FANDOM

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • Hi! Just occurred to me that [[No Hunting] isn't done posing continuity tangles: it also features a cameo by fawn-Bambi and his mother. It would seem to me that the best way to account for this would be to assume that No Huntin takes place in 1940 or so, somewhere during the events of Bambi. This interestingly makes sense of "mother" being still alive, yet elderly… Does that sound good?

      Loading editor
    • View all 5 replies
    • The Austria thing is easily explained by the fact that Bambi & the Dwarfs & Co. don't live in any one forest so much as they live in the Forest, a sort of platonic ideal of deep unsettled forests which can seemingly be magically accessed from most any forest in the world. I mean, it's the only explain worth a damn I can find for what the Seven Dwarfs' cottage and the Song of the South Settlement would be doing in what appears to be a forest near Duckburg. 

        Loading editor
    • Good explanation. I can't confirm that the Bambi manga is set in Austria, as I've never read the original Japanese version, but this explanation would certainly suffice.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • It's also on Fenton's page. Should that be deleted also?

    ~ Ducktor Who

      Loading editor
    • Er... I don't really know. My guess would be yes. Unless I'm mistaken, it looks like it was Scrooge MacDuck that added it to each page when creating or editing the infoboxes. I don't know if he meant to do it or if it was just a mistake. Hopefully he'll see this thread when he's online again and can tell us his opinion.

      That said, it isn't too difficult to undo an edit, so even if we're wrong, it shouldn't be too much of a hassle to get the "Cinammon Teal" bit back. 

        Loading editor
    • No idea where this came from, sorry. Probably a copypaste artifact. You were obviously right to delete it.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I really don't think the page about the song should equate between the song and the sequence. The sequence itself may well deserve a page of its own, as Aquarelo do Brazil (cartoon) or something like that, because it has, I believe, been released independently of Saludos Amigos. But, for example, the Continuity section about the sequence in The Three Caballeros should not link to the page about the song as though it were a story page. 

      Loading editor
    • Makes sense. Do both Aquarela do Brasil pages get a modifier or just one? If so, which one?

        Loading editor
    • Also, if Aquarela do Brasil (cartoon) becomes a page, would its "References" and "Continuity" section basically match Saludos Amigos'?

        Loading editor
    • I think the cartoon should get the modifier, as in most instances we'll just link to Saludos Amigos anyway. And yes, by necessity most every References and Continuity entry for Aquarelo will also be in Amigos. It happens. The same phenomenon can be observed with the various versions of Trick or Treat

      Speaking of which, however: don't forget to add to the Continuity of both that some caution must be exercised when dealing with Aquarelo's depiction of events, firstly because it is stylized and we cannot really take it for granted that José Carioca came into being seconds before meeting Donald because a giant paintbrush drew him into existence, and secondly because of the apparent conflict with Legend of the Three Caballeros

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • It's not confirmed that they share an ancestor, but Mickey and Minnie being a couple means you can put both lines on the same family tree, which was my reasoning for putting one in the category of the other (though not members of Minnie's family directly into the "Mouse family" category, as we would do if these were genuinely the same Mouse family). 

      Loading editor
    • Makes sense. I thought a common ancestor was being implied. My apologies. I hope I didn't cause too much trouble.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I just saw the shout-out on your profile! It was very nice of you to say.

    ~ Ducktor Who

      Loading editor
    • No problem! You've been a great contributor to this Wiki! As I said in m profile, you are "every bit, if not signifcantly more worthy of [the Best New Member award] than I." Thanks for all you do for this community!

        Loading editor
    • You're welcome!

      ~ Ducktor Who

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Congratulations on winning the Best New Member award! If you would like to, you can put this template on your user page: https://scrooge-mcduck.fandom.com/wiki/Template:Wiki_Awards/2.

    To do this, simply write {{Template:Wiki_Awards/2}} in the source code of your user page.

      Loading editor
  • Just for the record, there is no need for both versions of something to be disambiguated; the most primary topic gets to keep the undisambiguated name. Ergo, either Dumbo and Dumbo (character), or  Dumbo (film) and Dumbo; but not Dumbo (film) and Dumbo (character). For the record, in this particular instance, we'll much more often have cause to link to the character rather than film, so precedence should be given to the character; Dumbo and Dumbo (film) seems best.

      Loading editor
    • Ah, I see. I was planning to make pages for Dumbo and related characters, so I was going through and checking all previous references to Dumbo to make sure something about the film wouldn't link to the character page or vice versa.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hello again! I'd just like to remind you that the opening section of character pages should be written from an in-universe perspective, and so should not mention which story they first appeared in - this should be reserved for the 'Behind the scenes' section only.

    Other than that, you've been doing a great job, and I hope that you continue to edit the Wiki!

      Loading editor
    • View all 14 replies
    • Yes, I think you've got it. Although, the 'References' section is usually written from an in-universe perspective, too - there's no rule about it, but it usually makes more sense to write it that way, as there's not really any need to mention behind-the-scenes information in that section, since it's about things which occurred within the story. The 'Continuity' section is definitely out-of-universe, though.

        Loading editor
    • Alright. I'll try to keep these rules/guidelines in mind while writing future articles!

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hello! You've been doing a great job editing the Wiki so far, but I just wanted to let you know that on character pages, we don't put categories like "Character created by Don Rosa", as I see you've done on a few pages. The categories should be from an in-universe persepective, just like the description sections of the pages.

    Keep up the good work!

      Loading editor
    • Okay. I understand, but I now must ask this question: Why does the category exist? It had been used before I used it. I thought that the name sounded a little weird, as "Characters created by Don Rosa" would make more since than "Character created by Don Rosa", but I figured it would be good for people to be able to find characters by the creators, which is why I went ahead and added it. I apologize if I've caused any trouble.

        Loading editor
    • think it's an artifact from our merging with the Duckburg Wiki (as are the “Male Characters” and “Female Characters” category, which are unneeded duplicates of our “Males” and “Females”). If not, then it must date back to the very earliest days of the Wiki, before we established most of our policies for how to write pages. 

      The problem is that even after you strip a category off every page that was in it and delete the ‘page’ of the category, Wikia still remembers the category's existence and suggests it to editors. There's no good way around it. 

        Loading editor
    • Ah, I see.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Well done for an excellent beginning on the Wiki! Just for the record, we're not as regarding when it comes to videos as many other Wikis. If there's an official Disney upload, all the better; use that; but any old channel will do, really, so long as the video is the real thing and not tampered with. 

      Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.