| Talk pages are no longer used.|
Please use the Forum for discussing article changes.
It's easy to assume that the shopkeeper's name is Sam, but are we really certain of it? When he greets Simon the Soundman, he says "welcome to Sam's general store". That doesn't necessarily confirm that his name is Sam. That could be the name of the store's original owner. Muppet Wiki is usually careful not to include facts that aren't guaranteed true, so I thought I just might mention it. Then again, maybe his name is Sam. I'm just not sure we should assume that. Anyone agree? Garrettk41 19:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Good point, but in a similar sketch, we have "welcome to Marvin's Music City, I'm Marvin" and other Simon Soundman or similar sketches establish the same "character=owner." The Busby twins skits establish himself as the store owner (as does the phrase "shopkeeper" as opposed to clerk which is what most official documents use) and since the alternative was just "Shopkeeper," I think the assumption is well warranted in the context. It's the only mention of a name so it wouldn't be cited anymore, but it's a solid reference. Basically, we have to imagine a complex backstory of previous store owners ala Hooper's and so forth to disprove it, and I think the text makes the sketch dialogue clear, though it could be adjusted if you really think it's confusing. By the same token, one could argue that Mrs. Johnson isn't Mrs. Johnson if she kept her maiden name or added a hyphen, but that doesn't get us anywhere, and the text in the articles in question are factual. We're careful about avoiding fan names and such, *but* we also use names, even when mentioned in passing, as long as the context is enough to place them in reference to the character. I'm just not sure moving to the more generic "Shopkeeper" in any way improves the article or makes it more accurate (the parentheses in this case serves both to disambig and to mention the most common label). For that matter, see also Talk: Simon Soundman. Obviously we care more about names than CTW did when these skits were made, so we're not likely to find any specific references to "Sam," but I don't think we need to go overboard in the other direction and imagine original owner backstories and so on. Yeah, it would be nice if the skit had an "I'm Sam" line, but there's enough context and evidence to make this more than an assumption. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 19:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Very well then, Andrew. I guess you're probably right. Just thought I'd bring it up since similar topics have been mentioned here. And I agree, it's more than likely that his name is intended to be Sam. Garrettk41 22:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)