Talk:The Big Fix (South Park)

Please do not add mention of pop cultural references, continuity notes, trivia, or who the targets of a given episode's parody are, without accompanying such material with an inline citation of a reliable, published, secondary source. Adding such material without such sources violates Wikipedia's policies pertaining to Verifiability, No Original Research, and Synthesis.

While a primary source (such as the episode itself, or a screencap or clip from it at South Park Studios) is acceptable for material that is merely descriptive, such as the synopsis, it is not enough to cite a primary source for material that constitutes analytic, evaluative or interpretative claims, such as cultural references in works of satire or parody, because in such cases, such claims are being made by the editor. This is called synthesis, which is a form of original research, and is not permitted on Wikipedia, regardless of whether one thinks the meaning of the reference is "obvious". Sources for such claims must be secondary sources in which reliable persons, such as TV critics or reviewers, explicitly mention the reference.

In addition, trivial information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, per WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE and WP:TRIVIA, and this includes the plot summary. As indicated by WP:TVPLOT, the plot summary is an overview of a work's main events, so avoid any minutiae that is not needed for a reader's understanding of the story's three fundamental elements: plot, characterization and theme. This includes such minutiae as scene-by-scene breakdowns, technical information or detailed explanations of individual gags or lines of dialogue.

If you're new to Wikipedia, please click on the wikilinked policy pages above to familiarize yourself with this site's policies and guidelines.

Tolkien Black

Would it be fair to mention in the article that "Token" Black's name has been retconned to be Tolkien Black in this episode? Since clearly his name was not conceptualized to be Tolkien by Stone/Parker. I'd like to hear opinions whether this should be given any weight here. 2A0A:A542:1DE0:0:188D:C297:79A1:2D3A (talk) 12:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I thought the same thing − his name was more of a retcon than a revelation. Hoof Hearted (talk) 13:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Steve's Voice Actor

Did Steve get a new voice actor at the end of the episode?Inkan1969 (talk) 17:45, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

It appears he did. It is rumored it might have been James Troup (linktr.ee /slash/ JamesTroup) but I cannot find any reliable sources for that claim, not even on the IMDb page for the episode where he is only credited as "Narrator". 2A0A:A542:1DE0:0:2065:7F:7DF8:2A3F (talk) 05:20, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Stan misunderstood (not disobeyed) his doctor's advice

My two 8/26/23 edits to a single sentence corrected this article's misimpression that Stan ignored/disobeyed his doctor's advice. He did not -- he scrupulously obeyed it (though, being a child, he misunderstood what the doctor had meant by "from the perspective of a black person"). I see that my edits were promptly undone for reason of "Excessive details," but the restored version not merely omits a clever plot point but incorrectly portrays Stan as a character who would so cavalierly disobey/ignore his doctor's advice (after all, we're talking about Stan, not Cartman). 96.58.40.194 (talk) 15:47, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

@96.58.40.194: Welcome to Wikipedia, 96.58.40.194 (assuming that you're new here; I notice edits on your IP going back to 2020).

When it comes to writing about fiction -- and this includes writing plot synopses-- Wikipedia requires us to just stick to the facts, and refrain from making personal observations or analyses that are not derived from secondary sources, as explained more thoroughly in the banner at the very top of this page.

In addition, the site's policies and guidelines also require us to keep plot summaries brief.

For this reason, the editor who reverted you was correct.

I don't disagree with your observation, mind you; I agree with you. But it's a level of detail that is neither required for a reader's understanding of the plot, nor is derived from secondary sources. So leaving it out was correct. Nightscream (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Nightscream, for your much appreciated explanation.  But a question: Would either of the following qualify as a sufficient secondary source?

(1) From https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Recap/SouthParkS25E2TheBigFix:

<< Comically Missing the Point: When the doctor tells Stan to do more reading and do so from a black person's perspective to overcome his biases, Stan interprets this as him needing to read J. R. R. Tolkien's works while imagining a black man is the narrator. >>

(2) From https://www.avclub.com/south-park-recap-season-25-episode-2-1848512624:

<< ... Stan takes the doctor's advice quite literally and reads the entire Tolkien canon, but imagines the text being narrated by a racially caricatured Black man. >>

If so, and if the "excessive detail" policy allows, I suggest amending the present sentence in a manner similar to my original editing (absent my unnecessary time stamp), but instead including a direct quotation from whichever secondary source is deemed preferable. And if not, so be it. Thanks again. 96.58.40.194 (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Sites with user-generated info, such as IMDB, Patch Media, other wikis, etc., are not considered reliable under WP:USERG. TV Tropes is that type of site, where it accepts user contributions with little or no editorial oversight, so it would not be considered reliable.

The A.V. Club is indeed considered reliable, and we often cite their reviews of episodes in the Critical reception sections of the South Park episode articles. Should the bit about Stan imagining the text being narrated by a racially caricatured Black man be included? Possibly. I think it may go to the tone deafness on Stan's part with which the episode attempts to portray him, though me must take care not to run afould of the Plot Length Gods. I think I can add in a tiny detail without it being a problem. In fact, I now see that the source you brought up is already cited in the article in the CR section. I've gone and added that detail. Hopefully SanAnMan won't mind. Nightscream (talk) 22:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I never mind good edits with reliable sources.  :) SanAnMan (talk) 22:08, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both. I've just tweaked the edit to make it even better(?), but please feel free to undo it if warranted. 96.58.40.194 (talk) 22:38, 2 September 2023 (UTC)