Talk:Brian Griffin

Name

Ive said this before but someone delete it. Brian's name is H. Brian Griffin. Stewie read his name as "H. Brian Griffin" in the episode Brian Griffin's House of Payne. Some one changed it go H Brian Griffen and then someone changed it to Herold Brian Griffin. STOP MAKING IT JUST BE BRIAN GRIFFIN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.106.233.99 (talk) 03:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

So far, the 'H' is a 1-shot joke and is probably not 'canon' to the character. So, for now, it doesn't belong in this article. DP76764 (Talk) 03:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure you're not going to just delete it anyhow because it disagrees with you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbyknightmare (talk • contribs) 23:12, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Well sourced material will not be deleted. Just avoid original research and you're good. DP76764 (Talk) 23:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

go talk to the guy named him Herold he probably knows more info —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.106.233.99 (talk) 09:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The Family Guy wikia page http://familyguy.wikia.com/wiki/Brian_Griffin states "The DVD commentary for "Brian Griffin's House of Payne" explains that the "H" in "H. Brian Griffin" does not stand for anything and was a way to express Brian as a pretentious douche." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.237.215 (talk) 19:19, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Is Brian really an atheist?

In the recently aired episode, "April in Quahog", Brian can be clearly observed praying some time after the news report leads the public to believe that a black hole is going to swallow the earth. Also, at the end of the episode, Brian leaves the house saying he made a deal with someone that now that the earth is spared he would go volunteer at the soup kitchen. Based on the context of the situation and Stewie's remark in the background that the 'someone' Brian made a deal with was God, this calls Brian's atheism into question and suggests that he has developed some closeted religious beliefs (though other evidence from previous episodes might lead one to suspect that they have been there all along). There are only two other explanations for this series of events that I can think of: One would be that one of the underlying ideas behind the episode is something to the tune of 'there are no atheists in foxholes', though this is unlikely because Brian can be seen following through with his promise which a person who had temporarily reverted to religion because of fear wouldn't do, let alone that any kind of conservative message is very unlike McFarlane. The other would be that McFarlane is somehow poking fun at peoples' work righteous attitude towards religion, however this is also unlikely because in order to understand the joke, an in depth understanding of what Christianity actually teaches would be required which most people (including McFarlane) likely do not posses. Forceofdarkness (talk) 17:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Forceofdarkness

Well, until there are sources discussing this, speculation isn't going to do much good. In terms of "people who make promises under duress don't usually follow through with them": possible, unless Brian actually has some moral fiber and values his word (such traits do not solely belong to the religious). However, until a reliable source discusses this, we have no grounds to change it in the article. DP76764 (Talk) 18:11, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Concur with DP, plus Brian told Stewie he wasn't praying, and who knows who his promise was to. CTJF83 chat 18:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

A true atheist doesn't have moral fiber as atheism doesn't provide any sort of moral guidelines to adhere to. A true atheist will never do anything unless it benefits them somehow or it feels good. The technical term for that is hedonism. Try and deny it all you want, Brian was praying and the context of the situation makes that so clear that anyone who actually watched the episode would have to be either blind and deaf or just plain dense to not understand what happened. If doing the right thing involves sacrifice that has no personal benefit, an atheist will take the easy way out every single time but this time Brian didn't. There is no way around this except to correct the gross inaccuracy of this article concerning Brian's religious beliefs or at least acknowledge that there is evidence to suggest otherwise which there clearly is.

~Forceofdarkness

Well, that is your opinion on that scene (and I am sure that there are many who would strongly disagree with your definitions), and you're entitled to it. Sure, the visuals of the episode were highly suggestive (the writers of the show like to do this sort of thing, if you're not familiar with the series), but who is to say exactly what was going on? Perhaps Brian was praying to Buddha? Until something definitive elaborates on the scene, drawing the conclusions as you are is original research and doesn't belong in the article. DP76764 (Talk) 23:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe he was praying to Joe Pesci CTJF83 chat 17:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter who he was praying to. It is quite clear that he is praying. The fundamentalist atheists on this site are all so open minded their brains have fallen out. They think they've found something in popular culture that they can identify with and refuse to acknowledge any other point of view besides their own. However, this doesn't surprise me as atheists are the only people who take pride in holding beliefs that will only help them get their asses kicked and will never benefit them in any way.

~Forceofdarkness —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.239.155.230 (talk) 23:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Please try to remain civil in your discourse and to comment on the content of the article, not the contributors. Additionally, soapboxing about your perceived realities of Wikipedia doesn't belong on the talk page of an article. Now, in terms of this bit of information, I'd also like to point out that this is still currently a 1-episode event and may not end up being 'canon' for the character. If the show pursues this aspect of Brian, then yes, it should be mentioned it in the article. But if this is just a 1-episode joke (which the show is highly prone to doing), then it doesn't belong. Still waiting for you to find a source discussing this rather than your own opinions. DP76764 (Talk) 00:07, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

@Dp76764 I don't need rules and regulations of Wikipedia parroted back to me. I can read them for myself. I tried to come on here and kindly present my idea before publishing it, but it appears that diplomacy, as usual, has failed. I'm not here to vandalize anything and I'm not going to remove the atheism parts or anything else from the article, but I will include the fact that he was seen praying in this episode because it is relevant to the subject whether you like it or not. Please get yourself a life and try to remember that you don't own Wikipedia and that if you remove my submission or alter it in any nonconstructive way you will regret it. Fucker.

~Forceofdarkness

You know the rules of Wikipedia, yet are being actively agressive, offensive and rude both to people and an entire religious belief (or lack thereof). I'm probably just feeding a troll, but hey. -DepRac. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.221.219 (talk) 23:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Explain to me how me praying to Joe Pesci means I somehow believe in god? Brian could have been praying to anyone or anything, read WP:OR CTJF83 chat 16:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I have semi-protected this article for 24 hours due to repeated insertion of Brian Griffin's supposed birthday, in which the best the users can come up with are WikiAnswers and Yahoo! Answers – neither of which are anywhere close to reliable as they are both user-generated content from other people on the Internet. I have no problem with it being included, but there needs to be something more reliable than that. –MuZemike 22:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to include this information. With edit summaries like this, I'd say block this user as either tendentious or disruptive, and move on.

There was considerable discussion of whether to include Brian's age here. / edg ☺ ☭ 23:54, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Concur CTJF83 chat 00:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Due to continued edit warring from presumably the same person (via another IP), I have semi-protected the article for 2 weeks. –MuZemike 19:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

"Unwittingly"

Someone please fix this really stupid sentence. "Quagmire has since given Brian a severe beating after Brian (unwittingly) had sex with Quagmire's transgendered father Ida (née Dan), and told Brian that no one cares about his opinion."

He did not "unwittingly" have sex with Quagmire's transgendered father. I'm not sure it's possible for a male to "unwittingly" have sex. You ever have sex and not know it? He had sex with Ida without knowing it was Quagmire's transgendered father. PatrickLMT (talk) 21:49, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I changed it to "unknowingly", sound good? CTJF83 22:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

breed

When has it been stated that he's a labrador retriever? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.246.60.234 (talk) 07:26, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

He's actually said himself that he's a "RetrieverMixEasapekeBayBradoodle" In Season 7, Episode 14, "We Love You, Conrad"

Dab for Brian C. Griffin

I added back {{for|the American businessman|Brian C. Griffin}}. clearly this is helpful if you don't know Brian C. Griffin's middle initial. Frietjes (talk) 22:50, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

It's perfectly acceptable. As far as User:Reduolf13's reasoning, look at John Kennedy (disambiguation) for example. CTF83! 00:19, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, leave it there. But John F. Kennedy (the more famous page) has the middle initial, so people could miss it out. Whereas here (Brian Griffin), there is no initial. If people are genuinely searching specifically for Brian C. Griffin (very few I'd imagine) then they'd remember the C, or correct themselves when they arrive at Brian Griffin's page.

Anyway, you really should only have re-directs for identical names. The middle initial (C) of Brian C. Griffin, removes the identical problem. If there are more than one pages with identical titles, then you have a disambiguation page. Reduolf13.

Death

So, his death is absolutely canon, right? I believe this can absolutely confirm the death of his character. --Matt723star (talk) 02:54, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not really sure if it can be confirmed. According to the Wikipedia season 12 page, there are two upcoming episodes listing plots about Brian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bear300 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

So the e-online article at http://www.eonline.com/news/484172/family-guy-s-shocking-death-boss-reveals-why-they-decided-to-kill-off-spoiler is a hoax then? Of course there is nothing stopping them from changing their mind and bringing Brian back to life, or using him in flashbacks, or as a ghost. But until they do bring him back to life he is officially dead.

There are no inline citations for any of this section of the article, nor the sentence at the beginning. Taylor2646 (talk) 15:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Someone going to lock the article with "he'll likely return" as the end of the introductory paragraph? Lame: right now we know nothing about the future episodes, it's just as possible the released info were feints to throw the fanbase off. 163.150.50.173 (talk) 17:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps he'll just be back during flashbacks. From all the articles I've read and even just by watching the episode alone it seems all too possible that this is a serious thing and Brian will no longer be a significant role to the show. --Matt723star (talk) 18:28, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

• I have to agree with Matt723star here, as of I have just reverted a edit by Grapesoda22 for adding a last appearance notice on the article's infobox, because by some of the episodes I have seen that had the main characters dead or been in bloody fighting incidents in which could lead to death, there is no possible way that it could be Brian's last appearance. Blurred Lines 19:08, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I have a feeling that this is it for him, maybe put his last appearance as "Life of Brian", and if he comes back at all, list below the last episode for him to appear in as a flashback like "Episode Name" (flashback). And of course, if it all is just a publicity stunt, we can always remove it, but for now it seems pretty final. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipodmypod300 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

I say we give this a couple more episodes before we declare this as the final appearance of Brain. user:Bear300 —Preceding undated comment added 05:25, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Can we remove that he's been confirmed back? Seth Macfarlane said it was a last minute decision, so the future episodes can be scraped or redone with Vinny.24.188.197.22 (talk) 21:57, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Past tense now?

Some paragraphs refer to Brian in the past tense. Should this be spread to all of them, unless/until he ever returns to the show? Tátótát (talk) 21:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Brian is a work of fiction, and as per WP:TENSE - "Thus, generally you should write about fiction using the present tense, not the past tense." Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 21:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, we need to change him to past tense. When a human being dies, we change to past tense immediately, and sometimes revert someone doing that because no one believes it at first in sudden cases (see Michael Jackson for instance). We can still watch music videos, listen to music, etc. However, he's still dead. The comment references that Brian "still exists". This is the same thing. We (though not me because I don't) can watch old episodes of Family Guy. But Brian is no longer a character on the show. He's dead. He won't be reappearing unless there is some kind of weird time travel later in the season, and Brian then kills Vinnie. Therefore, "was" is necessary. CycloneGU (talk) 22:06, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Cyclone, but WP:TENSE is clear, and we as editors cannot arbitrarily choose which fictional characters follow this rule. One of the examples given is "Darth Vader is a fictional character from Star Wars. He's dead too. But he's still listed in present tense. Kjscotte34 (talk) 22:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Here's the thing. "Brian Griffin is a fictional character from the animated television series Family Guy". Changing this to "was" makes no sense - he is still a fictional character, and he is still from Family Guy. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 22:57, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Should be past tense. Here are examples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maude_Flanders#Maude_Flanders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recurring_The_Simpsons_characters#.22Bleeding_Gums.22_Murphy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.55.96.229 (talk) 23:38, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

• I'm only talking about the lead. The "Brian Griffin was" edits truly make me go nuts. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 00:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

The comment spacing above looks odd, so I'll continue down here.

After some thought, I've come to agree with the use of "is" in the header. Saying "Brian Griffin was a fictional dog" or anything else stating him as a fictional character would be effectively be suggesting that he's now a real dog, or something like that. However, it could be implied even in the lead that he WAS the Griffin's dog as, with the introduction of Vinnie, Brian is no longer the Griffin's dog. That and the fact that he's - er - dead. CycloneGU (talk) 05:58, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

The 2 examples by the IP are poor. Neither say they were a character on the show. They say "was the wife" and "was a jazz musician", so it's a poor comparison. Is, is proper. CTF83! 20:14, 26 November 2013 (UTC)