Talk:List of Rugrats episodes

Notice

Could everyone who links to an episode please check to make sure it doesn't redirect to this page? Almost all the individual episode pages were redirected because they were just a summary. --PAK Man ^Talk 15:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Seasons

Is there any official source on how the episodes are divided up into seasons? --PAK Man ^Talk 14:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to write the same thing. I don't buy this "26 episodes in season 2 and 3" thing. All the Nicktoons were on 65 episode contracts, which comes to 5 seasons of 13. That's how all the other shows are listed (well, except Ren and Stimpy, but that's because John Kricfalusi couldn't get all the episodes completed on time). 13 episode seasons are the most common form. Even if they did premier 26 new episodes starting in the second and third fall, that still doesn't mean those are seasons "2 and 3," but could very well just mean they aired seasons 2 and 3 back-to-back, then the same with seasons 4 and 5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.143.87 (talk) 05:46, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

How about you look at these Rugrats episode lists from NickandMore.com. Rugrats in airdate order: http://www.nickandmore..com/episode-lists/nickelodeon/rugrats-air-date.txt and Rugrats in production order: http://www.nickandmore..com/episode-lists/nickelodeon/rugrats-production.txt. Don't you think this episode lists should be a little bit more like the SpongeBob SquarePants episode list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HialeahFL (talk • contribs) 16:02, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Nickandmore is not a reliable source. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Rugrats Cartoon Title Card.jpg

The image File:Rugrats Cartoon Title Card.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --15:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Episode 99

Where is episode 99 or Rugrats?

I have reason to believe the second episode was entitled "Chuckie's a Lefty". "Chuckie's a Left is available for download on iTunes, but iTunes lists it as Episode 96B. At some point, it listed every episode after Season X (not sure which) as occuring THREE EPISODES EARLIER. This would mean it was in fact, episode 99.

However... Episode 99 is not listed, so I'm at a loss as yo what to do. 173.70.194.24 (talk) 23:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Where did you get the dates from?

Where did you get the dates from? It says that "Murmur on the Ornery Express" came on February 15, 2003, but my TV Guide says November 3, 2002. Jon23812 (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Redirect

Why on Earth does this episode page redirect from the search term "Hair!"?

Surely the successful Broadway play and Milos Forman movie version are what people are searching for, rather than a Rugrats episode? Are you kidding me? o0drogue0o 17:21, 5 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by O0drogue0o (talk • contribs)

This page is a mess

I see multiple episodes with the same episode number, some numbers are missing and the episode "Acorn Nuts and Diapey Butts" is not even listed, only mentioned.mcnichoj (talk) 06:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

This redirecting is abusive

The way this page redirects views from all kinds of valid pages towards this page is just pure abuse.

Now you can't find The Smell of Success, the 2009 film with Billy Bob Thornton anymore because it redirects here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.160.72.40 (talk) 22:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Pre school daze

Can we add the Rugrats Pre-School Daze to the list — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.201.178.136 (talk) 11:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Question about Candy Bar Creep Show

Why would Nickelodeon air a Halloween episode in January? 24.180.56.157 (talk) 20:16, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

That's a very good question. Until this edit on 17 February, its date was 27 October. There have been a lot of edits in the past few months that seemed dubious but I couldn't find a reliable source for episode lists to justify reverting them. A look through other episodes reveals some pretty strange dates. --AussieLegend (✉) 20:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Tommy Pickles and The Great White Thing

Tommy Pickles and The Great White Thing is not part of season 1 nor was it shown on TV. It is the unaired pilot of Rugrats that was later released on VHS as part of Rugrats: Decade in Diapers Vol. 1 and DVD as part of Rugrats: Decade in Diapers in August 7, 2001. 24.180.56.157 (talk) 18:08, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

I refer you to my previous response. It looks like all the date changes in recent months are going to have to be reverted. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Episode listing, airdates, and different segments

I just recently went onto TV Iv and I saw different airdates for the episode listings.

The first thing: They say that Season 1 ended on December 22, 1991. For Season 2, they say that it premiered on September 13, 1992, and ended on May 23, 1993.

Another thing, Season 3. Episodes 21-25 aired from October 8th to November 12, 1994. The episode "Passover" did air on 1995.

Season 4 is where they start listing things wrong. See, the episode "Vacation" is not on their list, and "The Turkey Who Came to Dinner", they say it aired in 1998, when it aired in 1997.

Like what I said, Season 5 contains the episode "Vacation", which aired a year earlier, in 1997. the other episodes, they aired from August 15 to September 21, 1998.

Season 6, oh boy. This is the season which other websites think that the remaining went into Season 7 and 8. For one thing, TV Iv said it premiered on January 18, 1999 and ended on November 27, 1999. Not only that, episodes 8 and 17 aired in 2001.

Season 7, lets just call this "Season 6, Part 2" because that's what it really is. It premiered on October 2, 1999 and ended on January 29, 2000, with two episodes not airing until July 2001. Also, most segments in episodes air a couple days after the first segment aired, not airing them together.

For Season 8, The episode "Be My Valentine", which is from Season 6, aired on Valentine's Day 2000, "Discover America" aired on October 9, 2000 and the episode "Acorn Nuts and Diapey Butts" originally was a three-parter, airing from November 7 to November 9, 2000. they re-aired on August 4, 2001, as a movie version,

As for Season 8 itself, well, it contains episodes from Season 7, but aired mostly weekdays. Not only that Season 8 had 26 episodes, and it aired until October 28, 2002.

Season 9 also has different air dates. for example, Season 9 only lasted 18 episodes, from September 21, 2002 to August 1, 2004. Also, TV Iv has also said that like season 7, several segments had aired only a couple days after the segment that preceded it, but unlike season 7, the segments took MONTHS to air. Also, "Pre-School Daze" aired on April 2004, and is somehow included in this season, even though it aired a season earlier.

So, this is what I have to say about TV Iv episode listing of "Rugrats". Also, is TV Iv a reliable source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.186.174.178 (talk) 17:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, what is "TV Iv"? --AussieLegend (✉) 18:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

TV Iv is this website were you can find episodes of shows you haven't seen. But mostly it lists episodes of shows if you go to this website, you will see different dates then the ones we have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.186.174.178 (talk) 18:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Can you please provide a link? --AussieLegend (✉) 19:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Here's the link: http://tviv.org/

And the link to the Rugrats page on said website: http://tviv.org/Rugrats

There is a section called "Seasons". If you go through the seasons, you will see different dates for episodes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.186.174.178 (talk) 21:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

This site appears to be a wiki. Not suitable as a reference, as it, like IMDb, TV.com, and even Wikipedia itself, are user contributed. See WP:RS Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Note also that other sites like tv.com and imdb are also not reliable sources. A list of both reliable and unreliable sources can be found at WP:TVFAQ. --AussieLegend (✉) 10:49, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Can we use TV Guide's episode listing, because TV Guide is a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.186.174.178 (talk) 21:44, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Keep in mind that there are sometimes disparities between TVGuide and other references like Zap2It. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:17, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

One glaring issue with TV Guide is that the episode titles in the TV Guide lists don't match the titles that are shown on-screen in every episode. --AussieLegend (✉) 02:23, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Here's another thing: 2 episodes were released on home video before they aired on TV. For example: The Season 8 episode " Bow Wow Wedding Vows" was released on home video on February 5, 2002, but wasn't aired on TV until March 25, 2002. The Season 9 episode "Babies in Toyland" was released on home video on September 24, 2002, but didn't air on TV until December 9, 2002. Can I add this to the episode list?

76.186.174.178 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC) What website did you get the episode list and airdates from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.247.216 (talk) 21:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Split into seasons

I suggest we split the seasons into they're own pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.247.216 (talk) 22:35, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

The article isn't long enough and there is no benefit in splitting unless significant content can be added to the season articles. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:07, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I've got a good idea to make it longer. First we separate each segment in half, because each segment has different writers. And if we are going to make it longer and add pictures to the season templates, I suggest we add the DVD covers in the templates.

There is another thing: This website (http://www.watchcartoononline.com/anime/rugrats) has all 172 episodes. Well, not all of them. They are missing the episode "Brothers are Monsters/Cooking with Susie". It isn't even listed in they're episode list.

Because Season 7 has three segments, I had to use YouTube for every episode. I even had to use it for "Tommy Pickles and The Great White Thing".

The episode "A Visit from Lipschitz/What the Big People Do" apparently doesn't even show the writers or directors. I had to use this link (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0691336/?ref_=ttep_ep13) for all of the writers and directors.

"Acorn Nuts and Diapey Butts" was originally aired as a three-parter when it first aired in 2000. It was re-edited as a TV Movie in 2001. The first part had a "Written by" credit, while parts 2 & 3 had a "Story by" and a "Teleplay by" credit.

So, these are my suggestions for the page to make it longer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.247.216 (talk) 17:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm confused—why would we go out of our way to make the article longer? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

You're right; we wouldn't go out of our way to make the article longer. But I'm just trying to help make it longer. [Special:Contributions/76.184.247.216|76.184.247.216]] (talk) 18:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb was asking why we'd want to make it longer at all. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, can I try to make it longer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.247.216 (talk) 21:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

You haven't explained why you want to make it longer. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:58, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Okay, why do I want to make it longer?! Because I would like to have season pages, and the segments to be split, that's what! THIS IS YOUR ANSWER! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.247.216 (talk) 22:13, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're upset about. It's your lack of adequate explanation of your rationale that's brought us to this point. Frankly it seems to me like we're putting the cart before the horse. The way I perceive it, you want to split the article for some reason known only to you, and to achieve that you want to artificially inflate the article. If that's not accurate, please correct my impression. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:49, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, since I'm not going to make it longer, can I at least us the episode list for Zap2it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.247.216 (talk) 23:33, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

This is not, "not going to make it longer". Almost all of the episodes aired as 2 or 3 stories, with one set of credits, one production number (that did not have "a" or "b" at the end) and aired at the same time. Padding out the episode list by unnecessarily splitting the episodes is not constructive. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

The Air Dates and Episode Listings Are Wrong

Both iTunes and Amazon Instant Video have the correct air dates and the correct episodes that correspond with each season. And if you look at the "Still Babies After All These Years" special the air dates for some of the episodes given agree with iTunes and Amazon, such as "Naked Tommy" premiering on January 23rd, and not January 2nd, and "I Remember Melville" premiering November 5th, and not May 15th. Jon23812 (talk) 16:28, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Policy discussion in progress

There is a policy discussion in progress at the Manual of Style which affects this page, suggesting that the capitalization of "like" should be removed from the episode titles here. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — LlywelynII 14:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Separate writer credits

The episodes themselves don't have one pair of writer credits. They have two different pairs (or in the case of Season 7, three). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.41.156 (talk) 19:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Certain episodes have own pages

Why is it certain episodes have their own pages? A couple of them are just random episodes and not specials. Tinton5 (talk) 20:51, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

That's the nature of TV episodes. Almost every series has a spattering of random episode articles. Many have articles for every episode while others did have episodes for every or most episodes, but these have been redirected or deleted for various reasons. This program falls into that category. There were episodes for most episodes but most were redirected. Only a few were able to be brought up to a standard that justified their retention. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:15, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Air dates

There's apparently several different sources to the airdates, per this ToonZone discussion: https://www.toonzone.net/forums/threads/rugrats-series-talkback.4642191/

As Rugrats was usually divided into two halves per episode, some halves aired on different days than others. I'm working to try and incorporate those sources here. Dpm12 (talk) 23:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

All of the episodes were aired in pairs. If you search, you can find copies of the episodes as they were originally aired. The list here is correct in that regard, at least every episode that I checked. Please note that discussion forums are not reliable sources and cannot be used as references. Toonzone.net is specifically listed at WP:TVFAQ#Unreliable sources as unreliable. In this article you have referred to rugratonline.com. That website does not seem accessible, so it can't be used as a source either. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Not true. I specifically remember when some episodes in the later seasons had the segments aired separately. I realize a discussion forum in itself isn't reliable, but the dates listed seem to be the most accurate I can find at the time being, as well as my own memory of watching episodes (I'm good at rememering dates). A bunch of different websites list a bunch of different dates. I only listed rugratonline because I knew ToonZone wouldn't be considered reliable, so I just said that instead. --Dpm12 (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

And most of the other dates are correct, according to the dates here, so why would these ones be wrong? Again, I understand a forum isn't counted as a reliable source, but these were dates that user had collected from other sources. -- Dpm12 (talk) 05:10, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Also, here's a discussion from ToonZone from August 2, 2004, where they're discussing and reviewing the "yet-unaired final episode of Rugrats", proving that in the later years, there were many instances where the 11-minute segments were broadcast on separate dates: https://www.toonzone.net/forums/threads/rugrats-hurricane-alice-rate-and-review.3683881/ -- Dpm12 (talk) 05:17, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I have a complete copy of all episodes as they aired and use these to verify certain aspects. Memory is not reliable and your memory is certainly not a reliable source. Whether or not you think the dates in the discussion at Toonzone are correct is irrelevant. You need a source for the dates and you can't use Toonzone. Rugratonline is not working so that can't be used as a source either. That means nothing is sourced. I've said the following on your talk page but I'll repeat it here:

Regarding your edits at List of Rugrats episodes and your edit summary "First of all, the show WAS on 13 years (I was literally copying the main article). Secondly, ToonZone isn't BUT, the links that were used ON THE subject were, if you had actually read it" I don't really understand what you mean. Perhaps you should have tried explaining on the article's talk page before restoring. However, your previous edits indicated that you were sourcing your information from toonzone.net which is not permissible as it's not a reliable source. The year and full date changes are not supported by reliable sources, using 2 dates instead of one for episodes that aired together simply does not make sense and you've screwed up the title formatting in that regard. More importantly, they're incorrect. For example, right now I'm looking at a copy of Starstruck/Here's Taffy? as it originally aired and Starstruck was the first episode. There is no separation between the two, Here's Taffy aired immediately after Starstruck, not 6 months later. While a very few of your edits were reasonable, the vast majority are wrong, which is why all had to be reverted. As it stands now your edits are opposed and when edits are opposed they need to be discussed on the article's talkpage per WP:BRD. Note that while discussion is underway, per WP:STATUSQUO the status quo should remain. You need to explain and get consensus for your changes before they can be implemented. That won't happen until you can provide reliable sources. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

So, the discussion from the NEXT DAY, was them lying? I understand a forum isn't a reliable source, but if a thread from August 2, 2004 has them discussing an episode that aired "yesterday", why would they lie about that? SpongeBob, The Fairly OddParents and Loud House have all had segments aired separately. Dpm12 (talk) 05:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

And you're telling me you have all 172 episodes from the day they first aired? Pardon me for scoffing, but I find that hard to believe. All of them? How? Dpm12 (talk) 05:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Is Amazon Instant Video considered a reliable source? Could I use that? Dpm12 (talk) 05:44, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I wanted you to know I found this site that was keping track of when new episodes were airing, and guess what? Some of the segments aired separately, including Starstruck and Where's Taffy? I won't change the dates now, so as to not anger you, but here you are:

http://www.animeexpressway.com/rugrats/rrep2002.htm Dpm12 (talk) 08:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

The point with toonzone is that NOTHING from those discussions can be used as a source, no matter how good it looks. You need an actual reliable source to support any changes. The problem is that there are several sources that we deem to be reliable but they contradict each other on different episodes. This was discussed above at #Episode listing, airdates, and different segments. There is no single guide that seems correct for all.

And you're telling me you have all 172 episodes from the day they first aired? - I do indeed. Long before the days of bittorrent I had friends sending me videotapes from the US for different series.

Is Amazon Instant Video considered a reliable source? Could I use that? - The problem is, as previously discussed on the page, there seems to have been a bit of revisionism. TV Guide is the most accurate for early seasons, but is less accurate for later seasons, while some of the other sources are accurate for ater seasons but clearly wrong for the early seasons. There is no single good guide.

I wanted you to know I found this site that was keping track of when new episodes were airing - animeexpressway.com is a self-published source. It's a fansite and can't be used as a source.

I won't change the dates now, so as to not anger you, but here you are - You shouldn't be changing anything until this discussion comes to a consensus. You were told that on your tak page and I repeated it here. Technicaly, these edits constitute edit-warring and you're now very close to breaching WP:3RR. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I still don't believe you have 172 tapes worth of episodes, but I'll go ahead and give you the benefit of the doubt, for a second. Did it ever occur to you that your "tapes" are not from the original airing, but a rerun? Secondly, you can dismiss sources all you want by saying "fansite", but these "fansites", at least two of them, prove you wrong. They were writing this stuff down AS IT WAS GOING ON AND THE EPISODES WERE AIRING. And last nights edits were not anywhere close to breaking the three edit revert rule as I didn't revert anything. You have to click "revert" to revert. I was editing. You can refer to your fantasy tapes all you want, but people who were actually tracking this stuff down say that many of the later episodes premiered separately. And by the way, one of my sources was the Los Angeles Times for the airdate of A Rugrats Vacation, but I'm sure you'll dismiss it as a "fansite".

I have all the proof I need that I could edit this list right now and edit the airdates for the segments that were aired separately, but I feel it's best not to do so for the time being, otherwise, you'll use your "tapes" as evidence against it (which personal tapes, even if they did exist, would not count as an independent secondary source, by the way). Dpm12 (talk) 06:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

And apparently Elijah Abrams seriously doesn't consider the Los Angeles Times as a reliable source.

I'm not going to bother with this anymore. If you guys would prefer to have the wrong airdates, that's fine. I've been a registered Wikipedian for 12 years, I was just trying to help. You'd rather use tapes that don't even exist over first-hand accounts and The Los Angeles Times. I also like how Elijah Abrams waited a whole day before he had a problem with my edits. Dpm12 (talk) 07:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

If it makes any difference, I found this: http://www.intanibase.com/iad_series/series.aspx?seriesID=320

It's not a fansite, and the information is only added by people who worked on the project in question. You can read about it here: http://www.intanibase.com/iad_general/mission.aspx

And again, it also lists some of the segments having aired separately. Just wanted to put that out there. Dpm12 (talk) 08:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

The episodes that I have on tape all have network identification on them and a label including date aired so I have no problem saying that they are originals. I've since replaced them with digital versions on my server but the tapes are in my storage shed.

you can dismiss sources all you want by saying "fansite", but these "fansites", at least two of them, prove - Fansites prove nothing. They're not reliable sources so they can't be used to support any claims.

And last nights edits were not anywhere close to breaking the three edit revert rule as I didn't revert anything. - You restored changes that had previously been reverted so, yes, they do count as reverts. Per WP:3RR, "A "revert" means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material." You don't need to click revert to revert.

You can read about it here: http://www.intanibase.com/iad_general/mission.aspx - Reading that page it seems to be a self-published source and yes, created by a fan.

And apparently Elijah Abrams seriously doesn't consider the Los Angeles Times as a reliable source. - It's not the source that is the problem, it's the claim. The source supports the claim that the episode aired on the date claimed but it does not support a claim that this was the first time that the episode aired. What you've done here is classic WP:SYNTH.

Finally, I'll ask you not to make false claims in edit summaries. I'm specifically referring to "And even AussieLegend said this edit was okay". I never said anything of the sort. Per MOS:NUM only one consistent format should be used throughout an article. Mixing numbers and words to represent numbers in the same sentence is not appropriate and "the Arbitration Committee has ruled that editors should not change an article from one guideline-defined style to another without a substantial reason unrelated to mere choice of style". --AussieLegend (✉) 10:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

You have GOT to be kidding at this point. Since you didn't actually READ the link, here you go. From a May 24, 1998 article in the LA Times:

"The Rugrats are awed by the lights and sights when they go to Las Vegas on The Rugrats Vacation Special (Nickelodeon, Friday at 8 p.m.). The babies see some famous tigers on a large video screen and mistakenly think the animals are kittens. They set out to find them and set them free. For ages 2 to 5."

Really? The link doesn't say when the date is? Why don't you just admit you have a problem with any source that proves your fantasy tapes (that don't exist) wrong. Can you REALLY not count six days to the next FRIDAY? This is beyond ridiculous at this point. I knew somehow you were going to find a way to make the Los Angeles Times not a good enough source for your bizarre standards. Dpm12 (talk) 11:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

And I knew you would find a way to call Intabibase "a fansite" even though PEOPLE WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE SHOWS are the ones who put in the information. Literally nothing is good enough for you. You keep talking about these tapes that we all know are bogus.

And really? You think the news would talk about a Rugrats rerun as if it is a big deal?

And your definition of "fansite" is hilarious. I especially love how you're just deciding every single source you don't like is a "fansite" . I never thought I'd see the day where The Los Angeles Times would not be considered a good enough source. Dpm12 (talk) 11:36, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

And by the way, I'm sure your "tapes" would be an example of WP:SYNTH. After all, you're coming to conclusions based on what was given to you. Why are you holding yourself to a different standard as a Wikipedia editor? Another editor threw that whole WP:SYNTH thing in my face because I dared call Antz a "critical and commercial success", which it was. If The Los Angeles Times is WP:SYNTH, then so are those tapes of yours that don't even exist Dpm12 (talk) 11:44, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

All the Zap2It links are dead. I know for a fact iTunes is accurate, although you'll try to poo-poo that, too. The Ed, Edd n Eddy episode guide and many others here on Wikipedia use iTunes as a source. I won't add the iTunes dates yet unless there's an agreed upon consensus, but the Zap2It links are dead. And I'm sure you'll find plenty of users agreeing with me that iTunes is indeed a reliable source for dates. However, for all I know, you'll dismiss it as a "fansite" or as WP:SYNTH or as fancruft or whatever else. As I said, many other episode lists on Wikipedia rely on iTunes as a major source for airdates. Dpm12 (talk) 12:07, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Could you please learn to indent? Yes I did read the LA Times article. Did you read what I wrote? To refresh your mind: The source supports the claim that the episode aired on the date claimed but it does not support a claim that this was the first time that the episode aired.

Really? The link doesn't say when the date is? I never said that.

You think the news would talk about a Rugrats rerun as if it is a big deal? - That article reports a number of TV programs. It's not the news, it's just a summary of notable episodes appearing on TV. They don't research them to find out whether episodes have appeared previously.

I knew you would find a way to call Intabibase "a fansite" - The wording at the link you provided gives some hints. The author talks about how he created the database. Nobody else is mentioned. The registrant name for the domain is an individual and the registrant organisation is a web design site. The registrant email is a free gmail address. there are no indicators on the website that it is anything other than a fansite. I suggest you read WP:RS.

And by the way, I'm sure your "tapes" would be an example of WP:SYNTH. - I'm not using my tapes as a source. I'm just using them to confirm basic information already in the article and reported by reliable sources. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

First of all, I'm on mobile, so I just type into a box that shows up on screen, so sorry my phone format isn't up to your standards. Secondly, Intanibase DOES mention it relies on info from the people involved in the show. Thirdly, those tapes don't exist, that's my point, and then you turn around and lie and say you aren't using them as a source. Not to mention you literally contradict yourself in the next sentence, saying you're using the supposed tapes to "confirm basic info... reported by reliable sources" even though no such tapes exist and you said you aren't using them as a source and no such airdates are confirmed by reliable sources. Fourth, I still can't believe we're debating whether or not the Los Angeles Times is a reliable source, it's actually come to this. You can throw up all the curveballs you want, there is no reason in the world the Los Angeles Times ISN'T a reliable source, you just don't want to use it as a source. Fifth, I see you didn't respond to my iTunes suggestion, which is a source a lot of episode lists on Wikipedia refers to. Sixth, not everything needs to be spelled out. And finally, I'm sorry if I sound angry, I'm trying to make the article as reliable as possible, and you keep referring to your "tapes", which don't even exist, wagging your finger at me, throwing WP:SYNTH, while being guilty of "jumping to conclusions" and WP:SYNTH-ing yourself.

Again, I suggested iTunes, but I won't change the dates unless there's some sort of a consensus. You probably would rather just leave the list the way it currently is though... factually incorrect. And I've read WP:RS plenty of times. The problem is you're deciding what is and isn't a fansite. WP:RS doesn't rely on the editor's personal opinion of what it means. I could write on the Barack Obama article that he's literally a demon from Hell, cite World Net Daily as my source and decide it's reliable enough, doesn't make it true. At least ToonZone is explicitly forbidden at WP:RS, as are Wikis, as are forums, as are blogs, etc. Intanibase isn't. YOU just DECIDED it isn't reliable. You probably consider Facebook a "fansite" because it was created by one guy. Dpm12 (talk) 12:54, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I just have to say, good job with the "accuracy dispute" tag. Again, I'm just going to mention iTunes. The Zap2It links are dead. I guess we'll have to disagree on Intanibase. Dpm12 (talk) 13:19, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

If no one objects, I'll go ahead and switch the airdates to the more accurate iTunes ones in the next few days. Dpm12 (talk) 22:43, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Here's the Zap2it guide: [1]. They updated their website quite a while ago, so any previous links are no longer working. Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:17, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

@Amaury: Thanks for that link. I wouldn't necessarily call the iTunes dates "more accurate". As I've already pointed out, there has been some revisionist history with air dates and the available sources all seem to contradict each other. Pretty much every attempt to change air dates in the past few years has resulted in errors. How do the iTunes dates compare with the Zap2It dates? We can't call one source "more accurate" just because one editor prefers it. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

As of right now, Paramount is directly selling officially licensed DVD's for the show through Amazon and thus aren't Amazon Prime's airdates a better source than TV Guide? An example that, to me, proves that the original airdates are more accurate on Amazon Prime is that they have Season 1's "Candy Bar Creep Show" episode with the original airdate as 10/27/1991 whereas our current listing has it in Janary 1992. That just doesn't make sense for them to air a Halloween episode in the dead of Winter. Can we come to a consensus on the veracity and accuracy of the Amazon Prime Video airdates? --Hated Humanist (talk) 17:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I'd say use the Amazon Prime Video airdates. Devann (talk) 05:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Rugrats Logo.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:36, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Potentially incorrect credits

A good majority of the episodes, particularly around seasons 5 and 6, have "story by" and "teleplay by" credits. However, only a select few episodes (i.e., the "Acorn Nuts and Diapey Butts" trilogy, "Club Fred", "Babies in Toyland", etc.) have proper "teleplay by" credits-- the majority of these episodes that have "teleplay by" credits have "story by / written by" credits. Also, it seems that some credits are flat-out incorrect: on the article itself, "Beauty Contest" credits Arlene Klasky for "story by" and Everett Peck for "teleplay by"; on the actual opening credits for the episode, Peck is given a "written by" credit while Klasky is given a "based on an idea by" credit. 03isrflo62410 (talk) 21:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)