Talk:Stimpy's Invention

Stimpy's Invention is currently a Television good article nominee. Nominated by RTSthestardust (talk) at 22:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.

Note: I will be busy on July 13-25, so my activity will likely be inconsistent

Animation: American / Television Low‑importance

	Animation portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Animated television work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Television: Episode coverage / Nickelodeon Low‑importance

	Television portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article is supported by the Nickelodeon task force (assessed as High-importance).

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Stimpy's Invention/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: RTSthestardust (talk · contribs) 22:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Rollinginhisgrave (talk · contribs) 06:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you're unavailable between 13-25 July we'll just have to finish this up over the next week :)

I'll start with a source review per the outcome of Talk:Rocko's Modern Life/GA2.

Sources

Not part of the GACR, but to get us started I'll suggest some links you can add:

You can get print disabled access via this form

These sources are generally reliable, but I'm not sure about BearManor Media as a publisher. Can you speak to their standards and what establishes them as not a vanity press? Did this book receive any reviews?

Spot check from this revision:

[3] clock I believe you want to say "The executives wanted to have the scenes removed". The source also says Ren smiling so wide that the top of his head separated from his lower jaw and you say "Ren laughs so hysterically that his head splits into two". I'm willing to entertain that in the show he actually is laughing, but I'll need to be shown evidence of that before I approve this.
[6] Y
[9b] clock Kricfalusi's insistence on drawing and redrawing many of the scenes himself greatly hindered production I'm not seeing this in the text, can you quote it?
[12a] clock And can you quote this one?
[15a] N I can't see this in the text either, but I've done enough word searches to be satisfied that the claim of 80s/90s is not in there.
[18] Y
[21] Y
[24] Off topic.
[27] N The phrase "happy happy joy joy" introduced in "Stimpy's Invention" has entered the English language as a slang term to describe someone being forced to feign happiness and to hide their unhappiness to conform. This isn't verified by the text. It's just one author using the phrase and then having to spell out what he's referencing. Hardly evidence of slang, and undue.

Media

The Happy Happy Joy Joy clip is really long. I would really appreciate it if you could drop a note at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions confirming this is an okay non-free media use.

Broadness

~ 200 words on the usage of antidepressants in America is far too much.

Prose and content

I'm seeing a lot of quotes. MOS:QUOTE is not part of the GACR, but it says While quotations are an indispensable part of Wikipedia, try not to overuse them. Using too many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style ... It is generally recommended that content be written in Wikipedia editors' own words. Consider paraphrasing quotations into plain and concise text when appropriate. I generally see this applied in good article reviews under #1a of the GACR, which requires prose be concise. Can you summarize most of these in your own words?

I'll pause here until the quotes are cut down, I get those requested spotcheck quotes, and I hear about the reliability of BearManor Media. Looking forward to working with you some more on this more. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 06:35, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My process as of July 6, 2025

Sources:

[3] Done: Revised part of the sentence: Ren grins so wildly "that the top of his head separated from his lower jaw."
[9b] Done: Removed the citation from this sentence and revised it into "Kricfalusi's insistence on redrawing many of the scenes himself greatly hindered production," as it further explains in the "Animation" section.
[12a] N No: Honestly, I've judged sources by their supporting info on Wikipedia, so I really can't access these to quote them.
[15a] Done: removed the whole sentence and citation
[24] Done: also removed all information supporting citation [24]
[27] Done: removed the whole sentence and citation

Media:

clock I reported it to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions and will wait for a response to occur.

Broadness:

Done: There are 132 words in the whole paragraph, with 42 words being in the last sentence. As referred before, information supporting citation [24] was removed.

Prose and content:

Done: In any information preceding the "Reception" section, many quotes excluding a few are now summarized in my own words.

RTSthestardust (talk) 20:29, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. I see now that A.S. Brown has written most of the page. It worries me a bit that you don't have access to the main source the article uses because we can't really ensure text-source integrity and do a spot-check if that's the case. I've pinged A.S. Brown and hopefully they are willing to jump in and give some quotes so we can progress. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 01:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, I am willing to help out. Just what quotes do you need? Best wishes. --A.S. Brown (talk) 01:43, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing, thanks A.S. I did a spot check from this revision and was looking for quotes supporting 9b (that Kricfalusi's insistence on drawing scenes held up production), 12a and 15a. I also asked about the reliability of Sick Little Monkeys: The Unauthorized Ren & Stimpy Story: I did some searching and can't really see anything to establish whether it is a vanity press, editorial standards etc. Did this book receive any reviews? Appreciate your help on this. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 01:56, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @A.S. Brown:, pinging you in case you missed the last message or this has slipped your mind. If you're still able to provide these, there's no rush, and any time in the next week would be great if possible. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 01:16, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi It is a wonderful world, hope you don't mind if I ask for some advice. I started this review with a spotcheck as you had failed Talk:Rocko's Modern Life/GA2 a few days before. My spot check was mixed, but I found the nominator doesn't have source access, and hasn't previously, so they haven't ensured TSI. I'm inclined to fail as I have tried to complete a spot check via the original author, but haven't had any luck. What would you advise here? Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 07:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would definitely fail if there is no editor who can vouch for the TSI of all sources and provide some for a proper spot check. I would send a talk page message to A.S. Brown and wait a few more days before failing though. He could have just missed the reply and been busy on the weekend. IAWW (talk) 11:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks IAWW :) Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 02:53, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for being so important. I had an important job interview to prepare for. For citation 2, he is the quote: "During the writing sessions for Ren & Stimpy, Bob Camp came with an idea for a short entitled "Stimpy's Inventions", in which Stimpy makes Ren the guinea pig for his useless creations. What might have ended up as an inconsequential gag picture quickly evolved into something more elaborate. Camp said that John K. "fell so in love with the idea that he constantly re-refiined everything to the point of ridiculoulousness until everything was perfect". The title became singular and it developed into one of the funniest-and most delightfully odious-animated character studies ever produced". [Komorowski, Thad Sick Little Monkeys, 2017 p.115]. I have not done this, but I hope this is expected. Best wishes! --A.S. Brown (talk) 05:07, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, I will be going away for awhile on a long trip, but before I go, I get to this. For citation five: "The cartoon was in outline form for a period of nearly six weeks and was fully written and boarded by Camp at the end of February 1991" [Komorowski, Thad Sick Little Monkeys, 2017 p.117]. For citation 8: ""We were not gong to bag, ever, Stimpy's Invention, the whole show. There were just pieces of it that Nickelodeon didn't want to air. That particular episode was not about fighting over content-it was more about the perfectionist part of it. John didn't want want to send send certain things over until it was perfect". Most Spumco staffers of 1991 share Coffey's view. Chris Danzo, who had been acutely aware of material being completely thrown out in the first season, remembers nothing of the kind happening with Stimpy's Invention. "I don't thing anything would have gotten made if Nickelodeon didn't like it. If they hated something, it would have never gotten made. I think he had to push to suggest certain things, but everyone had the show's best interests in mind". Even if Nickelodeon had wanted to thrown out Stimpy's Invention in its entirety, the result delays would have occurred very early in the production. Instead-according to Camp, one of the cartoon's chief architects-most of the delays sprang not from Nickelodeon, but from Kricfalusi's micromanaging, directorial style." [Komorowski, Thad Sick Little Monkeys, 2017 p.117-118] For the scheduled debut: "Rescheduled for broadcast in October 1991, the short was still not even completely animated at that point. Nothing mattered to John K. except that the cartoon be the best that Nickelodeon would ever air" [Komorowski, Thad Sick Little Monkeys, 2017 p.118] I would like to do more, but it is very late and I have a flight to catch tomorrow, so I will finish this off when I return. Best wishes! --A.S. Brown (talk) 08:00, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]