Talk:Mystery of the Urinal Deuce

Problem

Eric says kyle got a 91 on his spelling test 12 days after 9/11, however, the boys are in fourth grade, meaning they would've done a spelling test on their first or second week of kindergarten. That doesn't make much sense.

And they've been in fourth grade for quite some time now. 5 years, is it? Time doesn't really pass in television.

Not quite. In most Elementary schools (at least those in the Mountain States), spelling tests are administered through the first several elementary grades, starting at First Grade. This is done to expand the child's vocabulary with more advanced and complicated words. Nonetheless, the above poster is right--Time doesn't pass in the television world. Heck, the Stan's parents should be much older considering they were at Woodstock.

Hardy vs Hearty

Changed the Hardy boys reference, it is wrong. They are a parody of the food network stars, The Hearty Boys. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.7.41.170 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 3 December 2006.

This is correct. Good work on changing it back to WRONG. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.236.110.73 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 4 December 2006.

Given that they're detectives . . . I think Hardy Boys is the primary reference here.

Citation Needed

It would be nice to have a citation for this in Trivia:

The basis for the episode came after Trey Parker found that Mick Thomson of Slipknot believed that September 11 was a cover-up by the US government. Trey and Matt wanted to highlight how Thomson is indeed retarded. Mick responded by telling South Park to go 'blow him' on his myspace.

As it would give the ability to follow-up more closely. This seems to be unfolding now. -- Ubergenius 17:12, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Kyle's age

I suggest that this be added to the trivia section. Some mention of the shows floating timeline may need to be made.

• Although Cartman claims Kyle received spelling test twelve days after 9/11, nine year old Broflovski would have only been four years old at the time of the attacks, about two years younger than the age at which most American children first take such tests.

Xargon666x6 12 October 2006

Except for the transition from eight to nine, the South Park kids haven't aged since 1997. They should all be in their mid-twenties by now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.209.233.192 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 12 October 2006.

• Math not your strong suit, eh? 8 in 1997+9 years=17 in 2006. Mid-20s? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.192.34.8 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 12 October 2006.

• Clicking on links not your strong suit, eh? Click on the link above, to see why the South Park kids were not 8 in 1997. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xargon666x6 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 13 October 2006.

The problem is, floating timelines don't work the way you seem to think they work, especially not in a case like this, where the plot is directly tied to real-world events and references. At best, if a character says something happened 5 years ago, that refers to 5 years ago in THEIR timeline, from THEIR perspective - NOT the timeline and perspective of the viewer.

Episodes (like Prehistoric Ice Man) explicitly mention the date, which utterly ruins the idea of retroactively dating their age backwards from the present moment in such a fashion. Other episodes refer to multiple real-life events, which implicitly date themselves as well. Saying "it's 2007 now, and since they're 9 years old, they were born in 1998" is inherently flawed logic. At best, one could say that EVERY event that has occurred in the real world between 1997 and 2007 has occurred during a single year or two of their timeline. From their perspective, 9/11 would have occurred only a few months ago, not when they were 4. Hossenfeffer 07:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Best line of the episode

"Yeah, at least one-fourth." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 38.117.162.35 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 12 October 2006.

I dunno... "REALLY?!?" was awfully hilarious, as was "dude, a bunch of pissed off Muslims..." -- Ubergenius 19:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

"I can't base my logic on fact" was a funny one two. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.228.67.30 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 20 October 2006.

"beautiful money ahahahahaha" KarlJohannes 06:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Those were all good lines, too, but I return to "Yeah, at least one-fourth." It has the additional benefit of being true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 38.117.162.35 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 30 November 2006.

Nancy Clue

For anyone who didn't know (like me two days ago) Nancy Clue and the Hardly Boys are parodies of the better known Nancy Drew and The Hardy Boys. In other words, the Hardly Boys were not a South Park invention. I have changed the wording to better emphasize that they are pre-existing parodies, as someone changed Nancy Clue to Nancy Drew earlier. I also removed the link from "The Hardly Boys" to the Hardy Boys because the Hardy Boys have their own link already in the trivia section. Mapache 21:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

How could you not know something like that? I don't care how old you are, didn't the internet teach you anything?

Pip?

Is it true he hasn't been shown in any screen shots in a long time or that it is that rare?

Yes, Pip hasn't shown up for quite a while. Shivers _talk 19:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

When The 911-Truth guy was shot, right after, he looks back at his bloody head even though he's dead. This is a short moment but it can be seen, and it is a hint to the fake act.

This is indeed true, but is it an error or intended? Any ideas,experts? --70.187.163.141 04:15, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

How do you fake getting shot through the head anyway? - Redmess (talk) 22:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

voice

i did notice a change, but still, it is very difficult to confirm. is there any clear source for it whoever added it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SangP (talk • contribs) 04:44, 14 October 2006.

Bush's voice, is that what this is reffering, because i also noticed a change in later airings of the episode. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 156.12.156.185 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 15 October 2006.

The itunes download version of the episode has the new Bush voice -- the voice is completely different from the original Weds airings and its quite noticable (compare the sheeple speech in the original to the itunes download or the speech by Bush at the end in the Hardley mansion). There were several comments made right after the original airings by various fans on the southparkstudios BBS on how bad the original Bush voice sounded. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 8.10.52.72 (talk • contribs) 00:59, 19 October 2006.

Photoshopped image?

The 9/11 truth guy is suppose to have "9/11truth.org" across his shirt but in the image it seems to have been taken out. You can see a video of the episode here on YouTube of the particular scene where he clearly has it on his shirt [1]--Jersey Devil 17:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

It's already mentioned in the article. I'm sure promotional images sometimes differ from the aired episodes. --Pixelface 12:02, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Quotes

Is there really a good purpose for such a large "funny quotes" section? There is an entire website for quotes: Wikiquote. The page even has a _link_ to this quotes section. Perhaps this is the South Park episode guide precedent, but it clutters up the page and adds a lot of redundant information. Cheers, 69.19.14.26 09:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I concur 24.25.131.211 20:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

9/11 researcher shot

I've removed this from the article.

When The 911-Truth guy was shot, right after, he looks back at his bloody head even though he's dead. This is a short moment but it can be seen, and it is a hint to the fake act.

His eyes roll into the back of his head, he doesn't look back at his bloody head. A screenshot should be provided if someone wished to include this again. --Pixelface 11:59, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Image:George.W.Bushshooting.PNG 'm pretty sure he is looking back at his head. This screenshot is already in the article and was submitted by someone else, to proove my point. It is most likely intended for the creators because the screen where he looks back at his head is quite long and noticable for many. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SangP (talk • contribs) 16:28, 16 October 2006.

I really don't like this bit of trivia. I read about it and went to watch the episode again to see if I could spot it. It is there for a tiny fraction of a second, it is barely noticable even if you know what to look for. Plus it's debatable as to why he's looking back, maybe he was acting as though his eyes just rolled back as he died, or maybe with his last ounce of strength he was turning to the boys for help. It could be that the animators didn't even go into it that deeply and just made his eyes roll back as if he was dead. Whatever the reason it's barely noticable and as such I don't think it should be mentioned as a 'hint that he is not really dead'131.227.185.60 11:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I've removed this bit of trivia again. I've seen the screenshot, I've seen the episode. What does "looking back at his head" prove? The researcher is seen again with no explanation. Kenny used to die every episode and be back, with no explanation. It's speculation and doesn't belong in the article. --Pixelface 14:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, pure speculation. Sabar 18:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

If you ask me, it could be foreshadowing a false murder, since the South Park animators could do different things to the eyes of the 911Truth guy. What I saw is that he actually closes his eyes at the moment of the gunshot, and opens with his pupils pulled back. Also, consider that his eyes stay shut when shot by the father of the, ugh....horny-ass Hardly Boys. Further, it may be a reference to conspiracy theorists saying that some 9/11 hijackers were seen alive later, and he said "I just do what they say *weep*", so he's well aware of the act. Even though death is possible in South Park with open-eyes (Kenny), I would expect the choice of the animators to be consistent within at least the same episode, unless for a specific reason. But if it's really this contentious, then we should at least mention that incident, but not conclude it for ourselves what its true meaning is. Vindictive Warrior 01:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Leroy

Do we really need a mention of leroy? he probably will never be back —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.235.40.128 (talk • contribs) 00:43, 16 October 2006.

Well, let's just see. If he doesn't reappear, then we probaly should remove that info.

Just wait. 24.25.131.211 20:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• Remove this info at once, it violates Wikipedia Is Not A Crystal Ball!!!

lol Just kidding, I don't really care. Leave it in, what harm will it really do? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Simondrake (talk • contribs) 15:08, 23 October 2006.

Picture

The Hardly boys image should not be the picture in the inbfobox because it is not a good representation of the episode. A better image would be Cartman with a picture of Kyle smiling and the world trade center behind him. Pacman 13:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. Andy120290 23:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Colbert? is the glasses thing cartman does in his presentation a parody of what stephen colbert des to set a serious mood? i found it odd how cartman put glasses on only to take them off and raise his eyebrows, can anyone get back to me on this?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.213.92.130 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Many newscasters have taken off their glasses when reporting a story. Colbert makes fun of the phenomenom. And so does Cartman. It's not a parody of Stephen Colbert. --Pixelface 21:45, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, Cronkite used to do that a lot, at the serious points. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.168.70.213 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 30 November 2006.

War in Iraq

So far I think this article is good... but I think that it misses something important: mentioning that the urinal incident is supposed to represent the war in Iraq. How do you think we should approach this? There are the obvious parts: the PTA meeting where Mr. Mackay says "No no, I'm not saying they're related..." (referring to the fact that a lot of Americans think the war in Iraq is related to 9/11) to Ms Garrison's "Mr Mackay... we got him" parodying the famous press conference when Saddam was finally caught.

I know you probably think this is obvious but I think it needs mentioning, since it was kind of one of the main political points in the episode. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.153.57.113 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 27 November 2006.

Voice changes

They have a different voice for Bush in the rerun tonight. He sounds more Texan and tough-guy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.168.70.213 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 30 November 2006.

Why the heck have all the trivia and the list of references to 9/11 theories and stuff been removed? The article's kinda worthless if it's only a rundown of the plot. 207.108.214.249 07:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Raging Clue/Erection

I think when the Hardly Boys were saying something like they "have a raging clue thats pointing the the left", or they "had the biggest clue ever". I think it was an innuendo for an erection. They also said somewhere in the episode that their clue was going to squirt something out or something like that. Don.-.J 16:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Clue goo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.193.193 (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

duh, you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.49.220.5 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 22 March 2007.

Well incase you havent noticed it has now been added to the article and wouldnt of been if i didnt mention it. Don.-.J 22:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, sterling work, dipshit. Now Wikipedia has more useless crazy fucking shit in it. 89.243.96.114 09:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

911 Conspiracy Theories At the Bottom

This episode does nothing but parody 911 conspiracy theories, not support them. Why does this page have a significant portion of it devoted to links of 911 conspiracies at the bottom? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.67.115.80 (talk) 04:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

Agreed. I'm removing it, and will continue to do so whenever I see it if somebody replaces it. Justinthebull (talk) 01:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:1009 in custody.jpg

Image:1009 in custody.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Cultural References and OR

Cite these please;

• The Hardly family is a parody of the literary Hardy family of super-sleuths created by Franklin W. Dixon by way of the 70s TV series, The Hardy Boys/Nancy Drew Mysteries starring Shaun Cassidy and Parker Stevenson. The TV show's title and bumper sequences are imitated. In both the books and the episode, a man named Fenton is the father of Frank and Joe. The boys also match the physical descriptions of the original Hardys, although the blond is referred to as "Frank" and the dark-haired brother as "Joe," a reversal from the books. A parody of the Hardy boys with the same title and idea once appeared in National Lampoon, along with another parody called The Retardy Boys. Parodic characters of this name similarly appeared in Nancy Clue and the Hardly Boys in A Ghost in the Closet, a LGBT-themed novel by Mabel Maney published in 2000.
• When Stan and Kyle found the man in front of a fast food restaurant, the restaurant's symbol, a big W, is identical to McDonald's big M, just reversed.
• The song that Cartman sings is a reference to "Broken" by the band Shadow Gallery.
• Defecating in a urinal, and Kyle being blamed for it, was previously referred to in the episode, Starvin' Marvin in Space. The CIA agents working on the case of Starvin' Marvin stealing an alien spaceship enter the classroom and ask to interrogate Stan, Kyle, Kenny, and Cartman. Cartman becomes defensive, and trying to deflect getting in trouble, shouts, "That was Kyle that went number two in the urinal!"

And they can go back in the article. Alastairward (talk) 10:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

References