Talk:Boy Meets World/Archive 1

Mallrats reference

While i'm not sure of the episode's name, in the one where they plan a rave/anniversary topanga refers to frankie as a "mallrat" referencing Ethan suplee's role as willam black in mallrats--Aaronpark 21:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Bad influences

A lot of the episodes have very bad examples, i.e. getting drunk, and does not seem very fit for young viewers. Though edited for sex jokes and harassment, it still poses a bad example. channelsufer08 11:03, 15 August 2007

Yes, but in all episodes, it is made clear by the end that those are bad things to do. And even some end with one of those 'real-life' comments by the cast making it clear that they are bad things. It's all about growing up and facing these problems. I think there are A LOT worse things on television. --Pilotboi / talk / contribs 04:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Some recent updates

To whoever made the 'some fans consider season one non-canon' comment - if you do not have a source for that statement, it will be removed for being POV. In general, I will be making several POV cleanups over the next week or so. Rscibett 19:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Lets also keep the continuity errors to specific things, not generalizations about character personalities. Rscibett 19:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Disney Remake

There is no source provided for the claim that Disney will be remaking the show.

I was wondering about that myself. I searched everywhere I could think and have found nothing on this. Also, the person who updated this is not a registered user and never left a source, so I am removing it. If anyone has valid information on this that can be referenced, feel free to put it back and include a link to your source. Rscibett 16:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

High school name trivia

Did anyone notice that the High School is called John Adams High School (with the appropriate mascot Patriots) and William Daniels, who played Mr. Feeny played John Adams in 1776 on Broadway, and the movie that came from it?

No I didn't, but I guess that's interesting. sharpdust 21:44 Sept 7, 2005 (UTC)

Looks like someone added a whole section about 1776. --Jaardon 07:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

The show was never compared to Wonder Years

They have nothing to do with each other, other than the fact that Savages starred in both of them.

That is true... Although to say that it "never" was compared to The Wonder Years is a bit presumptuous, isn't it? However, it shouldn't be in the article unless it can be backed up... (And sign your stuff with four tildes (~) guys! Emily 21:21, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Unless someone can provide some sources that openly compared these shows, I will remove most of this (it is very POV if we do not have any sources).Rscibett 20:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Things to add (or remove)

I'm adding the fact that Mr. Feeny taught Cory, Topanga, and Shawn every year of the show, and it is mentioned MANY times that Mr. Feeny has taught the three of them every single year of their lives, all through elementary school. However, Eric is still somehow a former student of Feeny's! This is another continuity problem... Emily 21:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Eric was four years ahead of them in the first season, right? So, Feeny may very well have taught Eric when he was in third grade, or, he may have taught Eric in a different class. Pending how the system is set up, sometimes teachers even travel between Elementary and High schools throughout the day.

Could someone familiar with the show maybe add the name of the actor who played them to each characters bio? And why bother having a link to "Topanga Lawrence" that redirects to this article in the article?Optimus Sledge 22:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I think we should try to eliminate references to specific episodes from character descriptions. We should be focusing more on the overall development of the character instead. Hydrokinetics12 22:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the genre of the series page should be edited to be Teen Drama / Sitcom. Hydrokinetics12 21:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Characters

I like the look of the Characters section, but it seems to have a few problems. The section on Cory does not talk about him at all, just his relationships to the other characters. Also the section on Topanga is much longer than any other section. Finally, there is no listing for Joshua Matthews, but he does have a separate article devoted to him. Sarahjane10784 22:46, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the top portion so that links to characters direct to the relevant subsection of the Characters section. Sarahjane10784 23:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I merged the page Joshua Matthews with this page. Sarahjane10784 21:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Did Boy Meets World count as having Cousin Oliver Syndrome when Joshua was born? Just curious. Vulcanlad 21:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The show never really focused on Joshua though. It seemed like he was born, was a baby for awhile and then was like 4 in the series finale. Also, what's up with the use of middle names for some of the characters? It should be all or none. SpikeZoft 13:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

That's OK with me. Joshua seemed to disappear, & then reappear on the series finale, 3 years older. It wasn't my idea to use the characters' middle names. 152.163.101.5 18:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Why is Angela not in the group photo? Could someone find one that includes her? Noneofyourbusiness 20:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Someone really doesn't like Eric Matthew's character development during the series. I think calling him "psychotic" is a bit much. It is good to note a change, but forcing your POV on it doesn't help tone of article. 24.5.235.194 06:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Summary of upcoming and suggested edits

• Removing people from the recurring characters list that have already been described in detail earlier in the characters section (J. Turner and C. Hunter)
• Removing some POV items (e.g. - "She has an amazing talent for singing.")
• Lengthening the section or Cory and shortening the section on Topenga. Doesn't anyone find it odd that the section on the main character is 1 paragraph and the section on Topenga is 8? I'll probably remove the section about her parents' actors changing as it doesn't have much to do with her and its mentioned again later on under the continuity section.
• Changing the order on the characters section a bit (moving up Eric, Feeny, Alan, and Amy - I'll probably use the order in which they joined the show)
• Updating info on the "The House" setting to including the boys' bedroom/bathroom.
• Clean up the redundancy in the DVD releases section.

I'd also like to change up the synopsis a bit to focus less on similarities to other shows (Happy Days and Wonder Years) and more on what the show was actually about (common plotlines, etc). Please leave your thoughts here! Rscibett 16:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Addition: I want to remove all the inconsistency information from the individual character bios since there is another whole section dedicated to it (there are a lot of duplicate references to topenga's sister, shawn's brother and sister, etc).

Also, when did the show parody Rounders? I think that's an error that should be removed unless someone can tell me otherwise. Thanks. Rscibett 20:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the synopsis can benefit from a season to season change rather than just a relisting of the main characters. Hydrokinetics12 22:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

In addition to focusing less on similarities to other shows, the similarities to 1776 should also be removed. --Jaardon 07:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

1776 link

Does anyone notice the title of the schools? John Adams? William Daniels played John Adams in 1776. 71.111.232.40 18:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Remove the Entire Section

This fact is mentioned in the trivia section dedicated to links between Boy Meets World and 1776. Personally I think the entire section should be removed because aside from this coincidence of name, the other "references" don't really directly reference 1776 and are just similarities. --Jaardon 07:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Chet Hunter as a spirit

Chet Hunter makes an appearance as a ghost in the series finale. He is upset when Jack Hunter has made the decision to give up his money and go off with Rachel. He accepts it when he realizes that they are going to the peace corps, to help people. He says goodbye to Jack and Shawn. Before he leaves, he pinches Rachel. I made a minor change to the Chet Hunter bio to reflect this. Rev. Uncle Adam 22:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Recent edits

Please do not continue adding POV edits. Edits concerning how one views the series do not belong on the page, such as which child each parent was "closest to." -Shannernanner 19:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

This isn't point of view, the show has flat out made these statements. In "Wheels" it's explicitly stated by both Eric and Cory, that Alan's favorite is Eric. You also see Alan dealing with Eric constantly and them having a buddy/buddy relationship whereas Eric would view Amy as a disciplinarian and meaner, and they have the constant issue of how Alan babied Eric because he was his first born. Also, Amy is clearly closest with Morgan, in that you pretty much only see Alan and Morgan interract because of some issue he's having with one or both of his sons and so turning his attention to the other child he has. Whereas during the rare occasions you see Morgan she interracts more with her mother than any other character.--Harlequin212121 03:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

That is your point of view. Something implied in one episode doesn't necessarily apply to the whole series, especially in one such as this which often adapts the storyline to the particular episode. How you view their relationships and your commentary on it does not belong on the page per Wikipedia guidelines. -Shannernanner 15:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Except here's the thing, it's not my point of view. I didn't put anything on this that wasn't fact. Eric and Cory physically SAY that Alan's favorite with Eric, and if you wanted to get a stopwatch out on all of Morgan's scenes you'd probably see her interract with Amy about twice as often as you'd see her interract with Alan, this is all empirical evidence not something any one is making up. None of this is my opinion, it's things that become evidencial after watching the program. Besides, it's not as if you changed this one thing. Every single change that were made, many of which could not possibly construed as opinion and were only giving more information to a character or situation. You just decided to write the entire edit off. Notice how you are the only one with a problem with it? The purpose of this site is to provide information, how about letting that happen? And not going out of your way to stifle something just because you personally seem to have a problem with the edits. For instance, the character order was also changed to put Angela, Jack and Rachel in front of Mr. Turner and Mr. Williams. This is a logical thing to do as Angela, Jack and Rachel all appear in the series more than Mr. Turner and certainly Mr. Williams do. There is no reasonable explanation for why it should be anything but in this order, but you have appeared to develop a sort of vendetta against that particular edit. --Harlequin212121 22:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Not empirical evidence, but original research. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps everyone can come to some middleground here. I firmly believe that Harlequin is completely acting with good faith. Many of the edits that Harlequin has done are fairly straightforward copyedits and article improvements. From what I can tell, only a subset of the changes made are under dispute. In order to help "sandbox" the problem, could someone please itemize the content under dispute? In addition, if the content that Harlequin wants to add is cited by an episode (which is usually considered canon), can we all agree that that is a reliable citation? Afterall, what better source is there for an element of a fictional story than the story itself? Of course, there can also be counter-examples. Here's an example of how something like this could be worded: "The character dynamics between Alice, Bob, and Charlie are complex. In "Episode X", Bob claims to be Alice's best friend, but in "Episode Y", Bob and Charlie practically ignore Alice." Any thoughts? -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 18:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Since it would appear Shannernanner is the one with the issue, perhaps they or someone who agrees with them can do said cataloguing. For my part, in addition to adding my own edits back in (which until this is actually cleared up for good, I will continue to do) I tried to make things that Shannernanner found troubling (particularly in regards to Amy and Alan as those seem to be where his bigger issues lie. My edits to Morgan and Jack have been reverted without much comment as to the reasons why, and appear to just be Shannernanner wishing to remove my edits with one foul swoop.) Anyways, the point is I've tried to make things a bit more clear. I hope it helps some.--Harlequin212121 19:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

It might not be a bad idea to try to build a bit of consensus before new changes are made. So far, everything has been going according to "Bold, Revert, Discuss" cycle. That is, you were bold and made some changes. Someone disagreed and reverted. We are now in the discuss phase. I recommend that we spend a little more time figuring out which edits are contested and which are not, then coming to a compromise on those that are. What we want to avoid, above everything else, is for this to break down into an edit war. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 20:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop re-adding your edits and reverting others' edits. Your last reversion deleted relevant additions, copyedits (including wording changed to fictional present), and corrected information. If you would like an itemized list of the NPOV/original research issues with your edits, I'll attempt to provide it. In your last reversion:

1. Alan "[has] also at times lacked the supportiveness that he should show" (NPOV: What supportiveness "should" he show?)
2. "At times during the later years of the show, Alan failed to have faith in Eric when it came to jobs and overall successfulness in life. This was due to the fact that of all his children, Alan was, by his own admission, the closest with Eric due to his position as the oldest and, as Amy tells Alan, he has coddled Eric and babyed him his entire life, resulting in the lazy, immature (despite being naturally intelligent) Eric that exists today." (NPOV/original research, especially that Alan "caused" Eric's behavior.)
3. "Generally speaking, while Morgan was the child that was 'her's' (likely due to her position as the only girl) and Eric was the child that was 'Alan's', the two of them almost evenly tended after Cory." (NPOV: "Generally," "likely.")
4. "She's precocious and well aware of her cuteness, although she develops a bit of a temperamental streak as she hits puberty at the series' close." (NPOV: "well aware of her cuteness.")
5. Angela is "beautiful," "very classy" (NPOV)
6. issues "of angst" (just awkward)
7. "Interestingly" (NPOV)
8. "In one of the episodes where she and Shawn break up, she is seen dating a black man, perhaps an allusion to the fact that she is always sensitive to the fact that she is the only African-American in her group of friends." (NPOV, "perhaps an allusion," plus non-notable)
9. "The half-brother of Shawn, Jack is the opposite of Shawn" (sounds awkward, plus second half is POV)
10. "although it's unclear if [Rachel and Jack] end up together at the series' close" (non-notable, not an issue towards the end of the series)
11. "Although Jack was quickly cemented in the group by virtue of being made Shawn's brother and Eric's roommate, he wasn't really used for very much (in comparison to larger characters like Cory, Eric and Shawn) and never truly developed an indentity of his own. His own personality becoming fluid depending on what the writers' wanted (e.g. he could be smart if it fit the writers' story or he could be stupid if that worked better.)" (largely POV, though could possibly be adapted to the article)
12. Mr. Turner's "new age" approach (NPOV, not how it was portrayed directly on the show)
13. "Eventually Mr. Turner became for Shawn what Mr. Feeny was for Cory and Eric." (possibly could be adapted, right now sounds POV; what was Mr. Feeny for Cory and Eric?)
14. Mr. Turner was a "beloved" character (NPOV)
15. Mr. Turner was "responsible for introducing the character of" Eli Williams (doesn't make sense as stated)
16. Mr. Williams "is hip, cool" (NPOV) -Shannernanner 20:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Shannernanner. This is very helpful. I enumerated your list for ease of reference; I hope that's okay. Other than things of this nature, is this the sum of your issues? I do think that you are casting your nets a little wide here. For example, if the items in #2 could be backed using various episodes as a source, I would think that it would be acceptable. Again, I would conclude that canon is an excellent source here. However, I do agree that some of these are probably not backed by canon or other citable sources, and therefore should not be added. Harlequin has also made many changes outside of these. Is there any objection if Harlequin, if he/she so chooses, makes those uncontested changes? -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 21:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Harlequin -- For those items above, could you reword these so that the article does not assert items that are completely objective in nature -- such as beauty, hipness, coolness, etc.? -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 22:00, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm not sure what you mean by Harlequin's "other changes," I certainly don't have any issue with the user making edits in general. If you mean the other edits which used to be contained with these, I can go back in the history and enumerate them if needed, I suppose. The items in "#2" are, as I pointed out to the user, part of a storyline adapted to a certain episode (rather than canon), which is a device utilized throughout the series. -Shannernanner 22:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

If it is part of a storyline of the series, how is it not canon? Usually, one implies the other. In other words, if the events of the episodes can't be used as a primary source, what can be? I understand that story dynamics can change from one episode to the next and sometimes flatly contradict each other. However, as long as the source episode is cited and indicated, I really can see nothing wrong with it. In a fictional universe, the episodes define the "truth" as it were. Perhaps I don't fully understand. Could you further elaborate? -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 22:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry I wasn't clear. What I meant to imply was that it wasn't true to the series as a whole. It is not something that is mentioned, implied, or detailed throughout the series; something that belongs on an encyclopedic synopsis about a character. It belongs more on the specific episode page. It was not a "revelation" of "Alan has caused Eric to become 'who he is'"--it was one episode that decided to re-paint the characters in a certain light. If it were an issue addressed throughout the series, it would make sense. As it is, it lends undo credence to an incidental storyline. I understand your point about fictional universe, but in a fictional universe truth is also easily shifted. In this particular series, this often happened. -Shannernanner 23:15, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

While what you say is true, what you present can become a sticky-point for POV. At this point, it becomes the personal opinions of the editors to determine what is, and what is not, applicable to the whole -- which episodes are "canon" and which are not. Up above, I put "truth" in quotes. The reason for this is that Wikipedia is more interested in verifiability, not truth (but I couldn't find a better word than 'truth' above, which is why I quoted it). As long as we have a reliable source, which includes the episodes themselves, I really see no issue. HOWEVER, this should all be tempered by the fact that for the vast majority of the edits, no source has been provided as of yet. This is all hypothethical based on the presumption that such episodic references can be found. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 23:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I did not intend to say it was not a "canonical" episode, it was a poor choice of words; as I said, I was not clear. The issue is not whether or not the information can be verified (that it happened, though the information itself was not presented in NPOV). It's more an issue of retroactive continuity, and for only one episode, at that. The "issue" was not addressed again. -Shannernanner 23:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

First off I just want to say that a good many of those things listed are not my edits to begin with. I have done no editing to any character entries other than Cory, Eric, Alan, Amy, Morgan and Jack. And some of the things mentioned about Jack weren't me either (when I first made changes to the Jack article, he was already mentioned as being Shawn's opposite, the only change I made was that it claimed Jack worked out which was the opposite of Shawn, and I didn't get the sense that Shawn's lack of working out or Jack's working out were big enough character issues to be mentioned so I omitted them) So anything to do with Angela, Mr. Turner or any other character wasn't me and these are the ones which feature the issue of terms such as "beautiful", "classy" and "hip." (Although in defense of Mr. Turner being hip, I believe that term is specifically used by other students to describe, so perhaps that one can be made to say something about his students finding him hip.) The bottom line is, however, any changes needing to be made about them, anyone can feel free. In fact, to go through the list 2, 3, 4, 10 and 11 are really the only ones I take any responsibility for. These ones I stand by. To talk about the issue of Alan and Eric's relationship, Shannernanner is incorrectly claiming the episode in question "Security Guy" as a random history revising episode. It isn't in the slightest and the issues of Alan's treatment towards Eric (while intended positively) having negative consequences on his maturity, is addressed elsewhere, the episode "Raging Cory" being one such example. However, I neglect to see how even if it was that one episode (which it isn't) why this isn't canon. It happened in the episode and nothing later on ever refuted it's accuracy. And above all it certainly isn't in violation of NPOV. --Harlequin212121 00:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

No, but that is the version which you reverted to, disregarding the improvements which had been made. Not all of the things I listed were deleted; some had been edited to NPOV statements ("Like Turner, Williams is 'considered "hip and cool"'"). People did make changes to their sections, but your continuous reverts undid them. I disagree with you regarding the episode and its relevance to a character synopsis; however, if you wish to add it, something like this would be more appropriate, with proper citations:

"In some later episodes, Alan does not support Eric in all of his ventures, and Amy in turn tells Alan that he is the reason Eric has turned out the way he is." -Shannernanner 07:38, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I stopped reverting a long time ago, as a matter of fact. I've just been individually adding all my edits in. You're the only one going reversion-crazy, and you continue to. You reverted all my changes again even after this whole discussion and after the mediator requested that you stop with the continous reversions. There's such thing as a compromise, and most of your list is being dealt with. You might have to suck it up and deal with a lot of my edits, some of which were not considered inappropriate by any but you. That said, I'm adding my material in again. I don't understand how you can so completely disregard what the mediator's been trying to do, I however will continue to try with the compromising. Continue with the constant, unyielding reversions and someone else will again have to get involved. If there is an edit you feel needs made, like the one you mentioned above for Eric, why can't you make it? Why do you always have to revert all of my contributions? --Harlequin212121 00:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

To be fair, Shannernanner did that revert 10 hours before I proposed this compromise. I'm glad you are adding your edits back in singularly and are willing to discuss them. Shannernanner hasn't had a chance to respond to the compromise I proposed below, but I'm hoping that any edits that are disagreed with are met with the kind of improvements that were proposed up above, rather than just simply reverted. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 01:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

"Individually adding all [your] edits in" is the same as reverting, when it's the same edits/information over and over. I reverted it because you continue to re-add the same information and completely disregard the improvements made by other editors. Please stop making the same changes, especially when I have pointed out exactly what is the matter with each of them, and I added two of them myself, in NPOV form. I proposed a NPOV form of another one, but did not add it myself as I was waiting to see your opinion on it. Apparently you are "okay" with it, so I will add it as well. -Shannernanner 09:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

After I added in the statement, you reverted it, and the other two statements, and, again, many previous improvements made by other editors. Please do not do this. -Shannernanner 16:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Excellent! Looks like we are making some real progress for an agreement here. From here, I'm going to make the following compromise offer:

• Harlequin -- Apply your changes without undoing other editor's changes and please keep in mind a neutral tone when you make them. Remember not to have the article assert anything as fact that another editor can't independently verify. Remember to cite your sources!
• Shannernanner -- If Harlequin makes changes that you disagree with, please do not do a mass revert, thereby throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. Instead, I recommend civil discussion and refactoring the troubling items to be more neutral, like you did above. Your proposed rewording is excellent. Remember to assume good faith.

I hope this all works out. If you like, you can always reach me at my talk page. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 17:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Jones?

I know where the other characters' full names are stated, but does anyone have a source for Amy's maiden name being Jones? I just don't recall that specifically. -Shannernanner 09:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Giant infobox

The infobox is so long it's messing up the formatting. I'm not Bold enough to do it myself but we should list just a few producers and maybe the top 5-7 actors. It would be great if we could make it end at the same place the table of contents does. - Peregrinefisher 18:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with it, personally. It was a long-running series, and those were all main cast and producers. I assume what you mean are the [edit] links not being at the top of the first two sections. -Shannernanner 05:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The edit links but also I was making the character entries one line long but they're wrapping because of the infobox. - Peregrinefisher 15:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

when did this happen?

when did eric go from a pretty boy older brother, to a "unnatractive" comic relief character? User:blades2121

Wikipedia is not a forum, but if you must know, I believe it was between the third and fourth seasons.--Atomic-Super-Suit^{What Have I Done?!} 05:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

sorry, just wanted to know. User:blades2121

Eric's middle name

Eric's middle name keeps going back and forth between Randall and Allison. Is the latter really vandalism, as suggested, or is this merely one of the many continuity gaffes on the show? After all, if Shawn can have a sister for only one episode, then Eric can have two different middle names. Rather that just reverting, it would be good to know whether the alternate middle name is being entered here for a legitimate reason. Karen | Talk | contribs 20:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

It's Randal. Though, he does mistakenly believe his name is Neil in a third season episode, but is corrected by his parents. --OGoncho 23:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Correct. It was never Allison. Shannernanner 15:47, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks. Karen | Talk | contribs 20:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

He claims it's Allison in "The Witches of Pennbrook" actually, so it's not *vandalism*, but I'm fairly sure he wasn't being serious. It's Randall. --Harlequin212121 05:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Feeny's marital status

If the latest edit is correct about Feeny marrying Bolander before he mentions his wife heard a rumor about Cory and Topanga (and it may not be for all I know; I'm no expert), then there is no inconsistency in the reference, and it doesn't need to be mentioned in the section. Can anyone confirm a sequence of events here? Are there any inconsistencies at all in Feeny's family relationships? Karen | Talk | contribs 21:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

This is correct. I'm watching the episode now ("She's Having My Baby Back Ribs"). In the List Of Characters Article it says Dean Bolander was never mentioned again after the wedding. The wife mentioned is obviously Bolander and therefor whoever has the power to edit should. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.132.210.206 (talk) 22:50, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

Eric's Brain

For some reason, I remember an episode in which Eric Matthews signs up as a psychology "lab rat". The researcher finds out that Eric does not show brain activity, and she invites several scientists around the world to look at this. Later on, part of Eric's brain was removed. Now, I'm not exactly sure if this happened. If this episode exists, please reply with which episode it is from.

I think it was that Eric's brain didn't show any activity while he was asleep. 'Not no brain activity at all. I remember they made some jokes about how restful his sleep was because nothing was happening in his brain. Also, I don't remember them removing part of his brain. But, uh... Maybe. Aaron A. Brown 10:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

In the episode where Eric talks to a weird girl musician outside Alan's store, he sarcastically mentions something about "having their brain removed".Dshibshm (talk) 22:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

He had a LARGE piece of his brain removed and it was a major episode. know what you are talking about PLEASE before writing this garbahge out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.4.141.217 (talk) 17:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Continue selling DVD's please

Has anybody noticed that only the first 3 seasons are available to buy? Hopefully in the near future, they will sell the other seasons. This is seriously my favorite show of all freakin time.

Sorry we dont own the rights to produce the DVDs Firesun 00:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Elementary School

I think that it should be noted that many elementary schools (especially in North American Catholic Boards) go to grade 6, so the tone of the elementry school section should be changed from one that is pointing out an error, to one that is more explanatory99.241.140.96 (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Revamps for this article

Remember, Wikipedia talk pages are not general discussion forums, but places where improvements to articles can be discussed. Please do not post comments and/or opinions about the show in general. Also, please follow Wikipedia policy by signing your posts.

Currently, this article reads more like a positive review of the show than an encyclopedia article. This needs to be fixed. Does anyone have any objection if I make some changes? Citadel18080 02:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

List of Revisions: If anyone disputes these changes, please discuss them here

• Characters section cleaned up. All characters that were not at one point part of the main cast were removed from this summary list. Descriptions of characters also removed, as this information is duplicated in the characters article. Citadel18080 03:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
• Continutiy section cleaned up. "American Broadcasting Company references" subheading removed. The reference to ABC moving Boy Meets World to a later time slot was moved to the description of the episode, "Shallow Boy", in the episode guide. The mention of the Monkees had nothing to do with references made to ABC. Citadel18080 03:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
• Syndication section condensed. "Disney Channel Banned Episodes" subheading integrated into main section. Citadel18080 18:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
• ABC Family (in the United States) no longer airs Boy Meets World as of the September 2007, I think this should be reflected in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.141.241.182 (talk) 18:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Run-on sentences

This article is written almost entirely with run on sentences. It needs badly to be revised to improve readibility.

It seems fine to me.

Puh! It's a huge messy wall of text! This article requires cleanup BAD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.38.100 (talk) 16:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Running gags

Could someone add some explanations to this section, or trim it back? For example, I don't see how Cory's choice of underwear is a running gag. I wear briefs, but have never found anyone finds this funny. I don't want to go wild and cut all the stuff that strikes me as guff, because I don't remember the show well enough. There may well have been recurring gags and Cory's undercrackers, but I don't recall them. Optimus Sledge 04:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed and tag. Many items in the list are not running gags, just trivia in disguise. I've made several tags for suggest clean ups with notes in the edit summary. AnmaFinotera 03:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I'm very familiar with the show and dont believe that Cory's underwear was a running gag. I believe the person who wrote that was referencing the time Shawn and Topanga were sitting on a couch in the Pennbrook Student Union and Cory came by (being suspicious that they might be cheating on him) and pulled off a blanket that was draped over them, to which he noticed Shawn wearing only his briefs and shouted "Underpants!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.11.118 (talk) 21:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I've cleaned up that section and removed some that weren't really running gags (they seemed more like character traits). --Kiseki Megami (talk) 04:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Looking for help writing an article about the spin-offs and crossovers of this series

I am writing an article about all of the series which are in the same shared reality as this one through spin-offs and crossovers. I could use a little help expanding the article since it is currently extremely dense and a bit jumbled with some sentence structures being extremely repetitive. I would like to be able to put this article into article space soon. Any and all help in writing the article would be appreciated, even a comment or two on the talk page would help. Please give it a read through, also please do not comment here since I do not have all of the series on my watch list. - LA @ 16:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Season 8

I've been trying to include this in this article for some months now, but it keeps getting removed I must not be doing it right. But, in the Season 1 DVD collection on the commentary Michael Jacobs said himself ABC approached him and asked him to do an 8th season, he declined because they did not have anymore ideas. How can this be included? ( 98.220.16.130 (talk) 05:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC) )

DVD Release Seasons 4-7

There's no article stating that seasons 4-7 will be released on DVD. The links in the article only state that the license has been purchased, not that there were any plans to do anything with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.40.36 (talk) 17:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if Lionsgate or Anchor Bay have actually purchased "the rights" to the series, or just obtained and paid for a home video license for a particular region. I have all the seasons on DVD already when I traveled to various Asian nations two years ago and obtained it in either Hong Kong or Tokyo, as I don't really remember. Using the term "the rights" makes it believed that Disney ditched the series and sold it all to Lionsgate or Anchor Bay. Clarifying this would be nice. And I'm mentioned Anchor Bay because the last time I read this article late last year, Anchor Bay was the company mentioned. Why not throw in Mill Creek and Echo Bridge as well, huh? Coffee5binky (talk) 17:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Angela's middle name

Angela's middle name was NOT Sheneanea. Seriously. I'm pretty sure it was just a joke to set up "I have got to get some black friends." Her father was a decorated officer in the military. You think he'd name his daughter Sheneanea? I didn't want to edit it out before i made that point.

fonz469 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fonz469 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

In every other informational website that I've seen, 'Shinanay' is always listed as the character's full name.

--p4 (talk) 20:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)p4poetic--p4 (talk) 20:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with fonz, it was definitely used as a setup to that punchline. Her real middle name is never given, as far as I know. She also said she lived on Martin Luther King Blvd. She was just illustrating how black she was, and white her friends are. I am removing it. (I don't have a Wikipedia account. Just an avid BMW fan.)

--20:19, 10 July 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.40.156 (talk)

2nd run on ABC family

I have this series set to record on DVR. It seems that on this run on ABC Family they have played all 3 previously unaired episodes. I am not aware of how to source items on wikipedia, but surely someone out there could get this included! (67.173.147.70 (talk) 12:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC))

Synopsis copyvio

I removed the synopsis as a copyright violation of http://boymeetsworldfans.com/. The blog has that text dated 1/10/08, and the text was not present in the article on that date. 69.137.130.101 (talk) 18:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind. It says it was taken from here. 69.137.130.101 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow!

This is the 2nd funniest show ive ever seen.--Fox Sion (talk) 01:50, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

This is not a place to discuss opinions about a certain subject matter. This page is meant to improve the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.238.187 (talk) 20:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Tone and Corrections

This page is in serious need of correction. For example, the summary of the character 'Angela Moore' didn't even make any sense, misleading and confusing. I fixed a few of those things up by the best of my ability.

--p4 (talk) 20:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)p4poetic--p4 (talk) 20:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

As an addition to the description of Angela Moore: I removed the supposed "continuity error" about how it was odd that they were going off to an internship when they have two years of college left. Many college programs (especially engineering and health services) require that you spend a semester or two in various types of internship in order to gain practical field experience. I think it's safe to assume this is what happened in the show as well. Sleepsong (talk) 17:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, that IS a continuity error. Topanga Lawrence is the only character that had an internship to go to NYU, Cory and Shawn, who she brings along, do not. Are we lead to believe they travel back and forth from New York and Philadelphia to Pennbrook?

--p4 (talk) 02:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)p4poetic--p4 (talk) 02:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I did a brief skim of the content authored and corrected many incorrect words and terms. I surmise that if this is an encyclopaedia, then the articles must be authored in a formal, instructive tone (in a like manner to the 1957 edition of Encylcopaedia Americana as an example), and should be written in a way that, overall, a person from any century that speaks the language we know as English can have the ability to know what is and isn't from the words contained, used, authored, and structured within the article thereof. Coffee5binky (talk) 15:55, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Synopsis

The synopsis is terrible. There is only one sentence about the first season. Someone needs to fix this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaytiebobaytie (talk • contribs) 23:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Boy Meets World/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I want whoever wrote that synopsis to please chronicle my life. Awful structure, but oh so riveting.

Last edited at 23:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 14:25, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Minkus

I don't think this statement about Minkus is correct: "He is never seen again after season one until their high school graduation...." I'm pretty sure he appeared in one or two early episodes of the second season before being written out completely. (Otherwise why even have him at the graduation as a student? Just say he went to a different high school and he's there as a guest.) Can someone with access to the DVDs please verify? --72.34.180.53 (talk) 14:19, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Lee Norris moved on. You're thinking of the nerdy character of Alvin. Fictional Science Sextuple Feature! 19:22, 2 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MagentaTimCurryElbowSex (talk • contribs)

No, that information is correct, I recently bought seasons 1-4 on DVD, Minkus does not appear in seasons 2-4 at all. However I think he should be listed as a main character as he was credited as part of the main cast for season 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.137.102 (talk) 20:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Girl Meets World

At what point does this get its own article? It's starting to become a very lengthy part of this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.15.97 (talk) 19:33, 5 March 2013 (UTC) I am going to be looking into this soon. It should be getting its own page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WP Editor 2012 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I will be working on this soon, I did copy it and put it on my project page to do, So hopefuly I will beable to get it done. WP Editor 2012 (talk) 13:38, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Any objections yet to GMW having its own article?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:25, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not aware of any specific guidelines for television series, but the current section seems to pass Wikipedia:Notability (films) and WP:CRYSTAL so I don't see any problem with creating a separate article based on what's here now. Elizium23 (talk) 00:59, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Support - but follow process described in WP:PROSPLIT for doing it correctly. Say what you are doing in the edit histories of both articles at the very least. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:56, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Support- I have been busy lately, but have been somewhat working out the page. I know at this time its not the best right now. I am slowly working to get it up and running. The page is User:WP_Editor_2012/Project_01 WP Editor 2012 (talk) 22:19, 26 March 2013 (UTC)