Muppet Wiki

     
A Fandom user
  Loading editor
  • Hi Fred! Thanks for keeping the main page updated. Could you do me a favor though, and minimize the number of times you edit the page? I have it on my watchlist to keep an eye out for vandalism, so I get an email every time it's edited. You can actually preview the changes you make to a page by using the preview button. That way you can make all the changes you want to make all at once. In most cases, you're making pretty minor edits that probably aren't so necessary anyway. So if you could tone it down on the main page, I'd appreciate it as would everyone who's got it on their watchlist. Thanks!

      Loading editor
  • Hi Fred! On your archived talk page, you introduced yourself as Fred A. Could you add that to you profile header? I keep forgetting your name :)

      Loading editor
    • A Fandom user
        Loading editor
  • Please don't undo my edits. I know you're trying to help, but I've been doing this for six years. I know what I'm doing. If you have a question, you can ask on my message wall or the article's talk page. Thanks.

      Loading editor
  • Heh, you undid Buddy at the same time I did. Basically, as you can see, it's because it's not really relevant to the info box and we cover far too many movies (especially all those PG-13 to R movies where the relevance is just some Creature Shop effects or props) to do it every time (and then it gets into near semantics, like for all the G ratings, where we might as well say "G for everyone" or even cases where no rating was applied or added later for video, etc). I wondered why you did that, and then thought to check The Muppets (2011), so now I see why. I see there's an explanation there, but that's an exception because there was uncertainty about the rating and it's still new out (so people would be more apt to think "Why is the new Muppet movie not G?" than they would to wonder about The Witches or anything). Personally though, I think it would be better to discuss the rating in the text, but that's something we can tackle on the article's talk page later (the page is still more of a work in progress, after all).

    Plus of course those rating explanations have become more detailed over time (for the original release of Labyrinth, the best I can find is "thematic content," as opposed to "scary scenes, some sexual implications or subtext, infant in peril, and David Bowie in suggestive tights"). In general, the reasonings of the MPAA are outside our ken and focus anyway. Not that you needed the explanation, but here you go anyway!

      Loading editor
    • Yeah, incidentally, I couldn't find a "reason" for Labyrinth's PG rating anywhere. But yeah, its a little off the point, and a case of me just trying to over-correct. There is also an explanation for It's a Very Merry Muppet Christmas Movie should that one stay, since its Muppet movie? (Similar to the new film's situation.)

        Loading editor
    • Hi, guys! Just because I'm kind of a geek about ratings and stuff like that, I wanted to mention that the MPAA didn't really give out official reasons for ratings until a few years ago, when they made them part of the rating box on movie posters and the back of video boxes. Sometimes you'll see a retroactive one on an older movie, but Labyrinth didn't have one in 1986. I think it came about because of people not realizing that not all ratings mean the same thing. For example, The Passion of the Christ and American Pie are both rated R, but for obviously different reasons. So I think people were asking for a more detailed explanation, which led to the additional line of text in the rating box. I just checked the latest DVD and Blu-Ray of Labyrinth, and they don't have one.

        Loading editor
    • Thanks for weighing in, Ken! I thought that might have been the case (and of course we often see it added retroactively on movies that had no rating at all when released, but with no explanation). That's one of the reasons I really don't like including that in the infobox (that and the sheer number of Creature Shop or effects entries, since to start doing it on a few at random, we'd need to be consistent) but for the new film, it's an exception worth making at least until it's no longer current/news, and it's a major Muppet production as well (compared to Honey which is prop/effects, and Rat and Buddy which we cover in more detail but are still Henson/Creature Shop projects so varying ratings for those aren't a surprise).

      For It's a Very Merry..., it wasn't even released theatrically, the rating was added to the DVD packaging as we note, so in my opinion it shouldn't be there at all but noted in the section on DVD release.


        Loading editor
    • A Fandom user
        Loading editor
  • Hey Fred! I just noticed that you haven't customized your avatar yet. You should, as it helps everyone in the community identify you. Just hover your mouse over the gray person next to your name on your profile and you'll get an Edit Avatar link. Then just choose a picture from your hard drive, and you're done!

      Loading editor
  • Hi Fred! You probably didn't notice this, but I see in some of your edits that spaces are being left under page sections. Of course, it's not your fault; it's some bug that seems to happen when you switch from the default visual editing mode to source mode. I discovered it a few days ago and brought it up a few days ago on Current Events. It's nothing major, but if you want to not have that happen anymore, I recommend unmarking the "Enable visual editor" option under "Editing" in your preferences. Just wanted to let you know ;)

      Loading editor
  • Hi, Fred! Thanks for letting us know that they're going to do D23 again in 2013. I hope by then we have a new Muppet movie, or series, or something! I hope that I can also meet up with more Muppet fans next time. I only got to see a couple of wiki people in 2009 and 2011.

      Loading editor
  • Hello Fred. I had been writing this before I saw your most recent messages, but I still wanted to say a few things because I felt I had to. When I initially replied to your post on Scott's wall, I was reacting to the fact that you were really making a bigger deal out of the issue than it needed to be. As evidenced by Scott's recent revert and comment, it did seem that he was annoyed and probably in a rush. I agree that it was out of line, but maybe he couldn't think of a better explanation for reverting like Wendy did. None of us are perfect, you know. Not even admins.

    In most of your recent comments referring to Scott, it seemed like you were attacking him verbally, especially in (even hypothetically) calling him "lazy" and "inconsiderate", and saying things like "who do you think you are?" To an administrator and co-founder? To me, that seems like the bigger crime than leaving a small comment like Scott's telling you to stop. Frustrated outbursts like that not only makes it worse for you and Scott, it makes it worse for everyone else here.

    However, I'm happy that now you've come to more reasonable conclusions with Danny and Wendy. Perhaps leaving the Wiki for a time is called for, that is if you still feel uncomfortable working here right now. If you do leave, I'll await your return and hopefully Scott can patch things up with you. You are a great contributor, and a very loyal follower to the Wiki rules, but I just feel you were thinking about all this too hard.

      Loading editor
    • Yeah, I get where you are coming from.

      Honestly, at the time it was more of a shock, knee-jerk reaction, I still don't appreciate the comment, It was not exactly how one wants to be addressed. And this is not the first time that Scott's actions have left me scratching my head.


      But for the record, I do have to point out that with whatever I said, it all sounded worse that I was really feeling, I'm sure you know that it is very easy to sound "loud" and angry in text. Sometimes people just want to be heard. I am not a trouble maker.

      And honestly, I would appreciate if I did not have to discuss this anymore with anyone. (Seriously) I don't want to give this anymore life.

      Believe me, I have read what you have all said, I understand. Mistakes were made, lessons were learned.

      I just want to put this behind me, and I don't want to hear about it anymore.

      So please spread the word and if at all possible, please delete some of my previous comments on Scott's wall, most of the stuff was just rambling I would rather that it not stay around.

      Just please let everyone know that I am sorry and regret that this happened.

      Thanks for the words on this matter, I appreciate your thoughts. :)

      I will still take a break from the wiki. All these "unwritten rules" of editing can be very disorienting.

        Loading editor
    • Hi Fred -- Honestly, this is all totally okay. Writing a website with a group of people is a tricky thing, and you bump into each other sometimes. It happens to all of us. :)

        Loading editor
    • A Fandom user
        Loading editor
  • Hi Fred! Glad to see you're still adding to the Wiki. I think you could be of service on Talk:The Hollywood Walk of Fame; Julian left a message there questioning about the Sweetums puppet/costume they used (Looks like an alternate, to me).

      Loading editor
  • Thanks for adding the references tag to Beaker. In the back of my mind, I just kind of always assume they're there, and sometimes I forget to check.

      Loading editor
See archived talk page
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.