Jump to content

Talk:Crazy Frog

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by No milk with the teabag (talk | contribs) at 17:21, 31 July 2006 (moved Talk:Crazy Frog to Talk:Crazy Frog On Wheels). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Votes for deletion This article was the subject of two previous votes for deletion: archived records of the discussion can be found here and here.

Article name

Shouldn't it be moved to The Annoying Thing since that's the actual name? // Liftarn

That may have been its original given name, but following an international saturation-level advertising campaign across dozens of TV channels, I think "Crazy Frog" is probably the best-known name. Blufive 19:43, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I think we should respect the original name the author gave. We are making a encyclopedia here. We would not call a man (or a country, or even any [other] product (consider any cereal for example)) wrongly just because that's how everyone refers to it. We do not rename the artice "George W. Bush" to "Big George" just because most people would recognize him by that name. I'm sure everyone of us can find a lot of examples of this. So it should be moved to The Annoying Thing and Crazy Frog linked there. Or, as an alternative, a whole new page called The Annoying Thing should be created, because most of the stuff on this page is about the Crazy Frog only. But The Annoying Thing should NOT redirect here FOR SURE. That's just disrespectful. By the way, does the article mentions what Mr. Wernquist thinks about his Thing's rename (by the music company, not wikipedia)? Kirils 03:15, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Jamster named it Crazy Frog. All of the massive international ringtone and music success has been under the name Crazy Frog. Under Annoying Thing, it was nothing. Article stays. M.C. Brown Shoes 04:58, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hasselhof, tour, citation needed

I removed the following copy from the article:

The Crazy Frog is touring Australia in December 2005, and is rumoured to be working on a duet with David Hasselhoff. [1]

In what sense can the frog tour? Is there a puppet or a person in costume? I can't find any evidence for a tour on the Jamster website. These statements come from the "undercover" website, but is there any independent confirmation? Maybe the statements must be clarified. As for the duet with Hasselhof, I'd like to see some evidence that this is not just a marketing hoax. --Slashme 09:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was there at the Frog's Sydney appearances. It was a guy in a costume, yeah. Nonetheless this was part of the Frog's marketing and was announced by the record company as a "tour", and deserves a mention on the page. Ditto for Hasselhoff. M.C. Brown Shoes 11:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see. Would you mind re-wording that bit and re-inserting it? I'm terminally lazy, and I don't much like the darn frog anyway :-] --Slashme 12:13, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spoiler Warning?

What does this article give away? I don't think it's a spoiler.

NPOV?

Daniel Maldmedahl, a Swedish computer salesman, has a talent and serious interest in imitating engine sounds.

Not only is this an opinionated remark but he sounds nothing bloody like a bloody engine in the bloody first place!

Annoying for a different reason

In Ireland the company that supplies this sound has recieved numerous complaints from consumers. When you register to download the tone, you either did not get the tone or they continued to bill you with cryptic instructions to stop them billing you. Example information here.. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=213126&highlight=crazy+frog

Someone should censor all the genitals in the pictures in this article

It's just disgusting. We should really draw the line at bestiality.

The genitals aren't shown in a sexual context, however - bestiality is an act, or a depiction of an act, rather than a depiction of an object (unless that object was also a depiction of an act, i.e. a ceramic sculpture of a man having sex with an attractive pig, for example). Furthermore the frog's penis is clearly flaccid, i.e. unaroused. The Daily Telegraph has a photograph of the frog, uncensored, on page 12 of today's issue - directly across the page from a photograph of Tracey Emin, who is 42 years old and showing her belly button. Emin upset my stomach more than the frog.-Ashley Pomeroy 12:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Further, the genitals depicted are those of a human being simply placed onto an odd, anthropomorphic body of a frog. --Oldak Quill 18:04, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not censored, irregardless of your personal opinion. Harpalus 12:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrics? Really?

Do we really need a stab at spelling the lyrics? Was it not enough to say "attempting to imitate the sound of a two-stroke moped engine"?

No. That does not convey nearly as graphically the quality of the impersonation as the phonetic spelling of the sounds being made. I find them absolutely hilarious. They're also a convenient reference when I am trying to quote the impersonation to others who are not as familiar with it. The fact that they are so annoying to some people only makes them funnier. <devilish grin> --Susurrus 04:51, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
People like you are to blame for the explosion of this crap. I demand a vote on Wikipedia to have you lynched by a mob of repectable editors!

Rhino and Rat

If you're wondering why I just re-added the anon information that keeps getting reverted, it's because the anon is right. A Google search may return nothing, but they definitely did appear in Jamster adverts during early 2004, usually as number 1 of a 'Jamster Ringtone Chart', with seperate adverts featuring mobile phone animations of the rhino dancing or something. BillyH 19:03, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Shoot the frog.

Seriously , it does seem that theres genuine *hatred* for this ad and the people behind it. This really needs to be emphasised.

Well that and that theres an overpowering moral arguement for laws to be past post-haste demanding the creators be taken onto a lonely beach and shot.

No, the creators didn't know what they were doing. But the company paying for the nonsto advert should be Hung, Drawn and Quartered. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:07, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This piece of crap haunts me. I want to die whenever an advert comes on the television, so much that I have now boycotted the infernal box. It has caused me serious psychological damange, I used to be a placid being and now I am nothing short of a violent, gibbering wreck. Does anyone think I have suitable grounds for a lawsuit?

Another source responds:

If a person can attain such emotional and/or psychological damage due to a thirty second advert of a naked frog (which coincidently is how they exist in their natural habitat), then that person is mentally unstable and should seek therapy and counseling immediately. These people could possibly also be a danger to society and should undergo certain tests by their national government to determine whether they should be placed in special institutes for people with similar symptoms.

Excessive word linking

Do we really need so many ordinary words in this article to be linked? I'm thinking of: rotate, motorcycle, children, etc. etc.! --81.174.240.160 18:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In my day..

People would be shot for releasing records like this.

Mentioned in Veronica Magazine

This page has been mentioned in the Veronica Magazine, a Dutch TV Guide, in the culture section. Why culture? Why? Why? Why? This isn't culture, it's annoying. The Crazy Frog should be tortured, not worshipped.

Why do you think it's singing this song? - Ta bu shi da yu 05:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Uh...

... it appears that we've been quoted by highly respected and well read paper, The Australian. About the song lyrics no less. Can I ask why we have the song lyrics?!? - Ta bu shi da yu 05:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps we were quoted because we have the lyrics up. I had heard the tune only once, sung by my younger brother, and wasn't sure what it was called, until I saw an article in a Toronto newspaper that quoted the lyrics. :) --Unforgettableid | Talk to me 18:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Akon

Akon's current hit single, Lonely, is actually a ballad orignially recorded by Crazy frog himself. Some people claim that a (obviously fictional) Bobby Vinton is sampled for this song. This is of course wrong. You can clearly hear that its Crazy Frog's voice singing the lyrics.

That's INCREDIBLY wrong. It's Bobby Vinton's voice altered. Haven't you ever heard of Kanye West's "Through the Wire?" Jeez, it's him! It's Bobby. --daunrealist 18:32, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I think he was joking. Sounds much more like Sweety the Chick to me, anyway. BillyH 19:16, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The following links have been moved here from the main page per External links.

Crazy Frog Games:

If you'd like to add them back in based upon the guidelines linked above, please discuss here first.
brenneman(t)(c) 10:18, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • I suppose the Crazy Frog games should be put back up there, they are relevant in the sense that it gives people the chance to kill the frog, as evidently there are a lot of people who hate the damn thing. Basically, the games' existance shows how much people detest it (which was how the frog came to fame in the first place - annoyance). Plus not all of the games are to do with killing the frog, and a lot of people might be coming here for those too. secfan 18:00, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • If there were one particulary notable website that could be shown to have started the kill crazy frog wave, I'd pay that out. But barring that, I think a few lines in the body would be enough. Maybe a link to the google search for "crazy frog game" at the end.
brenneman(t)(c) 23:47, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've tried to trim the links before, but they keep getting added back. I'm glad they've finally been whittled down. I think the ASA link and the Annoying Thing homepage are pretty important and should be included in the main article, I'm happy with the rest staying here. -- taviso 12:32, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, I probably got too enthusiastic... I agree with those two going back in, but would still like to limit the number of links. So are there any on the main page that could go? The link "BBC article: Crazy Frog clings on to top spot." should go, since it's after two weeks and the one above is after four weeks at number one. brenneman(t)(c) 00:32, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Also moved here:

And copied ASA back onto main page while I had the editor open.
brenneman(t)(c) 23:58, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Spotted a poster in HMV for this thing, under the name "The Annoying Thing". Morwen - Talk 09:22, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Me too, ew ew ew ew. And Play.com are going to be selling a damn keychain! Why Play.com! You used to be cool! *Collapses in sobbing heap* - Ferretgames 20:09, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Singing Plush Toy

I've seen the box for this, and it's being marketed as The Annoying Thing, rather than as Crazy Frog. No doubt everyone will just call it the Crazy Frog anyway, regardless of what it says on the box, but I thought it should be mentioned here. --Bonalaw 18:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Does it have little plush nadgers? Please say no.
Also, I've been wondering, who owns the rights to this thing? Now that it's effectively become a kind of post-modern Mickey Mouse, who controls the copyright? Or can anyone just make plush toys or foam rubber dice or happy meals out of it?Serendipodous

Good Article

I impressed there is such a good article on a ringtone. I think this article should be suggested as a FAC. 67.19.211.250 16:46, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But that would simply lend more credence to this awful, awful phenomenon. Slicing 04:58, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Complaints about the advert

There have been a number of complaints in the UK about the phone ringtone promotional campaign being advertised at young persons, and not making clear that there are ongoing charges.

A comment should be made in the article about this.

Cleanup request (also pasted on Wikipedia:Cleanup)

  • Crazy Frog was recently one of Wikipedia's top clickthrough articles from Google. Also, we are #2 for the term. However, the article could use some restructuring, as well as copyediting. It seems to me it makes too much use of:
    • overly long words,
    • the passive tense,
    • and long sentences.
The article definitely needs cleanup, as for many Web users, the Crazy Frog article is their first impression of Wikipedia. --Unforgettableid | Talk to me 09:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy Frog origin date

Anyone got a date for when the Crazy Frog adverts began appearing on TV? I remember seeing them as early as September 2004 on VH1, during their Number Ones Week. I'm thinking of adding it to 2004 in television, see. BillyH 18:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC).[reply]

  • Answer:
  1. The adverts started airing in mid-2001 on Broadcast Belgium Compacts S.A., a Western European corporation of TV and other media. 12:20, 4 March 2006 (Matthew Wilson)

Mention should be made about the legal case brought against the ring tone's originating company about its downloads (Dec 2005 - see papers of 21/12).

Jackiespeel 16:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a problem if i add my site ?

The Small Crazy Frog

Images

Are these images censored, or are the original album covers? WP is not censored to protect minors... Rich Farmbrough. 15:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These images are censored, not the original album covers. They need to be uncensored. Harpalus 04:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relation to Mr. Toad?

Does anyone else see the similarities to Mr. Toad from Disney's The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad (1949)? One scene includes a toad imitating an old-style motor car. Ensignyu 14:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

)

Anti-Crazy Frog

I think the section stays because many people on the Internet seem to hate Crazy Frog. I wanted to bring the section back, but now I decided not, because the edit I make may be considered vandalism. Should it be brought back or we should make it as a seperate article? GBA 04:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I've just deleted some vandalism for controversy and other parts of this article.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crazy_Frog&oldid=66884553"