Talk:Peter Griffin/Archive 4

Cleanup

A load of cleanup by New Age Retro Hippie (talk · contribs) was reverted with the following Edit summary:

Hey, everything that's important about him should be included. Don't erase important details.

I've reverted this reversion to the latest post-cleanup revision. While it is possible that Hippie's work discarded worthwhile data, I think it was a good cleanup. According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction), "real world" information is what's "important about him". An article about any TV series character can grow enormous by recapping everything that ever happened to them in the show—that sort of detail is suitable for a fan site, but not useful for an encyclopedia.

Can we discuss Hippie's edits here (instead of edit-warring)? / edg ☺ ☭ 14:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Why no Bertram?

Allo,
I was just wondering why Bertram isn't included in the listing of Peter's relatives? I mean, a son counts, right? I know he isn't a regular character or anything, but at least he had a prominent role in two episodes, which is more than Mickey McFinnigan got. 209.90.135.202 (talk) 03:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, I'll add the info. 87.69.177.35 (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

We've already agreed NOT to add Bertram to the infobox. If you can find a consensus to add him, then you can add him, but not before. CTJF83Talk 22:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Peter as a fisherman

This is a pretty small comment, but the two men who worked with Peter on the fishing boat were Portuguese, not Peurto Rican. Could someone change that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by KezzieMoynihan (talk • contribs) 23:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The Simpsons

In the cited episodes, the references are virtually spoken (except they are not) — a non-verbal message can be as deep and obvious. As per WP:Filmplot, things that can be explicitly seen in a film (or in a show) do not need references as it is easily verifiable by simply watching. Therefore, the fact that it is implied that Peter's character is somewhat of a "ripoff" of Homer Simpson is crystal clear and does not need sourcing. 87.69.177.35 (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

yes it does! Just because it shows Homer doesn't mean he is a rip off! It could clearly be a nod to the Simpsons. CTJF83Talk 22:38, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Again, you are displaying total confusion in regards to sources of information. The episodes show Peter, not Homer, and put the word "plagiarism" under his picture/present Peter as Homer's clone. There are no two ways of interpreting it. If you have a sensible alternative, I'd like to read it. 87.69.177.35 (talk) 22:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

It's just one of those things you love so much, a one time joke. Get MacFarlene or Matt Groening to say he is a rip off, and you can add it. CTJF83Talk 22:46, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

In WP:FILMPLOT it says

A good plot summary should stick to describing what happened in the film, and does not interpret the reactions or motivations of the characters, attempt to explain the significance of events, or speculate about the purpose of the filmmakers - such analysis belongs in Critical reception and must come from reliable sources.

You are speculating the purpose of the makers and and therefore it must come from reliable sources. --Maitch (talk) 22:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, the fact that the writers acknowledged the physical resemblance by making a joke about it does not inherently indicate that the resemblance is intentional. However, if the resemblance is intentional, it shouldn't be too difficult to find that in an interview with the creators. If there's an intentional resemblance, I agree that it's important enough to discuss in the article. This edit is not very clearly worded; I'm not sure what you're trying to say about Peter Griffin. The article already says that he has appeared on The Simpsons, and the verb "premised" doesn't make grammatical sense in this context. You seem to be saying that he appears on The Simpsons because of the physical resemblance, but I'm not convinced that's true. There have been cameo appearances by many different characters on The Simpsons, and most of them do not resemble anyone on the show... do you have a reason for believing that this case would be different? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I don't have a problem listing that, if an outside source can be find. Just because they show Peter on The Simpsons with Plagerisimo under him, doesn't mean he resembles him beyond a joke on The Simpsons CTJF83Talk 23:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

[D]o you have a reason for believing that this case would be different? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

None of the other guest characters were ever accused (even if it's indirectly and in form of a joke) of plagiarism/cloning. Moreover, the words "premised on [their] resemblance" do not imply intention, they point at the resemblance symbolized by calling Peter "Plagiarismo" or having him as one of Homer's clones. No one here seems to be willing to exercise common sense; I will repeat myself: if any of you has a sensible alternative, I'd like to read it.
By the way, Maitch (talk · contribs) — it's funny to see the words "speculating the purpose of the makers" coming from someone who insists that certain parts were intended as one time jokes. Am I disallowed to practice the same logic as you do?
87.69.177.35 13:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC) *My IP has obviously changed, sorry about that — talk page is actually here.

You wrote that Peter resembles Homer and cites Treehouse of Horror XIII as evidence of that. That is your interpretation of the episode. My interpretation is that Peter shares a lot of character traits with Homer and not physical likeness. However, it doesn't matter what you think and it doesn't matter what I think. If something is disputed then the issue can be cleared with a reliable source. I challenge your statement and per WP:V "Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed". And then you might say why I don't find a source then. It is not my job. Per WP:BURDEN "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material". --Maitch (talk) 11:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Peter Jr.?

Is it irrelevant to list the "Peter Griffin Jr." mentioned in the OJ Simpson episode? I just googled that name and found a link to the Family Guy Wiki regarding this alleged character. --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 00:57, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

It is irrelevant, you're right, it is just a 10 second joke. We don't list stuff like that on Wikipedia. CTJF83Talk 02:08, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Write

thumb|200px|Peter's book cover

Peter Griffin's Guide to the Holidays

Main article: Family Guy: Peter Griffin's Guide to the Holidays

Peter Griffin's Guide to the Holidays is an American humor book about Family Guy written by executive producer Danny Smith. The book was first published on 23 October, 2007. The book consists of a monologue by Peter Griffin discussing his various memories of Christmas and other subjects related to the holiday. Though the book primarily consists of a loose narrative monologue related to Christmas, it is also interspersed with sections from other cast members such as Quagmire.

It was published in the United Kingdom in 2008 by Orion Books.

Book Description

From the Griffin house to yours—a one-of-a-kind guide to enjoying the most wonderful freakin' time of the year!

Peter Griffin, everyman extraordinaire, the holidays are the best time of year. With endless Christmas specials (a couch potato's dream!), plenty of family merriment, and eggnog that's heavy on the booze, what's not to like? In this unique Yuletide treasure, the Fat Man offers up a host of holiday memories from the Griffin household as well as hilarious tips for merrymaking the Family Guy way.

should we make a section for this book. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 23:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Voice

those some one have in formation about why Sth mcfarlane took the job to play Brian prter and stewie. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 23:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, Peter's accent is a Massachusetts accent, no Rhode Island. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.157.85 (talk) 14:39, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Weight

His weight is not notable. It was only mentioned once for a few seconds, in 129 episodes, thus making it just trivial. CTJF83 chat 04:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

In one episode he started an entire association of fat guys, that is probably the most glaring example of his weight's relevance to the plot, there are several other jokes regarding his weight. Doc Quintana (talk) 04:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a problem saying he is fat I just have a problem with a trivial number. I also have a problem adding anything that is mentioned once for a few seconds CTJF83 chat 04:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok, i'm fine with that. I have no attachment to the number. But his fatness is a key character trait. Doc Quintana (talk) 04:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

If it's anything like The Simpsons, it'll change next time (actually, weight fluctuates all the time for people anyway) CTJF83 chat 05:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The number might change, but the fact that he is fat will not. Doc Quintana (talk) 16:42, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Didn't we used to have 'obese' as one of the adjectives describing him? Currently there is a mention of his fatness in the 'Creation' sub-section DP76764 (Talk) 17:21, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that CTJF83 chat 17:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Peter Section

i think that the edits i did where quite helpful the reception was on peter and the cultural influences work alot i am baseing my self on Homer Simpson and a bit on Phineas Flynn.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 12:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Peter's Griffin ancestors

Just occured to me that all the ancestors named Griffin who look like him which Peter recounts don't make sense, since Mickey McFinnigan is his actual father. He most likely made them up, especially since most of them are bullshit anyway, like Ella Fitzgerald Griffin... -- Imladros (talk) 04:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)