Talk:Family Guy season 8

Television List‑class Mid‑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 articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Animation List‑class Top‑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 articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Note: This article needs to be updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OVRKLL (talk • contribs) 09:40 am, 28, September, 2009

Something, Something, Something already aired 12/22/2009, see here [1]. changing page again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.227.226.209 (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can edit IMDB, find a reference from where ever it supposedly aired. CTJF83 chat 00:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

only a few minute preview aired on adultswim, not the full episode. Grande13 (talk) 13:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Partial Terms of Endearment

Sound off as to what you think should be done about the inclusion of this episode in the season eight episode list. For my money, I would put it there as Season #21 and Total #147 and leave the air date blank or put "unaired" on it. Am I right in saying that it will be included in the next lot of DVDs, or the volume after that? Besides, there's nothing to say that Fox or Adult Swim won't air the episode on a later date, like the "Wish Upon a Weinstein" episode. If that's the case, then the information can always be changed. What do you guys think? SchrutedIt08 (talk) 01:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, not really part of the season, I think it is fine just listing it at List of Family Guy episodes CTJF83 chat 02:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

its an 8th season episode that was banned, so its still part of the season. we dont need the season count of 21 next to it, but it is an episode so should be counted in the overall total. It wasnt made for dvd or anything as Fox could have aired it this season as it was promoted during the various tv festivals as an upcoming episode this season where lois has an abortion. Grande13 (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Grande13. Unless it is aired as a part of a future season, which is highly unlikely, the episode was produced for the eighth season, but simply remains unaired at this point in time. ~~It will likely be released on the Volume Nine DVD (not season 9),~~ at which point, I'm sure Adult Swim will also decide to air it soon afterwards. Gage (talk) 23:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

its actually been stated it will have a seperate release not on one of the standard volume releases. It will be just a standalone episode dvd possibly with a special included as wellGrande13 (talk) 00:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have to fork out another 20 bucks just for one episode? That sucks. But I think this is a good solution. The air date can always be added later if one of the networks decides to put it on the air. Good work, guys. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 06:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think i recall they would include the seth and alex variety show on the dvd as well, hopefully something gets announced soon for it with a release dateGrande13 (talk) 13:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't need to be in the table, as the table also appears on List_of_Family_Guy_episodes, the episode is now listed twice on that page. Adding a link underneath to that part of the table would be sufficient than to guess it would've aired as part of season 8 - which is actually original research and isn't allowed on wikipedia. Wattlebird (talk) 23:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

please wait for a consensus before making any changes. It is a season 8 episode, just an unaired one which is made clear in the table. It doesnt matter if it appears twice on the main list as this is a special case. Its not original research either as there were many articles stating how the episode was intended for this current season(they even did a live table read for it at one of the comic con shows) and it was only FOX's decision that it wasnt aired. so please wait for a consensus before making any drastic changesGrande13 (talk) 06:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i've kept the link you added that redirects the link to the season 8 page. As long as we focus on different things in each section it doesnt matter how it appears on the table. On the episode list it can strictly have the plot, and on the straight to dvd section it can have more details on why it didnt air and such. Again, it was a season 8 episode that Fox chose not to air on television and instead send directly to DVD. How its released doesn't stop it from being an episode in the seasonGrande13 (talk) 06:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

should the episode be labeled as episode 21 or episode 14? since it's airing as 8x14 in the UK. for all we know 8x14 is where it would've aired had FOX not decided to not air it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wattlebird (talk • contribs) 23:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just at the end, if a number at all, the UK airdates could be diff then US CTJF83 pride 02:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Summaries

The summaries on this page are too long and it would be more appropriate on the episode's pages themselves. Can someone sum these up in a short manner?--174.66.8.144 (talk) 20:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed I fixed it once before and someone changed it back, thanks for pointing it out. CTJF83 chat 03:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I noticed season 5 and 8 have much longer summaries than the rest of the seasons, a few isolated episodes amongst those have some lengthy summaries as well. I mean, holy crap I fell asleep reading them, honest to god. There should be some friggin consistency! A brief sentence or two should be enough, don't you think? Inb4 Buzz Killington 174.88.20.139 (talk) 02:50, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan note and unexplained reversion

There was an orphaned note "a" in the "Notes" section. It started "a FOX has stated this episode ..." but there was no "a" linked in the article above. I tried to fix this with these edits. Those edits were then reverted with no explanation.

The problem remains - maybe there is a better way to fix it, but just reverting does not help. Were my fixes not correct? Both this article and the list article List of Family Guy episodes appeared to work correctly after my edits. Now, the list article has a note "a" that does not work.

As a stop-gap I have now part-fixed the problem by restoring the ref lost (note a in "Partial Terms of Endearment") in this edit. What do other editors suggest? Remove the note completely maybe? At the least "this episode" should be expanded to name the actual episode, but the list article also transcludes this article and the note is somewhat redundantly duplicated there. Meanwhile, may I ask editors to use edit summaries so other editors can understand why a particular edit was reverted. -84user (talk) 23:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for the note, especially not on the List of Family Guy episodes article. More information can be found on the respective article's page, and the subject is already addressed in the production section of this article. Gage (talk) 13:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]