Jump to content

Talk:Sam & Max

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
Good articleSam & Max has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 21, 2009Good article nomineeListed

Year

What years were these comics written/released? -- Anon, Jul 13 2005

Telltale Games's Online Comic

I've added a brief reference and link to Telltale Games's new online Sam & Max comic. It might be beneficial to make a Telltale Games heading for this page as they seem to be a serious player in the future of the Sam & Max franchise. fruitofwisdom 15:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"&" or "and"

It seems the comics and the cartoon has "&". Move? // Gargaj 20:39, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup?

What exactly needs to be cleaned up? --SevereTireDamage 02:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Game

Deserves a mention if you ask me... - SkarmoryThePG 00:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery?

I think the gallery of album covers is in violation of fair use. Only the cover at the top is needed to identify the subject. It should be removed and the images deleted, I think. Milto LOL pia 11:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sam and Max's Car

Sam and Max's car looks more like a 1959 Dodge Coronet to me. Is everyone 100% sure it's a De Soto? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclone of despair (talk • contribs) 01:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the game if you mouse over it, it's called a De Soto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.66.47.150 (talk) 00:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the original comics, "DESOTO" is branded clearly on the grille of the car frequently. The comic book car is likely an amalgam of a bunch of different models, but it most closely resembles the Adventurer. mrcool1122 (talk) 21:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In episode one of the cartoon they refer the it as "The DeSoto" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.63.82.60 (talk) 09:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Purcell has said a few times in interviews that it's loosely based on a 1960 DeSoto Adventurer. He also refers to their car as "the DeSoto" all the time. Within the games, Sam & Max call their car "the DeSoto" as well. I wish I could find a source but Purcell's interviews aren't really archived or chronicled anywhere. That said: http://media.photobucket.com/image/1960%20desoto%20adventurer/Tsubasa93/References/Cars/Real_DeSoto.jpg?o=1 The hood and some of the curves are a little different than Sam & Max's car (especially as it's changed over the years), but the basic shape, the grill, windshield, headlights, and fin configuration are pretty iconic and match very closely to Sam & Max's car. Ja2ke (talk) 19:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Chaikin

There are two notable people with this name. This article seems to link to the wrong one. http://www.imdb.com/find?q=Andrew+Chaikin&sourceid=mozilla-search Coolgamer (talk) 18:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Characters.

Nothing on the Soda Poppers, Sybil Pandemic, Jimmty Two Teeth, etc? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.236.142 (talk) 09:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Law-Breaking.

How about a list of all the illegal things they do in the persuit of justice, taken from all of the games, comics, & cartoons combined? It's probably the core element of their humor. A few of them would be launching missiles at Antartica, reckless driving while shooting, breaking/entering/siezure without a warrent, frequent shoplifting, destroying Reality 2.0 with a virus they bought, animal abuse, harassment, trying to gun down Santa Clause, aiming guns at unarmed citizens, keeping a man locked in a closet for 6 months, attempting to decapitate a magician, repeat crank calling, locking 2 men in a freezer & offering them up as a human sacrifice to Sasquaches & latter selling them to the circus, abetting the Dokota War, launching a missile at a national monument, sabotaging a campaign, destroying & casino & looting whatever wasn't blown to bits, offering tainted food, trying to bribe a judge, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.236.142 (talk) 21:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page would take about 2 years and 7 months to load (on 100 mbit, that is). 78.69.84.78 (talk) 19:40, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never convicted.129.139.1.68 (talk) 20:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More on Characters

The descriptions here confuse the video game characters with the comic characters. It seems to me like the video game characters should be described at Sam_&_Max_(computer_game), while only the comic characters left here. 132.200.32.34 (talk) 15:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was playing Fable 2 the other day and there are multiple quests within the game that have to do with the shenanigans of "Max & Sam". The fact that the two names are there, and then switched makes this seem like an obvious implication to me, but do others agree? also, i know there are more popular culture references, i just cant remember any others right now, can we maybe get a few more and add a section? 143.195.170.90 (talk) 06:31, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Complete rewrite

I've rewritten the whole article so we've got some proper coverage of the series. I've implemented a new structure, and redone the prose to cover each aspect of the series in turn, including creation and reception, so there's now a comprehensive history of the series. There's still a few gaps in referencing (one paragraph of the comics section, and the characters section), but its mostly all done. There's certainly no need for that "additional citations" tag anymore, we now have 73 references instead of 17, 11 of which were the same place anyway. I've even got hold of a nice freely licensed image for use in the cultural impact section. Note that the Surfin' the Highway image has been replaced with the image of the series' first comic, as that's generally the more encyclopedically valuable one. However, if I can find the sources to construct such an article, I'll try to create an article for Sam & Max: Surfin' the Highway, so we can have a separate article dealing soley with the comics. Lastly, the article's coverage of characters has been limited in scope to only Sam & Max. Coverage of other characters should be in the articles on the media in which they appear—eg Bosco should be covered primarily in the Season One article and the Season Two article, while Flint Paper should be covered in the Season Two article, as that's the media where he appears most substantively. -- Sabre (talk) 15:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you also completely removed any reference to them being romantic partners. This whole thing is straight washed... 118.92.211.86 (talk) 18:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pure, unleashed Id

The bit I added about Max being "pure unleashed id" was removed because it needed a reference. The reference I have is that it was written just like that in the inside cover fold-in of the "Sam and Max: Surfing the Highway" graphic novel. Is that reference enough? H Hog (talk) 20:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, a primary source is fine for that. I've reinserted the info. -- Sabre (talk) 00:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sam & Max/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Ah. I haven't done a GA review in a while, pardon my rustiness. Anyway, reading through the almighty criteria:

  • Prose
    • "The series has been very successful despite its relatively small size" - small size doesn't tell me anything
    • "the episodic video games are considered the first successful application of the episodic distribution model." - clunky
    • "first full story, fully written, penciled and inked by Purcell himself." - redundant
    • I might be wrong, but I think comic stories are put into quotes, not italicized.
    • "containing all comics and strips except the 2005 webcomic, " - it's annoying to reference the webseries, when it comes after the paragraph in question.
    • " Despite his seemingly heartless personality, he believes very much in protecting Sam; however, Max can still act violently towards Sam, often commenting that when he dies he will take Sam with him" - SamSamSam redundancy
  • Refs
    • Can't check them now, see below.
    • How do the following sites meet WP:RS: Rock, Paper, Shotgun, Spong, International House of Mojo, Comic Vine, Jog
  • Coverage
    • Development, main medium, appearances in other mediums, cultural impact all there. However at some point you seemed to have chopped off the references and final bottom of the page (probably a ref tag not closed.) Also, I think it might make more sense to organize the later translations into an "adaptations" section, like Halo (series), and move the characters up earlier in the article.
  • Neutrality, stability
    • Looks fine in this respect.
  • Images


Ok, mostly all done. All prose issues have been dealt with. I think the refs disappearing was as a result of vandalism, I can see them all fine now. However, I don't think that a restructure is necessary, the series is fairly balanced over what media it uses. Its not like Halo, which is first and foremost a FPS video game series, nor is it like Superman, which is naturally grounded in comics. Sam & Max doesn't really have a single media to pin it down on like that (after all, although debuting in comics, the cultural influence of the series is on the video games industry), so each media section is given equal weight.
As for the images, I've tried to improve the rationales: I think that both are justifiable. File:Sam & Max Issue 1.jpg was included as it seemed relevant to include the cover of the character's first publication, an undoubtedly significant moment in their development following printing in a college newsletter and the like. I was following a similar style as the two comic FAs Superman and Batman, which use similar images with the characters in their typical appearances (File:Detective27.JPG and File:Action1.JPG) for the same purposes as this image. As for File:Sam & Max 3D.png, it's important to remember that the characters' influence has been more on video games than comics, so I thought that some form of visual identification for their altered 3d appearance in these products (representative of the 11 episodes and to an extent Sam & Max: Freelance Police) was prudent. As stated in the article, Sam & Max didn't really get going until the games come out, so this is probably the view of the characters that many people associate with the franchise. Plus, as a very minor point when this image is compared to the other two, its the only one that shows that Max is actually capable of standing on his own two feet. -- Sabre (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then why don't you swap the infobox image out for the 3D one? --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 16:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because that's their common appearance, in a specific artistic style (a more refined version than that you can see on the first issue cover image) adopted sometime around 1993. That's the style of image that is on the video game box art, in the later comics and official websites, and how they appear in the TV series and the first video game. The 3D incarnation is much more recent, from 2006. I think they can probably co-exist happily in the article. -- Sabre (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, Sources. I'm not too good at justifying sources, but I'll try my best:
  • Rock Paper Shotgun is written and run by four high profile British video game journalists (as high profile as you get for video game journalists that is). All four write for PC Gamer, and occassionally do work on 1UP, IGN, and the like. One in particular (Kieron Gillen) is largely responsible for the way that video games get covered in the industry's media (see New Games Journalism). Shouldn't be any problems for reliability here. Article in question is written by Alec Meer, a fairly well established journalist who in addition to PC Gamer writes for 1UP and PC Format.
  • Spong: I went out on a limb here. I got this source from Grim Fandango, which is an FA. The source was there when the article was promoted last March, so I'm assuming that it has been verified as a reliable source. Looking at their about page, they aim to be a database, but they do journalistic stuff as well - in this case, it is the latter sort of content being cited. They seem to have an editorial process and a structured staff. -- Sabre (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • International House of Mojo is part of LucasArts Fan Network, LLC, established back in 1997 and host to some twenty odd sites, some user-generated wikis, others, like International House of Mojo, with some form of editorial process and pernament staff. Looking around, this is the one with the most high-profile activity on in out of all the LFNetwork sites. They've conducted interviews with many of the big developer names in this particular area (Simon Jeffery, Tim Schafer, Ron Gilbert, etc) from which one could reasonably assume that these people regard the site as reputable. I know they've been cited in places, but I can't darn well find the links again.
  • Comic Vine probably isn't the most ideal source, but it serves its purpose. The main bit of the source that's relevant is the image of the comic in it: I just needed something to show Comico published some Sam & Max stuff, and the image shows that they did. Not an ideal source, but I suppose that I'm really citing a primary source published elsewhere. -- Sabre (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jog is not a reliable source, its a blog by a nobody. I've removed it. The only reason it was there was because I had a nightmare trying to find something with "First Comics" and "Sam & Max" in it, most of it ended up pointing to people talking about the first comics they ever read: the name was too generic to actually yield results. I've hidden the bit about First Comics for now, hopefully I can find a better source for it later.
-- Sabre (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have to ditch it then. As with First Comics, the game is too generic for the search engine, I just get every result under the sun for 'Sam & Max comic' rather than 'Comico'. I can't find something reliable-ish that directly states "Comico published this", even though they did. Ah well, verifiability over truth I suppose. I've hidden the publisher name and removed the ref. -- Sabre (talk) 23:34, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I will do a final pass. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 01:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Giant Bomb wiki is an unreliable source. 92.2.188.40 (talk) 14:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canine Shamus

In response to S@bre's edit summary, I'm not opposed to the canine shamus description being on the page, but nowhere does anything say that it's his genus. Call it a pet peeve. A genus is one word, and if it was a bimomial name, it'd more likely to be written as Canis shamus. As to where I got the definition from, canine means relating to dogs, and shamus is slang for a private detective. It's more likely to mean that than to be referring to his species. 122.49.202.8 (talk) 01:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the bit calling it a genus is gone now, the "canine shamus" bit has been moved into another sentence. -- Sabre (talk) 09:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sam & Max. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Sam & Max. 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:

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) 05:22, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sam & Max. 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:

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) 05:47, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sam & Max. 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:

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) 09:10, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category?

This article is in Category:Fictional lagomorphs. It is the only article in that category. There is a different Category:Fictional rabbits and hares. I'd like to move it into that category. However, it's possible that "Sam and Max" is in Category:Fictional lagomorphs because it's not 100% clear that Max is a rabbit or a hare and is rather "a rabbity thing" which isn't precisely the same as being a rabbit (but might still qualify as a lagomorph). So unsure on correct action here. Novellasyes (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Novellasyes: Go ahead. I don't think that was really a thought-out decision not to put it there (at least there is no comment on this edit to indicate that). Regards SoWhy 17:55, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Universal-Illumination-Legendary's The Sam & Max Movie

Sam & Max is an upcoming American animated feature film adaptation of the media franchise of the same name created by Steve Purcell. It would have been produced by Illumination and Legendary Entertainment, animated by Illumination Studios Paris, Industrial Light & Magic, Umedia and Reel FX Animation. Directed/written by Steven Purcell and distributed by Universal Pictures. 92.40.213.67 (talk) 07:44, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sam_%26_Max&oldid=1209917632"