This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Image copyright problem with File:Clifford The Big Red Dog.jpg[edit]
The image File:Clifford The Big Red Dog.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.
Since this page is actually talking about the 2000 animated series adaption of Clifford the Big Red Dog, I believe that all the info on the 1988 Direct to Video series should be moved to a separate article to avoid confusion since they're not really the same program. - FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 07:05, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"One principle was kept religiously: the dogs talked only when humans were not present; otherwise, they only barked."
This statement needs revision, for it implies that the characters had the ability to speak human language but chose not to do so around the humans; that is not the case. The animal characters (generally dogs) in this show do not have the ability to speak human language and therefore 'bark' consistently; however, much like in films like One Hundred and One Dalmatians or Lady and the Tramp, human speech replaces the barking so viewers can understand the storyline from the dogs' point of view, which switches to barking when the perspective becomes that of the human characters.T.W. (talk) 16:30, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since the reboot is airing next Saturday, shouldn't there be a new article? There is more info on it then what is there on Wikipedia. There are some actors that are on some articles on other sites that are not even mentioned on that section. It seems strange that the series is being aired starting December 7th, and nothing is improved on the section. The Air dates are usually listed on Wikipedia before the first time it is premeering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bopit1998 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Comment. Is "2000-2003" wrong?? An answer of yes would naturally imply either that it belongs to 2000 alone or that it's the primary TV series for the entire infinitade beginning in 2000. (I got the -ade suffix from the word decade in case you're wondering.) Georgia guy (talk) 13:41, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's formally wrong as it has a hyphen rather than an ndash - see MOS:DATERANGE. I don't think it's necessary to specifiy the end date of a series when the start date alone is sufficient for disambiguation, but I don't object to the range being given if there's consensus for it. Tevildo (talk) 14:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. There is no reason to have an article at an incomplete disambiguation which just makes it more confusing for both readers and editors. Gonnym (talk) 10:32, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - agree '(TV series)' title is incomplete dab and include starting year is standard among at least two TV series articles with same names. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 19:02, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Is there any source for this? It was added to the main page but there was (and is) no information at all about an end to reruns. 45.17.76.154 (talk) 02:37, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]