Talk:Anti-Barney humor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on November 29, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. See the 2006 press source article for details. The citation is in: Tom Zeller, Jr.. "Purple, the Color of a Legal Conniption", The New York Times, August 28, 2006.

Why has this article been listed in clean-up, if there is a good reason I would be willing to fix it, it is a very well written and inormative article that really doesn't deserve to get this kind of negative attention.

I think it's because the number of anti-Barney songs on there has gotten a little out of hand, due to the near limitless potential for variations (I'm more partial to "I hate you / You hate me / Let's get together and kill Barney / With a great big shotgun / Barney's on the floor / no more purple dinosaur"). --Toquinha 21:12, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 October Verification Notice 2 No More New Song Variations 3 Writing style 4 This article is getting out of contol 5 Barney Bunch 5.1 Barney Bunch should be an article again 5.2 The section should be deleted, period 6 Barkley vs. Barney 7 Keep It 8 New York Times found the article "useful" 9 Principal office 10 Barney/Tupac video missing?

[edit] October Verification Notice

I saw this article was listed for some verification notices, I got rid of the part with Mario (despite the fact I strongly believe those rumors) and the exact locations of the song orgins. Also got rid of a bit of Vandalism that managed to sneak it's way onto the page. Took down cleanup notice though, I don't see why this has to be listed as a cleanup.

[edit] No More New Song Variations

I put up an invisible message not to put anymore new song variations in to the "anti-Barney songs" part of the article, that should keep these people quite for now. Protozoic Waste

It got erased. Markendust

I can understand why this may be a notable social phenomena. But Wikipedia is not a song book and articles shouldn't be kept "just for laughs". WP:NOR and WP:NOT are not policies created without reason. If people want to keep an archive of songs they find funny then setup an account at Wikia. It is free and avoids the whole problem and you will still be able to add more songs if you wish. If something isn't done about this it needs to go back to AfD if nothing else then to reach a final consensus on what should stay and what needs to go. MartinDK 20:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Writing style

Although perhaps fitting for an article about such a juvenile (I don't mean that word in an insulting way) subject, this article needs better sentence structure. It reads like a 9-year-old's first essay, especially the first few sections. I think that is part of the need for cleanup. --TexasDex 01:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Not to mention the NPOV-ness of it all - there is NO balance here. Also no references of any kind. 208.193.132.253 13:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article is getting out of contol

Ok everyone, filling an encyclopedia article with un-sited, OR children's songs, simply does not work. This entire article is filled un-sourced POV claims, a perfect example would be the Anti-Christ section (and very poorly written at that). Yes, it is well known that Barney has attracted a significant amount hatred, and is frequently mocked and made fun of across the media. That does not mean however, that an article written about the topic should be poor and biased like the jokes themselves are. In other words, this article needs a serious complete re-write, and one that will cover the topic honestly, and not fill 3 pages full of riducules children's jokes. Avador 05:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the Barney = Satan thing has been around for a LONG time, almost since the show itself came out. I don't see how you do a "serious" re-write about anti-Barney humor and not include at least one example of what you are talking about. In the case of Barney = Satan, it's certainly not as outlandish as some of the stuff I have seen or heard. I do agree however that the topic can be whittled down somewhat to become more "disciplined"...this is an encyclopedia, not The Laugh Hour.

• Indeed. I think the jokes should be reduced to a mention; writing out the jokes in their entirety is not necessary (they can be externally linked for those who are interested).--Aleron235 01:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and delete the 10 or so versions of the Barney song.--Aleron235 01:46, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Added a References section - it's a start. Not sure why the Anti-Christ item got picked on - it at least had references and probably says more about 666 "proofs" than about Barney. Hopefully the added background there will reduce the number of people taking this part too seriously. Also added background for the Jihad section. There are also issues of legal attempts to shut down Barney parody sites, with EFF weighing in on the defence - haven't had time to pull that section together yet. Dl2000 04:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. The Anti-Barney songs section is basically an invitation for a whole buch of different people to submit their anti-Barney songs.Hondasaregood 20:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barney Bunch

It was a good addition. I one time created an article about the Barney Bunch, but then it was redirected to this article (what you have been on). Should we change it back into an article? Should the Barney Bunch section be deleted?

Add four ~s inside these lists. GBA 01:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barney Bunch should be an article again

I think it should, granted, the List of Newgrounds Groups article gets ressurected as well. I myself am a Barney Bunch member, but I really don't think it's fair that the BB gets to be mentioned on Wikipedia, while the other Newgrounds groups (enspecially the Clock Crew, which was responsable for starting the whole group idea) get deleted or are not to be mentioned.

I agree. It's not fair that only the Barney Bunch gets to be mentioned on Wikipedia and more well known groups get deleted. I don't understand why the Clock Crew can't be mentioned. Giant Blue Anteater 20:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The section should be deleted, period

• Barney Bunch should not exist as a seperate article. Newgrounds groups have been deleted many times before, check the deletion logs for Clock Crew and List of Newgrounds groups. I don't mind too much that there's a mention of the Barney Bunch here, but it's an article about anti-barney humour, not Barney-Bunch. So whereas they may enjoy taking the piss out of Drew Pickles, it really doesn't belong here. - Hahnchen 00:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barkley vs. Barney

I don't know how an article like this cannot contain a mention of Barkley vs. Barney, a Saturday Night Live sketch where Charles Barkley plays one-on-one basketball with Barney. Barkley plays the game in his usual style complete with elbows, hard fouls, pushing and shoving, and power slam dunks right in Barney's face. This to me is the most memorable "Anti-Barney humor" moment on television. The fact that the article neglects to mention this tells me that it is seriously lacking as an article, in my opinion.

[edit] Keep It

I say we keep it, it sees a bit Juvenile, but it should be taken for what it is: A joke. I didnt see any POV issues either.

[edit] New York Times found the article "useful"

"Wikipedia, the community-edited online encyclopedia, maintains a useful history of anti-Barney Internet humor — from the “Jihad to Destroy Barney,” which has evolved into a role-playing game, to fictionalized stories and images documenting Barney’s womanizing and crack habit."

From Zeller, Jr., Tom. "Purple, the Color of a Legal Conniption", New York Times (28 August 2006). link --Fastfission 13:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

About the Barney Bunch...they still are making videos but for youtube.com

[edit] Principal office

• How does anyone know that kids got in trouble for anti-Barney humor at school? WizardDuck 00:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I got in trouble for throwing kids' Barney backpacks in the trash in second grade. But then again, that's "original research," so... 63.215.28.146 02:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barney/Tupac video missing?

The link at the bottom of the page doesn't actually go to the Barney-with-Tupac video; just to the site that it is (supposedly) located on. Could somebody who knows where the video actually is get a new link there? 63.215.28.146 02:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)