Talk:HappyHolograms

Please do not add mention of pop cultural references, continuity notes, trivia, or who the targets of a given episode's parody are, without accompanying such material with an inline citation of a reliable, published, secondary source. Adding such material without such sources violates Wikipedia's policies pertaining to Verifiability, No Original Research, and Synthesis.

While a primary source (such as the episode itself, or a screencap or clip from it at South Park Studios) is acceptable for material that is merely descriptive, such as the synopsis, it is not enough to cite a primary source for material that constitutes analytic, evaluative or interpretative claims, such as cultural references in works of satire or parody, because in such cases, such claims are being made by the editor. This is called synthesis, which is a form of original research, and is not permitted on Wikipedia, regardless of whether one thinks the meaning of the reference is "obvious". Sources for such claims must be secondary sources in which reliable persons, such as TV critics or reviewers, explicitly mention the reference.

In addition, trivial information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, per WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE and WP:TRIVIA, and this includes the plot summary. As indicated by WP:TVPLOT, the plot summary is an overview of a work's main events, so avoid any minutiae that is not needed for a reader's understanding of the story's three fundamental elements: plot, characterization and theme. This includes such minutiae as scene-by-scene breakdowns, technical information or detailed explanations of individual gags or lines of dialogue.

If you're new to Wikipedia, please click on the wikilinked policy pages above to familiarize yourself with this site's policies and guidelines.

WP:EASTER and Synopsis Trivia

User:Mezigue we need to stop this edit war on this page. You have not proven anywhere in your links that the use of piped links is a purposeful violation of WP:EASTER. There are multiple other articles that use piped links for references to internal references, and you have not proved your statement that sections must "always" be separated. This has to stop. I am reporting this war to administrators as you do not appear to be willing to compromise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanAnMan (talk • contribs) 14:17, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Of course that sort of piped link is exactly what is described as WP:Easter. Anything that is misleading to the reader is to be avoided. I also don't understand your strange obsession with incorporating cutural references and continuity into the plot. The general practice is to put these things into separate sections. It creates a more tidy and balanced article. Mezigue (talk) 14:59, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The use of piped links to clarify is not an Easter egg. They are not meant to be misleading or otherwise. As for my "stange obsession with cultural references and continuity", have you even watched a single episode this season? The entire season was built around inside jokes of cultural references and continuity. You are editing way too much plot points out of the article. SanAnMan (talk) 15:19, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I didn't say you are obsessed with them - I said you are obsessed with incorporating them in the plot section. Mezigue (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

So where exactly in WP:MOS does it state that continuity and/or internal references have to be separated? I'm willing to learn, but I've also written multiple other South Park episodes that use this exact same format and you're the first one who seems to be making such a fuss about it. SanAnMan (talk) 16:27, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The purpose of the plot section to explain to the reader what happens in the plot, and not any inside jokes that occurred during the entire season. Anything that is not needed for that should not go in the synopsis.

As far as WP:EASTER, the language of that practice is clear. That page explains that an easter egg link is one whose meaning or significance is not clear to the reader until after they hover over or click and follow the link to the linked article. That, and the multiple examples offered in that section, make it unambiguously clear that the ones I myself and others included in the synopsis fall under that definition. Sorry about that; I forgot about that exact guideline or its language, and I hadn't written a South Park synopsis since last season. Nightscream (talk) 18:50, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Cartman in Times Square IS important

Nightscream, I wholeheartedly disagree with your one opinion that Cartman's appearance on the video screens of Times Square is not important. First of all, that scene is so important that the producers chose that one moment to be the screenshot in their press release. Furthermore, it is the moment in the plot where the main villain explains his motivation behind what he is doing, much like the producer explains to Stan and Kyle about his grandson in an earlier scene. The reference to Cartman's desire for his own bathroom is clarified and expanded in the Production section. While I agree that Cartman was starting to appear worldwide at this point in the show, this is an extremely pivotal plot moment, and I am adding it back, with minor modifications, to support this. SanAnMan (talk) 13:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Your point about his motivation is well-taken.

The specificity of Times Square is not. He was appearing on screens all over the world. Times Square was just one example meant to illustrate this point. The specificity of that one location has no particular relevance, and emphasizing it is both unnecessary and places undue emphasis on a point of trivia. Saying "appear on screens all around the world" gets the point across. Omitting the phrase "on screens" and merely saying "everywhere", while specifying Times Square is less clear for the uninitiated reader. As a compromise, I left in the motivation, but removed the mention of Times Square, and clarified the passage. Nightscream (talk) 14:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Understood and agreed upon. Glad we could work together towards a mutual solution. SanAnMan (talk) 15:04, 18 December 2014 (UTC)