Talk:Hell on Earth 2006

Spongebob costume

There is a dude in a spongebob costume at the end of the episode, when they all are dancing.

You evidently didn't even read what I wrote. I was responding to someone commenting that they doubt they'd have a fun little episode like the good old days, because the "good old days" were very similar to nowadays (except for improved animation), in that they interspersed political commentary with random kids-being-kids episodes almost every season from season 1 until now. That is all. I wasn't commenting on the content of the new episode (which I still haven't seen). -- Ubergenius 14:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The "Catholic Hierarchy"

Does anyone know if the Catholic hierarch with the principal speaking role (in the clergy scenes) was intended to be a caricature of Roger Cardinal Mahoney, the archbishop of LA? If so, this would make the satire of the episode quite astute, as the role encapsulates many off the criticisms the cardinal is facing right now.

This is the 5th halloween one...

This is the fifth halloween eppy. The last one was trapper keeper.

I think not, considering that it came out during November, and wasn't really classified as obviously as the other four mentioned.

Steve Irwin

The fact that Satan thinks it is too early to dress as Steve Irwin for the party is likely a reference to the fact that his death was an internet meme only hours after he died. Should I add it to the trivia?

When I saw that part, I was thinking of that episode, Jared Has Aides, and how it takes 22.3 years before something can be made fun of. 69.121.67.198 04:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I really don't see how it was a reference to the internet meme. I think it was just a joke, and a reference to his death in general. -- Xargon666x6

Agree Xargon666x6. I'm sure they just felt compelled to mention him in the show. As they have said before in interviews, you satire that which you love. -- Ubergenius 13:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

They mentioned this episode in a U.K newspaper, how they have completely disrespected Steve Irwin, and it was wrong to have him displayed with the barb hanging out of him...

And here's a CNN article about this [1]. This could prove to be controversial. Let's wait and see. Gdo01 20:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

My bad. I think its safe to say there is controversy [2] Look at how many articles there are on this. Gdo01 20:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

It does deserve a mention. I'll add it. -- Ubergenius 17:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

If they were in fact satirizing the Inernet response to Irwin's death, that's one thing. But the article claims that they were pushing the envelope, potentially offending people to make a point, a rather precious point ("we're taking an extreme poosition to make a point!") when, again according to the article, "every girl who has ever appeared on that show is evil." Um...what? Because they do extreme things? Maybe *they're* trying to make a point. Oh wait, I get it, they're evil becaiuse they're rich and spoiled and popular and not dorks like Matt and Trey were when they were apparently horribly abused (*eye roll*) at Columbine High School. Are only some kinds of extreme actions acceptable then? No matter how remote the "point" may be? At least the girls on MSS16 have the excuse of being young, stupid and harmless. Matt and Trey claim to be so much more evolved--it's a little hard to ognore the cruelty of their Irwin "joke" at their ages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.96.214 (talk) 04:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Did anyone read that response by Terri Irwin about her concern about her kids seeing this? Aren't they like 8 and 1 years old? Who's dumb enough to let their kids watch South Park anyway?

As far as I'm concerned, it was prolly a knock on anyone that made fun of Steve Irwin's death in a sense of bad taste, such as WWE's Matt Striker.

Yeah exactly. Their joke was ABOUT people who cause controversy, they were _denouncing_ it... so it shouldn't have been any more controversial than a show that says "DON'T go kill people horribly" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 02:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

Spookyfish victim?

I noticed that, if you look closely to the bottom left during one of the shots of hell, you will see a blond-haired man with an odd hairstyle. This man was one of the victims in Spookyfish. Grieferhate (talk) 08:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Sexual Harrasment

Sexual Harrasment(sp?) panda was at the party. In the last scene he appears in the bottom left.

Add to trivia maybe?

It was just a person in a Panda suit.

Ex?

"A summary released on the official South Park website mentioned that among Satan's problems would be an "ex-lover", however none of them appeared, and this teaser seems to have been unfulfilled."

Wasn't the minion with the scarred eye the same one Satan blasted in the face [and broke up with] at the end of the PSP episode?

I thought that minion was based on the guy from LOTR, who has been in south park various times...NJlo 14:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Kenny

Kenny, though not prominent by any means, does appear in the episode.

Does he? If anyone can concretely tell where he does, please edit the trivia as so NJlo 14:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

burns, gandhi, hitler & diana

george burns, gandhi, adolf hitler and princess diana were all in hell and seen in hell on southpark bigger longer and uncut as kenny goes to hell

Overall Message

"The overall message of the episode implies that the girls on My Super Sweet 16 are worse than Satan."

In my view the overall message is that spoiling young kids is making them selfish, egoistic and blind to the feelings of others.

Elmo Costume

There is a black man dressed up as Elmo at the party. This is a reference to Kevin Clash.

That's not a black man, that's one of Satans minions, i will change it accordingly.

This article has big problems.

See WP:AVTRIV. That "trivia" section is much longer than the meat of the article. Also, it's not even trivia. It looks like someone got lazy and decided to put everything into a list instead of actually writing an article. This is pretty sorry work. Mr Spunky Toffee 17:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Was this the first episode...

... to use the word "nigger" (or "nigga" as Biggie Smalls, and Butters, says it)?  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 19:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Supposedly, Krazy Kripples was the first to do so.Chocolate Panda 13:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I don't remember that, I'll have to watch it again. The Death Camp of Tolerance did, but in the setting of the museum, not having a character say it.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 19:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Song in closing scene.

I just added a note to the article that there's a song at the end that sounds similar to a handful of late-70s and early-80s dance songs, but someone I was chatting with on IRC told me that he's pretty sure it's not an original sound-alike, but it's actually from "Brithday Party" by Grandmaster Flash and The Furious Five, but he wasn't 100% positive. Is there any encyclopedic and verifiable way to get confirmation on whether this is a specific song or a soundalike? - Ugliness Man 15:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

although the trivia section was a mess, removing all of itdidn't seem neccesary.. doesnteven appear in the historysection. i justsaw it and removed one thing and boom its gone.

Half Life Ending music?

I found that, after the 3 murderers ruin the Ferrari cake, and the scene switches to the party, you can hear in the backround something that sounds very similar to the ending music of the first Half Life video game for just a few seconds, untill the scene switches again to the preists. The full song can be heard here: http://media.putfile.com/Half-Life-musics

Is this a real usage of Half Life music, or just a sound alike? (it wouldn't be the first. after all, the Woodland Critter Christmas episode also had Half Life music.) Chocolate Panda 00:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I noticed the song too. It had some vocals, so I'm guessing it's a remixed version. (not HL2's) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.229.47.92 (talk) 03:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Three Murderer Death

It seems to me that the way the three muderers has since been changed slightly... Did anyone else notice this, or was it just me?

Mention of Controversy?

Should the mention of the controversy over the Steve Irwin scene be mentioned specifically in the article? It is the first episode since "Cartoon Wars" that spawned news stories on CNN and other news outlets. ScoopPC11

Death of 3 murderers

The info about the different methods of killing from iTunes may be interesting but until a newspaper or major media critic reports on it, it fails WP:NOR. From what I've seen, it is more likely that the iTunes version is the original uncut scene, while the broadcast was edited by Standards & Practices. However, until it is reported on by the media, that is also OR and should not be included in the article. Does anyone have any sources for this? Cheers. L0b0t 17:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Ferrari/Acura

Was the Ferrari cake/Acura cake storyline inspired by a real-life event? Not one involving a cake, but (as I suspect) some rich spoiled celebrity brat being given an Acura for her birthday and screaming "I want a Ferrari"?  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 12:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's meant to reference any specific event as much as it's just a general stereotyping of a spoiled brat, since an Acura is an "inferior" car compared to a Ferrari. It just falls in line with all the other spoiled brat things that Satan said/did in the episode. - Ugliness Man 12:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure, it's just that some of the things that happened seem a little bit too specific, like the W Hotel and the pictures of Satan on the walls. I thought there might have been some specific inpiration for this. Either that, or this kind of thing happens all the time...  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 09:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe the direct inspiration is My Super Sweet 16, a reality TV show, and SOME of the events may have been gleaned or inspired from that show, but I don't think the Acura/Ferrari was anything from the episode, but just an illustration to the fact that, a CAR-SIZED CAKE wasn't good enough for Satan only because it wasn't a Ferrari, despite the amazement of a cake of that size and complexity. -- Ubergenius 14:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Need to put controversy in context

It does not make sense to remove the reference to people wearing Crocidle Hunter costumes with fake stingrays as this was happening before the episode aired and the whole segement is a comentary on taste and what is or is not acceptable. Without this reference there is no question in play and makes Matt and Trey appear pointlessly viscous.--Wowaconia 04:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

• Yep, we wouldn't want a runny Matt and Trey... 147.70.242.40 19:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

• I believe the Bill Maher wearing a Steve Irwin costume happened BEFORE this episode, so I always thought it may be a reference to that incident.Jamie2nd (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Song during Ferrari Cake scene

Does anyone know what the song is called? The one with the drum and the "ooohhhh yeah". many thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.233.154.32 (talk) 03:23, 9 November 2006

The song is simply called "Oh Yeah", and it's by Yello. The context is that it's the song that was playing during a pivotal scene of the movie Ferris Beuller's Day Off" when the car (1961 Ferrari 250GT California) was revealed and discussed. The song was somewhat known before it got used in that movie, but the movie helped boost its popularity quite a bit, and the signature "chikachikaaaah!!!" became an unofficial pop culture reference for the 80s. Of course, this was in the article at one point, and may still be, but articles this new are constantly having trivia added and removed, so I hope that at leats this portion of the talk page remains intact. - Ugliness Man 12:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome to put in the article providing a reliable 3rd party source has already published that info that you may cite it and it does not just come from your own viewing of the episode. Please see WP:OR, WP:V, WP:EPISODE, WP:NOT, and WP:WAF for some of the relevant rules. Cheers. L0b0t 13:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It's also used as Duffman's theme in the Simpsons.

Good Article

I passed this article as it meets all the Good Article criteria. It's a tricky subject to tackle, but it concisely covers all the major issues with good sources. Well done everyone! -GilbertoSilvaFan 11:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Intro for Season 11

In the intro for season 11a the clips shows one of the murderers cutting the other's tongue off. I thought he pulled it off as shown in the episode. Mr. Garrison (talk · contribs)

GA Sweeps (on hold)

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.

• The three images have slight fair-use problems - they have two copyright tags where one and only one is needed (drop the one for "copyright and unlicensed, because these aren't). Additionally, the one with the kids trying to summon Biggie Smalls is not reduced to low-resolution (unlike the one in the info box) and should be corrected.

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, MASEM 07:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Crow Costume

The reason that Satan gives why no one should dress like The Crow is because too many people dress up like the Crow and is therefore 'lame', not because he stated he's going as the Crow. That's supposed to be the gag, since he told people not to dress up like the Crow yet dress like him himself. 81.151.146.229 (talk) 19:34, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Hell on Earth 2006/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment. I do not think that this article passes the good article criteria; specifically, criteria 1a, 3 and 4:

• Criteria 1a: A word count of around 760 words for 22 minutes is way above acceptable limits.
• Criteria 3: The article lacks a "production" section. Most episodes have three major components—plot, production, review. This article lacks one of these, and is, as such, not comprehensive enough to be a good article.
• Criteria 4: This article contains a controversy section which only characterises one side of the dispute. Thus, it fails the neutrality criterion.

As the article is fundamentally flawed, I've delisted this as a good article. Thanks, Sceptre ^(talk) 02:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Why is the "Reception" part included? IGN is not a real TV review site.

Has anyone actually read that section? Honestly, IGN is not a TV review site in the first place. This section always sounds so incredibly tacky when one reads a South Park article, and frankly its irrelevant and not real information that pertains to the episode. I might understand if every season had reception in place, but who's idea was it to put those horrible reviews as a standard for every South Park episode? I'd say if there was a 1-10 scale for well-written criticism that IGN's reviews wouldn't even break into the 1 level, because they are just that amateur and irrelevant. Let's just pretend they were the most amazing reviewers in the history of the world, is it really required that every single episode have that section? Look at other shows from the past of other series -- is there a reception section? Of course not, because that is so pointless and irrelevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.206.190.113 (talk) 15:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

If you beleive that IGN is not a reliable third party source, please contest it at the reliable source noticeboard. If you simply disagree with their quality of article, that's just something subjective.

Reception sections prove notability by providing us with coverage of the article subject from sources not directly involved with the subject themselves. Alastairward (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay man, I agree with your logic there, except I really think you need to take a step back from black and white thinking and just really use common sense here. Firstly, its IGN. I personally do not care THAT much about this to try and figure out how to disprove the notability of a website on wikipedia, I just always use Wikipedia so much but the fact is, it irked me everytime I read this South Park page. I know enough to know poorly structured criticism when I see it, but for the reviews that are being included on this page? Come ON man. They aren't even content-driven. They are vaguely subjective to a point where they might've just said "I thought it was good." "I thought it was bad." Most of the times they repeat the line "But the episode was still funny." Really? That's like a music review saying "Yeah, but the music is still good." WHAT is that telling us? Far more relevant reception that goes along with your logic would be reception from the PUBLIC in terms of controversies and the such (see "With Apologies To Jesse Jackson"'s reception section). Frankly, leaving the reception in there as it is makes Wikipedia look like a joke site -- I know I'm not alone on this thought because I had a professor use a South Park episode to discuss social commentary and the impact on the public it had, but specifically told us not to use Wikipedia's entries for "Reception" due to how irrelevant they were. I'm not going to change it, but I felt I was at least doing my part by making the problem known. If no one wants to take this further, its not doing anything apart from making the site look bad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.206.190.113 (talk) 04:18, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hell on Earth 2006. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090103003952/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/southparkseason10.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/southparkseason10.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)