Talk:Good Times

Television Mid‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy High‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Mid‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Janet Jackson Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Janet Jackson, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Janet Jackson and associated groups or individuals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Janet JacksonWikipedia:WikiProject Janet JacksonTemplate:WikiProject Janet JacksonJanet Jackson articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

African diaspora Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Thelma Evans was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 16 July 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Good Times. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Inaccuracy

"After its initial run in syndication, Good Times seemed to be mostly forgotten until Chicago's WCIU began rerunning the show in the late 1990s, with various cable networks subsequently adding the show to their schedules."

What?? I grew up in the 80s watching reruns of the show, having never watched it in the 70s. It was still an extremely well known show. In 1986, for example, I could have gone into my high school and everyone would have known what "dyn-o-mite!" came from, and could sing the theme song. And, we'd often see it on TV when home. This was in Texas City, TX.--70.240.118.52 (talk) 14:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to write the same thing. I am 35 years old and everyday after school in the 1980s I would watch Good Times on what would be our Fox affiliate Nashville channel 17 WZTV. I remember seeing it on other channels as well. I am removing the paragraph that says Good Times was mostly forgotten until the 1990s. It is not true and there are no sources to back up the claim anyway.--65.1.220.194 (talk) 17:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WHERE IS THE CHARACTER "BOOKMAN?" HE WAS BIGGER THAN ANY OF THE MINOR CHARACTERS THAT ARE MENTIONED HERE.

And his nickname wasn't "Booger", it was "Booker"... Who wrote this?

Episodes

It would be cool to have some descriptions of important shows. I haven't seen an episode in years. I would guess if I had cable it's rerun on some channel. I'm sure the show had a tremendous effect on how I viewed black americans. I particularly remember an episode where JJ had a painting of a black Jesus which is much closer to what he actually looked like. Gbleem 09:05, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Uumm, excuse me, this isn't really the place to discuss the topic, but Jesus (or actually Jeshua), as a typical middle eastern jew, was not, nor did he have the appearence of someone "black" (which is itself a silly idea, since peoples of different regions around sub-saharan Africa don't have one common "look").

Good news, Gbleem – TV Land has started airing reruns of "Good Times." Once at 6:30 p.m. EDT, and again at 10 p.m. EDT. Hope you enjoy it! [[Briguy52748 03:16, 26 July 2005 (UTC)]][reply]

Building Opening of Show/Intro

Can anyone identify the aged large municipal-like edifice viewers see from a birds-eye view at the beginning of the shows opening credits? The large building right on the path of the water way. I do not refer to the modern public housing project ones sees towards the middle and end of the opening credit, but the ery first image when the first musical notes are heard. I am sure this building has a story to tell.67.86.199.239 05:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. I found the image on a Google Earth. The fine edifice indeed tells a story: it is the famous Chicago Merchandise Mart Building. 24.44.93.71 18:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that Garry Coleman wasn't mentioned as a character. Actually, it think this is were he got his start in TV. He played a sassy child in the projects who occasionally showed up at the Evans during the Last season. He had a crush on Penny (Janet Jackson). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeleoson (talk • contribs) 03:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picture issue

I reverted the picture issue because although they are not the same picture for both cover arts, they come from the same photo shoot, which is good enough. Mike H (Talking is hot) 06:49, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

I know this does not belong here, and feel free to delete, but I don't know where to say this:

In the article on Good Times, there are some additions under a heading of "streets r dangerous". It seems to be descriptions of plots of a series of TV shows, but, as they reference times in 1992, it does not belong in Good Times. I will not delete them, as it looks like they belong to SOMETHING, but I'm not familiar with the show they are discussing.

Theme song question

Is there any information on who are the singers on the theme song? 4.231.56.177 04:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of them is Eddie Bailey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.244.120 (talk) 00:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much too loaded with unencyclopedic topics

The article is way too long with its overabundance of trivia and minutiae. The "Catchphrases," "Two-parters," and "Songs" sections need to go completely (interesting though they may be, they are not encyclopedic); a strong argument can be made for the "Trivia" section's removal (or at least paring it back to no more than one-fourth its size) -- these sections alone occupy half the article space. While the write-up of the show's history is a pretty good introduction, a section describing each of the major characters (and also similar descriptions of the recurring ones) would add quite a bit to the understanding of the show itself. 147.70.242.40 01:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a break. TV shows are unencyclopedic topics. Lighten up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.189.10.107 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 6 April 2007

Interesting... are you suggesting that the article should be deleted as unencyclopedic? This is an encyclopedia; if TV Shows are unencyclopedic topics then they don't belong here. I don't personally believe that, but I felt it neccessary to point out the error in your logic. I do think that TV Show and other pop culture articles can be written in a professional and encyclopedic manner- so long as editors are vigilant for the cruft that tends to be attracted to them. —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 22:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct projects?

Moving this comment from within the article here to the talk page. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually believe the projects shown in the opening credits was the Robert Taylor Homes located south of downtown Chicago, not Cabrini-Green. 199.123.79.97 20:00, 7 December 2007

Actor who played Henry Evans

I think we've got the wrong actor listed. GoodDay (talk) 18:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I fixed the blooper. GoodDay (talk) 18:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notable points of interest section

I have removed the "Notable Points of Interests" section for the second time because, no matter what the section is titled, the majority of the content is trivia. Trivia sections should be avoided in articles which is why I removed it to begin with. I did, however, integrate the relevant points (notable guest stars, points about the theme song lyrics, etc.) into the article which is what editors are suppose to do instead of just up and removing it all. Things like the theme song being sung on SNL at some point or the show being mentioned in a movie is again trivia and should not be here. Pinkadelica ^♣ 16:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. An anon has just restored the material, saying there should be discussion on the talk page, but he or she hasn't bothered to participate. I'm going to delete the material again. If particular points can be well-sourced and are relevant then they can be integrated into the article. Will Beback talk 22:54, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I beat you to it :) Pinkadelica ^♣ 22:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged Original Research

I have added back a load of content that was removed supposedly under the reasoning that it was "original research". First, there was reliably sourced content that was removed. The "Changes in direction" section was already reliably sourced as were the quotes. How that falls under original research I'll never know. The show underwent some major changes and to omit that one of the main characters was killed off makes no sense whatsoever. The fact that two of the main stars, John Amos and Esther Rolle, publicly complained about the series and ultimately left because of it also doesn't fall under OR. This was covered by the media as evidenced by the sources that were present. If someone had a problem with Ebony and The LA Times being reliable sources, they should have dropped a note here instead of removing a shit ton of content that someone took the time to write (not me) and another person (me) took the time to source. Original research isn't including details about the work, it's drawing your own conclusions based on your own research. In television show articles, we can use the work itself as a source for the actual details of the show. Once the writing start veering off into overly detailed garbage, that's when the OR police can come out. Works of fiction should have some details about production, ratings, show changes, etc. If not, all we have is an article that says a show aired and some people were in it. It took me all of 20 minutes to find sources for the majority of the removed content - none of it was contentious nor was it OR which means it should not have been removed. Ironically, actual original research about the stupid opening titles was left in. Pinkadelica ^♣ 10:06, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with James Evans, Sr.

There is nothing significant about the character that cannot be detailed in the article. It is unlikely weight issues would ever require it to be split back out, so it should be contained within the main article. TTN (talk) 15:01, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suport - no lasting significance out of the show.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 15:46, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Eh, it seems like not too much would be lost. The character itself is probably much less notable than the actor and show, and the relevant controversies about his portrayal can be documented just as well in the main article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with J.J. Evans

As with the previous article, anything that can be said about the character can be summarized in the show article without much issue. There's no need for multiple paragraphs of in-universe information. TTN (talk) 19:44, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Good Times. 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/20070206173341/http://www.tvland.com/shows/goodtimes/ to http://www.tvland.com/shows/goodtimes/

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 18:42, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The drugs sure looked like Marijuana sticks in J.J's Fiance

When I first saw it on TV Land, they even reminded me of Homer Simpson's Medical Marijuana sticks.2601:447:4080:10:B0AC:847E:BC2F:603 (talk) 02:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Found the video, and it looks like a collection of multiple drugs, including both marijuana and heroin.[1]2601:447:4080:10:B0AC:847E:BC2F:603 (talk) 02:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC) Just looked at hemp purses and can see that Diana's purse even resembles a hemp purse like this. [2] It was like a PSA for Marijuana being a gateway drug.75.72.63.27 (talk) 02:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can clearly see syringes in that clip, which makes it pretty obvious what "dope" was referring to in that context. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, which I already referred too. However, the clip makes it obvious it was referring to a variety of drugs. There was also only one syringe-which was perhaps even presented like a weed stick until the cap was removed- and one hemp-like rope with no needle at the end. 2601:447:4080:10:A03F:A958:2221:8EE3 (talk) 01:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]