This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cartoon Network, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Cartoon Network on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cartoon NetworkWikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkTemplate:WikiProject Cartoon NetworkCartoon Network articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Isn't "Frisky Dingo" the launch code for the Annihilatrix? Didn't Sin mention that in episode 210? Shouldn't that be in this article somewhere? --98.70.43.231 (talk) 16:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Until more episodes are aired is it really necessary to have a separate character list? The information seems to be the same in both so at this stage it's pretty much redundant. --carpeNoctem04:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unless Frisky Dingo is cancelled early, there should soon be ample information to put in this section. I do agree that the redundancy is pointless, though, and so it would be best to remove the summaries from the main page. MGlosenger06:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed in the external links now someone has added a MySpace profile for Killface. Upon visiting the link I am not very sold that this is an official profile but more the work of a really devoted and possibly bored fan with a bit too much time on his/her hands (same applies for his son Simon's profile). Anyone can create a MySpace profile. Is there any reason for this to be included here? --carpeNoctem09:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I personally am sure it's run by the show. Verifiable evidence:
Many of the "photos" in Killface's profile could only come from production art. Most of the images shown are seen briefly in the background on the show decorating Killface's lair, but not that clearly, and the "paintings" especially would be hard for a fan to duplicate so closely.
Many of Killface's "top friends" are the show's staff, a couple of whom have Killface in their own "top friends" in return. ("Mack" is Mack Williams, and "Neal" is Neal Holman, both of 70/30.)
Killface's signup date to myspace (viewable on his blog page) was 9/17/06. Simon's was 9/29/06. The show didn't air until 10/16/06, or 10/13(?) on adultswim.com. While Killface was in the teasers and promotional writeups, Simon was not.
Killface has left (in-character) comments on Simon's Myspace as early as 10/11/06, five days before the show aired on TV.
If you really think it's inappropriate then please feel free to delete it, but I am convinced it's notable as a promotional gag by the guys behind the show. Perhaps it might be a better fit on the "characters" article? Rob T Firefly00:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. It's just that at first glance it just looks so minimalistic and sparse with barely anything to it. Perhaps this will change. I actually took the time to look through the Friends and etc. and I side with you. Also I got introduced to this great band Pleeeaseasaur because it's in his top 8. The irony is that everyone challenged me over whether the Dethklok MySpace for the band from the show Metalocalypse which was not designated as being official at the time was real or not (and it turned out to be official), and here I am questioning this MySpace profile. lol. Looks like pretty strong evidence that both Killface and Simon's profiles were made by the creators as a promotional tie-in. I had to give evidence much in the way you did for others to believe my claims about the Dethklok page as well. I think it should stay and Simon's could be added as well. --carpeNoctem14:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When someone gets the chance, can they add the spiffy image link thing to the Wikiquotes page for this show? I'm too much of a newb and too lazy to figure it out right now. -- ModernTenshi0416:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, yeah, got unlazy and added it. Saw someone added the graphic to the Wikiquote page that linked to the show's main article, and simply did what they did, swapping wikipedia with wikiquote. Now I feel retarded for asking someone else to do what is basically extremely easy. Anyway, go me! -- ModernTenshi0417:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How about we try to reach a consensus on the talk page as opposed to reverting it back and for? What does everyone think should be used, the form from the Web site or the spelling on the show itself? I'd prefer the show, since Adult Swim's Web site isn't always reliable as a source, but I'd like to hear what others think. SGreenwell22:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I find it weird that they decided on this spelling when various publications[1][2] about Frisky Dingo and adultswim's official site[3] used the spelling X-ticles. Where did they get their info from? Gdo0122:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One thing I remember from my hazy memories of running a Sealab 2021 fansite, is that while the adultswim.com crew are a great bunch of people, they're generally not the same people as those behind the Adult Swim shows. Thus, mistakes can and do happen on their end. Or, maybe it was 70/30 who made the mistake on that Xtacle paycheck, and we'll get a different spelling of the word on-screen in a future episode. However, the case remains that we do have on-screen material to go by at this point, and that outranks any third-party source. And only on Wikipedia could we endlessly debate the minutae of a testicle joke. ;-D Rob T Firefly05:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we know what's important in life :-D Anyway, given the other comments, I'd also go with the version used in the show itself. SGreenwell10:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as it stands now, there's one spelling in the Origins section and another in the plot. I'm going to consolidate them both to Xtacles. Feel free to run with the other spelling if you'd like, but the spelling should be consistent at least. Bitnine18:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're going to run into a problem if this show goes any longer than one season. As it is, the "plot summary" section really isn't much of a summary, it's an episode-by-episode retelling. I think if we aren't proactive, the entire thing might get edited out one night. I think it might be worth it to do sort of what they have on the Family Guy page - They have a short summary of the show in the main article, then a link to another article that's just a list of each episode. I think the text that currently constitutes the "plot summary" section would look nicer if it was split off episode by episode. What say you? SGreenwell13:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're right that the plot summary section is way out of hand. A link to a separate page for individual episodes is probably in order, but even then the individual episode summaries should not go into the depth that the summary currently does.Dekkanar20:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The information on when the second season will air keeps changing around without any new references being made. The current reference says "late 2007" and it is just a blog on TV.com that does not cite any sources for the information itself. I believe Adult Swim is running bumps this week that say when new shows are arriving this year, but I didn't catch if Frisky Dingo was on there. If that is where the current "Summer 2007" reference is coming from, then the old reference needs to at least be removed, if not replaced by a citation of the bump. --Jfowler2722:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On the Adult Swim Fix[4] it says of the episode "Thrust Issues" the following, "No. It is not the end. Because Adult Swim bought 13 episodes. So this ones(sic) the end. And what exactly makes this one the end, you ask? Well... remember the Annihilatrix?" So I think we should consider removing the claim of a second season altogether, as that pretty clearly states that there won't be any more than 13 episodes. Zaron18:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well since nobody seems to have anything to say, and some random person's blog that doesn't cite its source is the only supposed proof of a second season, while a website run directly by Adult Swim indicated that there will not be any more episodes, I'm going to remove the statement. If someone can come up with some more solid proof of a second season, please feel free to put the statement back in there, including the source. In all honesty I hope it does get a second season, as I love this show, but all reliable information seems to indicate otherwise. Zaron22:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, agreed. Besides, it seems kinder that way. Otherwise you might have folk wandering by and thinking that there's some actual verification of a second season, only to be crushed later on in that way that Adult Swim loves to do. Anyways, not wrong to hope that someone will bound on the scene with solid news of a second season and make all of this moot, eh? ;) Bitnine22:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They may not actually be from the Asiatic region of Earth. Perhaps they just happen to look like stereotypical Asians and speak Japanese. MGlosenger19:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're getting a little too PC, to be honest. They speak some form of asian language in the factory and they're packed in the van a la the normal stereotype about asian workers. I don't think it's a leap of faith to state that they're asian workers. Since we're talking about an animated comedy, I think it's hard to make all of the language neutral; the show uses stereotypes for a lot of its humor, whether it's the soul-less corporation led by the Stans or the "gay" X-ticle. However, I would like to hear some other opinions on the matter, since so far we're the only ones who have edited the article re: this issue. SGreenwell01:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty sure the intent is that they are Asian-immigrant slaves. This is a common problem for immigrants to the US as they often have a debt to pay for their passage, and have no idea about the existence of laws that would protect them. Back to less serious discussion :D Axion2220:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are 100% Asian. I have every episode on my 360 and I watch it once a day. Defiantely Asian males and females. Besides, it's a sweatshop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theoneandonlydedwinhedon (talk • contribs) 02:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would say the animation style is 'muted'. My definition of this would be, very little necessary movement, such as arms, legs, walking, moving objects, etc., but plenty of unnecessary movements like blinking, twitching of the nose, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theoneandonlydedwinhedon (talk • contribs) 02:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The plot section needs to condensed by about half, but if there is any disagreement on this point, I'd like to discuss it here first, before putting in the work and having it reverted. Do you object to a major shortening of the plot section? ike989815:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
At least half, if not more. I love Frisky Dingo, but it's a cartoon that (for now) has only been on for one season. A light covering of major plot points is fine; we definitely need to trim off a substantial portion of the summary. Go for it. /Blaxthos20:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be more manageable if each episode were summarized in order. It's much easier to keep it in line that way with all the foreshadowing and references. Like so:
Sorry, but Wikipedia is not the place to have extensive plot summaries. I am renewing my call to trim this article significantly -- three or four sentences per season is appropriate. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 19:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The series' animation has a distinctive look. Characters are rendered in a very 'clean line' style, with little fine detail. The backrounds are unusually lush, having a painted appearance. In any particular scene, the characters' movement is limited, presumably to limit animation time and cost. The is not particullary apparent when watching the show. Although it the show includes superheros, there are only limited action sequences.
I'd like to say something about the color pallete used, because I think it is distictive, but I don't know how to describe it other than calling it 'sophisticated' or 'elegant'. The use of bright, primary colors is limited and there is a emphasis on brown, black, and white.
How about something like: "The color pallete is typically muted or neutral, composed mostly of shades of brown, black and white. Bright, primary colors are used sparingly, used primarily for explosions or other unnatrual effects." Hazardous Matt12:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'm going to move something based on above into the article. Of course, there's room for improvement and it would be great to have a reference from an animation magazine or something like that. ike9898 (talk) 14:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They don't discuss the animation style at all, but this article does have an interview with the creators where they discuss the show's linear plotline (vs. Sealab's non-sequitor) as well as some other bits we may be able to use. Hazardous Matt14:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I put a fact tag on the Spin-Off section. I can't verify the website (security procedures at work..bleh) so if someone can actually attribute a reliable source to the claim (is Frisky Dingo Central affiliated with 70/30 at all?) it would be appreciated. Hazardous Matt21:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
71.66.98.157 (talk) 16:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Frisky Dingo Central is part of a greater network of fan sites that are dedicated to adult swim shows. It includes Adult Swim Central, Aqua Teen Central, Squidbillies Central, 12 oz. Mouse Central, Metaloalypse Central and the Swimcast. the information on the site usually says that it was confirmed by 70/30.[reply]
This section seems to be more focused on somebody putting clues together that the show's town is based on Atlanta than actually describing the setting - majore motropolitan era, the present (or near future), etc. This should be updated.Pirchlogan (talk) 00:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the style section is entirely factual and is based on PoV. It is simply written by someone who has watched the show and made observations; it needs references (obviously) and possibly historical context, e.g. what shows are related and how are they written/animated? What backgrounds do the main creators come from; were they previously artists or wrters from somewhere else? You get the idea. Andre666 (talk) 10:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What is POV about it? And how is referencing going to help? Unless you are talking about referencing specific instances of these aspects of the style occurring on the show itself... Anybody who is referenced will have "watched the show and made observations". If it is not factual then why didn't you delete/alter it? Otherwise I don't see how this is a dispute. Also, I fail to see how the background of the creators has anything but the most tangential relationship to the style of the program. Barnabas Brown (talk) 15:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe a POV template isn't the right one then; perhaps, rather, one on citations? The section has clearly just been written by a viewer, not a professional – that's what I'm getting at; a professional view (by, for example, a well-known TV critic or company) on it should be cited. Andre666 (talk) 15:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Replaced the POV tag with the OR tag. Fans wrote that section in good faith but without any citations by reliable sources. If these claims can't be backed up with sources, the whole section ought to go. White 720 (talk) 19:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Article says that it's "rendered" to look like a painting, but the Credits say that it actually is a painting. Which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TBone777 (talk • contribs) 03:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it is me but I thought that much of this was political humor. For example during one point Killface's bus was cut off and it nearly looked like it was a Hillary Clinton campaign bus.
The hunting with Xander and Killface can be argued to be like when Dick Cheney went hunting
Mr. Bill might be a parody of Obama
Of course the reference to Jackie Kennedy when Xander was asked to run for office.
the 2 most recent edits by 2601:601:1900:a08:d6e:178d:6bf9:4c3a changed original air dates that i was unsure of how to corroborate. if there's anyone out there with intimate knowledge on the subject who can confirm these changes it'd be excellent. Dankdevice (talk) 21:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]