In the interests of full disclosure, I'm using radio and old movie comedian Jerry Colonna (voice of the March Hare in Disney's Alice in Wonderland, frequent Bob Hope cohort, and guy with moustache and wild eyes caricatured in Looney Tunes cartoons going "Ahhhh yess!")
Sheeran can't hold a note as long. His skill was considered greater than most opera singers and doctors and experts called it an attribute more commonly found in hog callers. (Which brings us back to Pigoletto).
Hi, um, when I was reading the Cheers article, I read that "K Cheer" had three different sketches total. But then when I read articles on Episodes 1041, 2881, and 3388, it says there is a fourth sketch of "K Cheer." I am bizarrely confused by this because I feel that there's no such thing as Version #4 and I doubt they never even filmed a fourth take of "K Cheer"... Three versions is all there is, as far as I'm aware... I think you might need to edit in these three guides, saying it's Version #3 of "K Cheer" because it seems that Version #4 is likely false. :/
I was just looking at the CTW Archives First Season Show Content, I wonder if maybe they misprinted the number. Strange that they would just skip #3 on there. Makes me wonder if maybe they recorded one and chose not to air it (and had the fourth one remain "K Cheer #4", especially since titles weren't meant to be seen by viewers). That guide does list quite a few segments without noting episode numbers, I wondered if that meant that the segments were taped in the first season but held off from airing until later, but have found at least one of those "number-less segments) listed in a first season episode. But there is one insert, in episode 5, that I looked for in that document and couldn't find listed at all.
I think it's a good idea we shouldn't edit these three articles on these three episode guides about the "K Cheer" thing unless otherwise. Three different versions are all we know of and are all we could find. A fourth version is likely impossible to find.
Hey, how many of our templates use the "if" coding? I'm trying to adjust Template:episodesesametree to include a writer field (the BBC has specifics for most episodes; only one director for the whole run).
But I get weird issues trying to edit, because it now registers as an infobox, and Wikia's new markup suggestions etc. pop up and I can't actually edit (the "publish" button is basically disabled, only the "infobox preview" works). Have you seen this anywhere? (I checked, it doesn't affect any templates that use "class"). It's this way for me in both Chrome and Firefox.
That's not happening for me anymore, but I remember it doing that before. I think it made me preview it first, or something. Or, it might have been that new "Helpful Template" thing where it asked you to categorize it -- which I just try to ignore or bypass.
The problem here is that the "if" code identified it as an infobox (this wasn't happening on other templates that used "class," I checked), so *that* caused different stuff to happen. The preview neither allowed anything to happen nor even showed what the template would look like; it seemed to show a few episodes, I guess pages that used it, and that was all. I can screengrab if that would help. All other functions were basically disabled. You could edit the text but nothing could be done about saving it.
This is the full screen (I may have to submit a ticket for this).
Text editing, edit summary, and clicking that "Open Infobox Preview" are the only things that work. Everything else (publish, preview, the "generate draft markup" thing) is disabled.
At first I wondered if it was the "if" code, but Template:Movie uses that and it's fine (neither the disabled buttons nor any of the shown text about infoboxes, just loads the editor). Seems to be something within this template or else yet another semi-random glitch. Which browser are you using? (It might also be that you've managed to disable whatever the source of it is).
Ah, found the triangle! (I was looking to far up and then too far down.) And that did it. It's the long way around, but it works. (Fortunately only admins usually edit templates so it's not something too many folks will encounter).
Yeah, just one more thing to remember. At least it was easily circumvented. (It baffled me mainly because that was the only template page I could find that did that; what did the code have against North Irish Muppets?)
Did you get the screenshots that I made a list of Animal Show characters that i haven't seen (including Rudy the Roadrunner, Zack the Arctic Fox, Wingo the Shoebill, and Charlie the Chamois)? Huh did ya?
Hey, just for the record re The Swedish Chef, Dave Goelz is listed as playing him in the end credits for Muppets from Space, and so repeated in print film guides and online film sites, IMDb, British Film Institute, etc. Our reason for taking it out is on the talk page here. Anthony asked Goelz at an event and he said Barretta did it.
It wouldn't have made a difference with this user (their use of Japanese edit summaries, which sort of Google translate to "why did you change this" and so on, show we would have had communication problems anyway), but I'm trying to think of how best to note it on the article.
Yeah. I trust Anthony, but I kind of wish we had something clearer to cite (an interview, text or audio, with either Goelz or Barretta) since most of the time we use the actual credits as our first source, except when we can solidly prove an error. This might be worth opening up a thread for, to see if anyone knows of a more direct statement of who played the Chef. (I barely even remember his being in the movie, so I'm not comfortable trying by voice.)
Yeah, it's a very brief sample (the "yersky persky" stuff I'm not sure on, but the ending sounds Barretta-y). Given the layout of the characters in that scene, it's possible Goelz puppeteered, or it was just a goof period (there were incorrect performer credits for The Muppets, after all, re "Fozzie Moopet," and for awhile we had to keep explaining it wasn't Barretta).
We might have to do it in a semi-ambiguous way (i.e. "Credits list Goelz, but as Goelz remembered it in a QA in 2010...") Stating the two conflicting sources but not really giving primacy until we had a more concrete statement or a direct quote.