Talk:Everybody Loves Raymond

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Knocked Up

Does anyone have the quote from Knocked Up about Everybody Loves Raymond? --In Defense of the Artist 18:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"It's not funny."129.96.234.145 07:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Episodes

I'd like to know the reason for the removal of the Everybody Loves Raymond episode list please. also, will there be a replacement episode list? Stormy41992 20:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Stormy41992[reply]

I would also like to know. That episode list was very useful. Where did it go? N3bulous 00:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. Does anyone have a backup copy? -- 3bay sam 14:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting weirdness

According to the source, the text around the picture of Debra, Amy, and Marie is supposed to be a bulleted list. Looking at the HTML source for the page confirms this (it's a

); however, for some reason the bullets aren't showing up. Anyone know if this is due to a quirk in IE (which I'm using right now, much to my displeasure) or a problem with the Wiki source for the article? If it's the latter I'll try to fix it--without the bullets, it's rather confusing and appears to be a run-together string of sentences and sentence abortions. Kurt Weber 6 July 2005 18:54 (UTC)

Uniqueness

The article currently states: "one of the things that makes Raymond unique is that the writers have kept track of key moments and quirks in the lives of the characters and regularly make reference to them" - surely other shows such as Seinfeld and Friends were doing this before Raymond began? I make no claims to those shows being unique or original in maintaining long term continuity and I don't want to make any sort of negative point about Raymond, but surely this article shouldn't be claiming as unique an element also present in other equally popular earlier or contemporary programmes? ThomasHarte 19:16, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The charm of Raymond

As soon as I see a section titled in that way I know it's POV-ridden. violet/riga (t) 14:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and would not be opposed to removing the section altogether. The entire section suggests POV, and I don't think it could be rewritten from a NPOV. Jtrost 15:33, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like people who erase loads and loads of sections in less their completely insane. They should be respectful and make only a couple of corrections. That can offend somebody else you know. If you were more polite you'd know that to the person above

It may be biased, but any section explaining why it is found to be so popular or so critically acclaimed would be most helpful. I can't be alone in finding no humour in the show, so a section explaining its popularity is useful. It's all very well the top of the article saying it is one of the most critically acclaimed shows, but why? Crispin Giles 22:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Please could someone put the picture back or replace it in the near future because it spoils the look of the page. If replaced could it be something that nobody would delete.

A Everybody Loves Raymond Movie?

Maybe a movie of ELR?-Takua X

Dear God, no.

I would have liked that, but i dont think it would have been any good, Now that peter boyle is dead i think its a definate NO!Daniel625 18:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A possible TV movie involves The Barones taking Franks ashes back to the old country. Although this looks like it'll just be a Clip and Bottle show. Djarra 09:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It won't be funny. It'll suck. Like your mum.

Cleanup and trivia!

I have cleaned up the trivia section and removed the trivia tag. The entire article needs cleanup too but i dont think i can do much. please helpDaniel625 18:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wondering

Is Lou Romano related to you? Maybe your son? Becuase I just saw Ratatoille(-spell check)yesterday.

-wondering

Fair use rationale for Image:Season 9.jpg

Image:Season 9.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 01:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Twins

$Insertformulahere$

I was watching the first episode last night and the boys were called Geoffery and Matthew, and in later episodes it is changed to Micheal? anyone else notice this?

They referred to both twins by a third name?? Weird. Also: not funny.129.96.234.145 07:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]