Talk:Dial Meg for Murder

Simpsons Jab

I added in to the main page how the end of this episode more or less parodies and/or "takes a shot at" how the Simpsons episodes end; Peter basically says "Always end on a good joke" then instead of black-commercial, the credits hover in air showing producers with all names in a yellow font, same as The Simpsons. If anyone can clean up what I wrote it'd be appreciated; I'm not sure how to properly attribute it. But it was clearly a jab (once again) at The Simpsons and Matt Groening. Oddly enough, Matt and Seth are rumored to be good friends when not inside FOX studios... --162.39.215.96 (talk) 09:41, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a source it is a reference to The Simpsons? Otherwise it should be removed as OR CTJF83 chat 18:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Have you ever seen an episode of The Simpsons????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.184.234.213 (talk) 04:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Just 452, among owning 12 DVD box sets, but besides that. CTJF83 chat 04:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Ctjf83 There was definitely a jab at the Simpsons, it was plain as day and doesn't require a source.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Userod (talk • contribs) 00:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Read the first sentence at WP:V....I don't make the rules. CTJF83 chat 00:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Is it not verifiable by it's obviousness? They clearly use the Simpsons credit's font. For example, why is there's no need for a source to "Meg ambushes Brian in his car and forces him to drive to Mort's Pharmacy so she can rob him". The Simpsons jab is surely verifiable? Userod (talk) 07:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Another fatal flaw in the "verifiable" system.

Read WP:OR, one can see that Meg ambushes Brian...you saying it is the Simpsons font, is WP:OR CTJF83 chat 02:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Just cite the episode. That's enough. Not every link has to be an internet article you know. Back in the old days, we cited tings like newspapers, movies, and tv shows for sources on themselves.Mattbrown04 (talk) 19:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Citing the episode is clear WP:OR CTJF83 chat 20:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Error

The robbers at the end weren't visible, Mort just said "you four fine black gentlemen." No mention of stocking disguises. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk • contribs)

 Fixed CTJF83 chat 02:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dial Meg for Murder/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   In the Plot, I have a question, is this necessary ---> "(Connie and her friends. After letting them get their potshots in while she fills a burlap sack up with cans of soda from a nearby vending machine, she walks over and hits all five of them with the sack, then picks up Connie's head and tongue-kisses her)"?

   Check.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   In the lead, "...and aired on January 31, 2010 on Fox" ---> "...and aired on January 31, 2010, on Fox", commas after dates, if using MDY. In the Cultural references section, italicize "TV Guide", since it's a magazine. Same section, "The Ballad of Billy the Kid" is not supposed to be in italics but in quotation marks, since it's a song.

   Check.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   File:Dial Meg for Murder - Family Guy promo.png needs a lower resolution.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Not that much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

All done. CTJF83 chat 18:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Like last time, thank you to Ctjf for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Dial Meg for Murder

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dial Meg for Murder's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "yahoocast":

• From Business Guy: "Family Guy — Business Guy — Cast and Crew". Yahoo!. Retrieved 2009-12-03.
• From Dog Gone: "Family Guy — Dog Gone — Cast and Crew". Yahoo!. Retrieved 2009-12-03.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 14:53, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Isn't the title of the episode a reference to Alfred Hitchcock's Dial M for Murder? Likely Ally (talk) 05:08, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dial Meg for Murder. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110711021928/http://www.foxinflight.com/tv/15/ to http://www.foxinflight.com/tv/15/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 09:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dial Meg for Murder. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sling.com/blog/6714/%22Family-Guy%22-Non-Sequiturs-Explained%21-Episode-8-11%3A-%22Dial-Meg-for-Murder%22
• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/66wGDeHUb?url=http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2010/02/01/tv-ratings-sunday-grammy-awards-drown-out-the-competition/40619/ to http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/02/01/tv-ratings-sunday-grammy-awards-drown-out-the-competition/40619

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:13, 10 September 2017 (UTC)