Talk:Dumbo

Home video

Dumbo was NOT the 1st disney movie to be released on home video it was Alice in Wonderland.

The original name of the leader crow was later changed to Dandy Crow, I have also a storybook adaptation of Dumbo in which he's named Dandy Crow, and there are on eBay products like pins with the name Dandy Crow in the description and a picture of a humanized version of the character named Dandy Crow. Even on Disney Wiki, on the page who talks about the crows and the story behind their creation there is this story! Honest Yusuf Cricket (talk) 22:19, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

You’re wrong, sockpuppeter. Pete’s Dragon was the first Disney film to be released on home video (in 1980). In addition, Wikia/FANDOM Wikis are not credible sources. End of argument! 2601:4C4:4000:A8C0:CC4C:955A:5E62:A780 (talk) 04:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Dandy Crow, the original name of the leader crow of Dumbo was changed years ago.

The original name of the leader crow was later changed to Dandy Crow, I have also a storybook adaptation of Dumbo in which he's named Dandy Crow, and there are on eBay products like pins with the name Dandy Crow in the description and a picture of a humanized version of the character named Dandy Crow. Even on Disney Wiki, on the page who talks about the crows and the story behind their creation there is this story. Honest Yusuf Cricket (talk) 22:33, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

That's nice, although I see nothing on Disney Wiki that confirms how long ago they changed the name. I would like to know how far back was your storybook published. On an unrelated note, your edits when it comes to defending the crows as alleged stereotypes is too excessive and needs to be scaled back to maintain neutrality on the topic. You've already reverted edits done by me and several other editors and I will report you for triggering an edit war if this doesn't stop. Christianster94 (talk) 02:38, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Propaganda Role

Legend has it that Dumbo's name was inspired by the OSS as a put down of Dalton Trumbo, author of the 1939 anti-war novel "johnny got his gun." Because of this clandestine service origin, the film also was financed by the US Military through phantom box office proceeds as part of the pre-war propaganda build-up, and Disney agreed to it because he desparately needed a bail-out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.101.62.249 (talk) 00:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

The name comes from the book. As for the rest: reliable sources or it didn't happen. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 15:03, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

John Grant quote

Sock blocked-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I was going to add another piece at the John Grant quote, I hope it's different and acceptable: John Grant, in his book The Encyclopedia of Walt Disney's Animated Characters, wrote, "It seems strange that racial offence should be discovered in their depiction: so is it somehow alright to caricature whites but not blacks? That surely is a very deep racism, far deeper than anything in the friendly portrayal of the crows. Although naming one of them "Jim" was maybe a little questionable." Leyla Aisha (talk) 17:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) This isn't about the film. It's an attack on critics of the film. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 18:34, 28 May 2020 (UTC) And Leonard Maltin? It's not an "attack", it's simply a disagreement, and the part of "caricatures" is simply common sense and a notification of incoherence and possible hypocrisy, and there is also the "questionable" part. He has/had the right to say his opinion and I don't think it's so wrong, and it is about the controversy of the crows, that is the main topic of this section. Schickel's and Longworth's are not less questionable, considering also the fact that minstrel culture has nothing to do with voicing animated characters, especially animals, nor with jazz, also the "wider use" is questionable. Two black characters in Family Guy are voiced by white voice-actors, even Carl Carlson of The Simpsons is voiced by Hank Azaria, and black voice-actors like Kevin Michael Richardson play white and non-black characters. And what about voice-actors in the other countries? Plus, Grant didn't mention the name of anyone as an example. It can't be ignored, considering also how long his statement has been in this article. Leyla Aisha (talk) 19:10, 28 May 2020 (UTC) All of which are simply opinions and, and almost nothing of it is about the film Dumbo. Wikipedia isn't here to provide you with a soapbox to right great wrongs about how other people disagree with you about what constitutes racism. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC) Talks about the crows, talks about the controversy, talks about the naming of "Jim". It has much to do with the film and the main topic of the section. Not different from Leonard Maltin's statement in his book. I only stick to the facts. Why the statement remained for a (relatively) long time but now, suddenly isn't right? Leyla Aisha (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC) I'm referring to your comments, Leyla: your opinions about minstrelsy, whether white actors should play black characters, etc. They aren't about Dumbo. If you want to debate those things, take it somewhere appropriate. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC) "Not different from Leonard Maltin's statement in his book." Exactly: that's why I said in my edit summary when I removed it "Doesn't add anything new". Glad we agree on that point. -Jason A. Quest (talk) It's different because he talks about possible inchoerent and hypocritical criticisms and mention the original naming of "Jim" as questionable, and doesn't explain why suddenly, after so much time, with my arrival and without even touching it, the statement is not appropriate. And why Scheckygreen can't join the conversation? He's not harassing anyone, simply noticed something he retained suspect, what you told him is very similar to a threat. Leyla Aisha (talk) 21:32, 28 May 2020 (UTC) Yeah, that's the part of that quote that isn't about Dumbo: it's about his views on racism... possibly interesting, but a different topic. It's been there for a while because... that happens on Wikipedia: people add stuff to it and no one takes a critical look at the article as a whole. Then I happened to look at it, noticed that it didn't add anything of value to the article, and that it was also going off-topic, so I removed it. That's also how Wikipedia works. As for Schecky, he absolutely is harrassing me: he came here (and another article I recently edited) specifically to cause trouble for me. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC) And you, Mr. Quest, seem yourself intent on rewriting history to your specifications. Sheckygreen (talk) 21:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC) And you're now wikihounding me, which is one more thing that Wikipedia editors get in trouble for. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC) References

Replace "expired" source and add a new one

Sock blocked-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:20, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am not a registered/confirmed user and I cannot edit this article myself, so I wanted to ask a request to whoever is active on this page and if gently could do what I am going to ask. In the "Controvery" section, after the mention of the 'Jackson Brothers', there's a source that is not available anymore because the video has been deleted along with the YouTube channel, so I wanted to replace it with this other one: https://catalog.afi.com/Catalog/moviedetails/26684 . Plus, along with the source about Micheal Wilmington I wanted to add this other important source from Alex Wainer I found in the "Peter Pan (1953 film)" article, that cites every critic and historian listed in this article and not, from Richard Shickel to Micheal Wilmington, and summarizes very well the topic: https://web.archive.org/web/19970728034459/http://www.regent.edu/acad/schcom/rojc/wainer.html . Could someone do something about it and do me this favor since I cannot do it myself, please? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.36.40.179 (talk) 05:11, 16 December 2020 (UTC) I replaced the expired YouTube video link with an active one, but the link you provided would do best in the "External Links" section. And since I know it's you Honest Yusuf Cricket, please do not create another sockpuppet account to edit the article. PrinceArchelaus (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2020 (UTC) Excuse me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.36.40.179 (talk) 22:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC) You're not fooling anyone. You've edited under Honest Yusuf Cricket and several other sockpuppet accounts – registered or not. You're the only user that's been wanting to post a source from Michael Wilmington, with your last edit made on December 12. The "Controversy" section is as fine as it is and doesn't need any more defending arguments. PrinceArchelaus (talk) 22:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2023

Hey pal! Can you please unprotect this page? 5.180.207.104 (talk) 14:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. Cannolis (talk) 17:33, 25 December 2023 (UTC)