of this cartoon has spawned numerous amounts of merchandise." with a citation leading to a page which only has one example.[1] I deleted "numerous amounts of" and the citation, replacing it citations to pages with a t-shirt and a mug. Are there other examples? Mcljlm (talk) 14:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=d2fbde582ddfbd7f&sxsrf=ADLYWIIJm6LMNyh6D1KdwVtR4w2GCWzzag:1716539515390&q=Midvale+School+for+the+Gifted+merchandise&tbm=shop&source=lnms&prmd=sinmvbt&ved=1t:200715&ictx=111&biw=960&bih=455&dpr=2
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Far_Side&oldid=1259875916"