Talk:Natural Born Kissers

wikiquote

the wikiquote link does not give quotes to this espoide, instead a search 82.24.175.199 22:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Breasts

I find it hard to believe the Trivia entry about Marge's breasts being exposed. This would have been on CNN years ago if true.

Lots42 23:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Rough Commentary Info

The idea for the episodes couch gag came from Dan Castellaneta's niece, who is given a special credit for it over the end credits. (Castellaneta)

It was the first episode written by Matt Selman, who partly based it on his parent's marriage. (Selman)

The airplane restaurant is based on a submarine shaped restaurant near the studio named "Dive". (Scully)

The episode was the only time that Mike Scully ever got a call from Fox where they suggested not doing the episode. They were worried about the sexual content, the nudity and how it was going to be handled. It was the first episode to ever receive an M (15+) rating in Australia. (Scully) They particularily hated the phrase "ass forkin'" (Selman)

The Simpsons fought the censors and didn't give in anything. (Selman)

It was the first episode directed by Klay Hall. (Kirkland)

The aroused cow is one of MG's favorite act break jokes. (Groening)

Marge and Homer in the golf course is a reference to the season 3 episode "I Married Marge", although in that episode they are in a castle, rather than a windmill. (Selman)

The episode features the first time Marge's behind has been shown on television. (Scully) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scorpion0422 (talk • contribs) 03:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

GA on hold

• ninth season and originally, which originally aired
• was also the only episode to be directed by Klay Hall
• the family to a family restaurant - can it be reworded to remove the repetition of family - such as takes the Simpsons to a family rest.. etc.
• Remove link to 1942
• The DVD release was also reviewed favorably in the Chicago Tribune - Seeing as it's a newspaper the review needs to be attributed to the person who said it.

Very minor things, nice to see the improvement in all these Simpsons articles, good work. M3tal H3ad (talk) 04:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Done and done. Thanks for the review. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Pass. M3tal H3ad (talk) 05:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

UK censorship

I know C4 have been messing around with the cuts lately - "wankers" in, "this wedding angers me" out - but I don't think there has to be an acknowledgement of cuts on every episode page. There have been a lot of cuts over the years between the three channels, but hardly any of them are mentioned. Maybe there could be a page titled something like "censorship of The Simpsons" to include them? Billwilson5060 (talk) 13:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Referance to Maniac Mansion in this episode?

I belive there is a referance to Maniac Mansion in this episode.

After the farmer enters the barn and almost gets Marge and Homer with the pitch fork he leaves saying "Well, maybe they are in the Meteor Room".

I may be mistaken however and the referance is to something else or nothing at all. Please see for youself. 203.116.143.10 (talk) 10:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

There's also a Soylent Green reference - when Homer and Marge run from the minigolf castle, Flanders says: "It's people! People soiled our green!", a spoof of the (not so) grand finale of the movie. TomorrowTime (talk) 15:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The crystal cathedral

I find it ironic that I am being criticized for not using talk pages, when I tried just that, only to have my message quickly deleted and not responded to. [1] First, even if it seems obvious to you that the crystal cathedral is being reference, it still needs a reliable source. See WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:A for more information (and no, tv.com does not count because it is also user-generated). Second, you are going into far too much detail. Per WP:PLOT, we need to try to keep such sections to key plot points only, and that was basically a throw away joke and certainly doesn't warrant such an extended mention. You say it's subjective, but not really. Does it do anything to move forward the plot? No. The summary does not lose anything by not including it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

For starters, the section has been posted for almost a year, so it is established. Which means, you need to first gain consensus prior to repeatedly (there's little doubt you're inciting an edit war) removing it on your own (and it certainly isn't vandalism). "...seems obvious to you that the crystal cathedral is being reference..." - to me? You're seriously still harping on that? Anyone who watches the clip can see that the opening shot of the church is an EXACT copy of the Cathedral - that's not debatable man, and if you keep questioning it, you're going to lose. In fact, the pastor even refers to it as "God's Crystal Cathedral." Clearly, you've never seen the episode, so I suggest you watch it before responding. Look at the photos of the building on its article and then watch the clip, at the -3:15 mark, here: [2].

When an internationally acclaimed show like The Simpsons so clearly parodies one of the most famous churches in the world (the church's Hour of Power program is watched by 20 million viewers per week worldwide), as it obviously did with the Crystal Cathedral, it certainly deserves mention, as it was the first time the show parodied an actual church. And you are absolutely wrong if you think that everything on Wikipedia needs a reference - that would be absolutely ridiculous. For instance, you don't need to provide a reference for obvious things, i.e. the United States is a country. Anyone who watches the clip can see that it is an obvious, objective fact. If a clear consensus is gained, I have no problem having it removed - just stop acting on your own. However, I highly doubt you will garner the necessary votes to gain consensus to remove such an obviously legitimate section. As to your second point, that it is too long, how do you figure? I removed a substantial section regarding the parody of the pastor. All that is left now is a brief description of how they parodied the church, in a classic scene that everyone (who actually watches the show) remembers - I mean, how many times has Homer been dragged nude across a building? And every Simpsons episode article has much less notable comments, including this one, so I don't know where you're going with this crusade. Flavius Constantine (talk) 00:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's right I have never seen this episode, even though I improved it. In fact, I have never even seen The Simpsons, I simply work on Simpsons content because I like making things difficult for others... Perhaps you should stop making stupid statements simply for the sake of being petty. Clearly, you have never read policy, so I suggest you start reading it. It does not matter how obvious something may seem, it still needs a reference. Even if it was St. Peter's Basilica, I would still ask for a reference. By the way, it was in there from April to September and for a few periods before that (because you keep slipping it in there). That's hardly a year. You probably aren't going to read this anyway, so I don't know why I am bothering, but, per WP:PLOT (read the damn policy!) we need to keep those sections as brief as possible, which means key points only. Like I mentioned above, it IS just a one-off joke, and doesn't move the plot forward in any way. Should we include it just because it is "memorable"? Well, what is and isn't memorable is up to POV. There are numerous other memorable jokes in the episode (if you had bothered to watch it, you would know that). What about the aroused cow that watches Marge and Homer make love? Why not go into more detail about the third act, which is itself pretty memorable? What about the very end of the episode? Why not go into more detail about the alternate ending to the Casablanca film, that's pretty funny. My point is, the plot section should follow guidelines and remain short, and avoid the whole mess of POV. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:55, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Natural Born Kissers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071103203531/http://www.cbc.ca:80/programguide/schedule/dailySchedule.jsp?network=CBC%20Television to http://www.cbc.ca/programguide/schedule/dailySchedule.jsp?network=CBC%20Television&genre=&startDate=2004/04/02&startTime=12:00&endTime=19:00

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:13, 11 January 2016 (UTC)