Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Walt Disney/archive5

< Wikipedia:Peer review‎ | Walt Disney

Walt Disney edit

Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

Walt Disney was one of the biggest figures of the Twentieth Century. From a small-time animator in the 1920s, he built an empire on the back of a mouse His work has, probably, been seen by most people on the planet, and he influenced cinema, the illustrated arts, television and recreation time like no other individual ever has. This is a level 3 article which has gone through a recent re-write (and a lot of cutting of superfluous detail); I've tried to ensure that this is more about the man than the previous version (which focussed too much about the films or the corporate entity), so any comments on the balance and level of detail are particularly welcome. I am a British writer, so some of the American traits of writing may have eluded me from time to time. It is the 50th anniversary of Disney's death this December, and it's probably appropriate he has an article that reflects this. Any and all constructive comments are welcome. – SchroCat (talk) 11:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

  • Insufficient evidence found relating to first publication. Now removed. – SchroCat (talk) 04:56, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Walt Disney in 1912.jpg - When and where was this first published? If it was first published in The Art of Walt Disney, it's not PD in the US.
  • Insufficient evidence found relating to first publication. Now removed and tagged for deletion. SchroCat (talk) 04:56, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Walt01.jpg - Again, when and where was this first published? If it was first published on Tumblr, it's not PD in the US.
  • Insufficient evidence found relating to first publication. Now removed and tagged for deletion. – SchroCat (talk) 04:56, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • All 12 Newman Laugh-O-Grams were produced in 1921; Laugh-O-Gram produced other stuff in the following years, but they went under in 1923, so it should all be OK. I'll update the description tho. - SchroCat (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Trolley Troubles poster.jpg - What's the copyright of Oswald Rabbit? Also, this image appears to have been scanned from a book; do we know if the original poster had a copyright notice?
  • I've seen a couple of different copies of the poster and none appear to have a copyright notice (although it could have been in very small writing, I suppose). The film itself (copyright #L24088) came out of copyright in 1955 when Universal didn't renew. - SchroCat (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've nominated Cinderella for deletion on Commons: the original trailer had a (c) notice part way through. - SchroCat (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think so, though I'd be happiest if you have a reference that the archive only posts public domain images. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still doesn't say that the images were published at least 20 years ago. But then again, I'm sure Disney's visit was much covered. Not really at the point where there's reasonable doubt. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The original was there already, but not linked: now done. - SchroCat (talk) 14:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stamp info now updated, thanks to We Hope! - SchroCat (talk) 19:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Montanabw edit

Ah, my childhood every Sunday evening; the Wonderful World of Disney! Are you planning to go GA and then FA or straight to FAC? I think it's pretty much GA class right now if the image licensing checks out, but I'll try to look with more of a FAC eyeball, as I presume you'd want to go that way by December. Montanabw(talk) 08:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montana, I was planning on going from PR to FAC (although with a probable gap to add info people think is missing - you and Curly Turkey have already identified two areas that need a little extra info adding, and I expect there may be more. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some initial things I'm spotting:

  • Several of the left-justified images bleed into succeeding sections, pushing the section or subsection headers to the right (at least on my laptop). May want to look at the ones that are last in any given section and consider re-jiggering the layout. You don't have to stick religiously to a right-left-right alternating layout. I noticed particular problems with the "Trolley Trouble" image, the Disney in 1935 image and the image of his grave was the worst "offender" of the group.
  • Once the licensing has been fully sorted out I'll look at this a little more closely - we've lost a few already, which eases matters. Some of these are not a problem on smaller screens (iPads, etc), but I'll see what I can do to make them all avoid breaking the headings. - SchroCat (talk) 08:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • This should be largely sorted, but I expect we may lose another one soon... - SchroCat (talk) 11:36, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like the images if they pass copyright muster, though perhaps the article would flow a little better if one or two could be chopped. I know Disney Corp. is meticulous about copyright, so it probably was a real challenge to find what you found. Be sure you have a fair use rationale if the free license thing fails (I've gotten fair use images through FAC, it's doable.)
  • I'd like to see some expansion of the "Theme parks and other interests: 1950–66" section; basically, these years were when Disneyland was built and when Disney became practically a meme due to his multiple television ventures. Though the spinoff articles contain the history, I think you can expand a little here, in particular the evolution of the Walt Disney anthology television series and the creation of Disneyland and his planning of Disney World.
  • Overall sourcing looks excellent, though I didn't go into a lot of depth. I presume that all the books that can be linked via Google books are (even if only snippet view is available).
  • Again, noting there is a Disney family list, I do think you could expand a little more about his personal life. It is a good thing for him that it appears not to have been particularly dramatic, but anything about his family — even if noting the degree to which he kept his private life private — would be good. Also, his estate and fortune, how did that all shake out?
  • The "criticism" section is sandwiched between the legacy and honors sections. I think that it would be better placed before or after. Also, I'm not sure if the portrayals of Disney fit quite right in the "honors" section, may be better placed in "Legacy."
  • I've merged the legacy into the death and aftermath section, as there is a natural run on between the subjects. This should change the balance in that bottom section a bit. – SchroCat (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh yes... a whole minefield of potential problems with those! There are a few navboxes at the bottom which are probably the best structured, but we may have to look at adding a few links in the "See also" section to make sure everything is covered properly. - SchroCat (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hope these comments help. Good luck with your work on this, it's a great project. I might pop over and do some minor copyedits, nothing substantive and feel free to revert anything that's not an improvement! Montanabw(talk) 08:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for these. Some of them I'll address in the newxt few days, some I'll leave until post-PR to work on. He's a bit of a big subject to tackle, and I guess people all have their slightly different take on him and his product - the US readers will have a very different take from the rest of us, not having seen the television programme, for example. At least the PR should generate a few comments on what else to add here and there! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry to take so long to get back to you, I think your changes helped, and as you say, the big push for FAC occurs post-PR. Feel free to ping me any time for a peek at the television bits, or even a hand if you wish; we all know the big films worldwide, but there were tons of smaller movies that became best known by being shown in 2-part reruns on TV (my favorite of that genre, naturally, was Miracle of the White Stallions, followed closely by The Horse with the Flying Tail, LOL!). Also, there probably is not a baby boomer in America who didn't watch The Mickey Mouse Club -- most of us had the lunchboxes, the ears, etc... and, of course, for the boys, Annette Funicello was probably their first crush. The phenomenon of TV Disney was a huge cultural meme in that time. Also, the car vacation to Disneyland in California was de riguer for any family west of the Mississippi. (Mocked in many ways by National Lampoon's Vacation.) Montanabw(talk) 00:47, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two series about horses... Now there's a surprise...! ;-) SchroCat (talk) 06:15, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PR from Ssven2 edit

SchroCat, I'm amazed at how you have done a quick and, if I may also add, quite a comprehensive work on one of my biggest Childhood idols whose work we grew up watching (and still do! Well, I watch The Lion Guard. Quite good compared to the other cartoon crap we get today. :-)). Withour further ado, here are my comments.

  • Just asking, wasn't he dyslexic?
  • The sources don't say so (I went through the indexes of three of them and skimmed the ANB, EB and Disney Museum profiles and found no reference). It's interesting that books on dyslexia say he was, but none of the many sources I've seen about him make any reference to it. - SchroCat (talk) 10:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1906, when Disney was four, Elias and his family moved to a farm in Marceline, Missouri, where his elder brother Roy had recently purchased farmland." — Looks a bit of a repetition of "farm" (farm and farmland, maybe its just me). Is there another word for it? Leave it as it is if there isn't.
  • "Disney developed his interest in drawing with a retired neighborhood doctor" — Nothing much but is there any information about the doctor's name?
  • It's known, but I think it's a bit superfluous. - SchroCat (talk) 11:04, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who came from a family of theatre aficionados" — might add a wikilink to aficionados for those who might not be familiar with the term.
  • "Disney returned to Kansas City where he worked as an apprentice artist at the Pesmen-Rubin Commercial Art Studio where he met and befriended the artist Ub Iwerks" — Repetition of "where". Maybe "Disney returned to Kansas City to work as an apprentice artist at the Pesmen-Rubin Commercial Art Studio where he met and befriended the artist Ub Iwerks"
  • "that failed to attract much business" — Can be rephrased as "that failed to attract much attention".
  • "Attention" doesn't (to me) suggest why they needed to close. I'll leave it as is for the moment, but if others come up with a better wording we can always change it a bit later. - SchroCat (talk) 11:04, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Disney also asked Powers for an increase in royalty payments" — Do pardon me if it may seem a bit silly but what are royalty payments?
  • "The success also made Disney realize the importance of the it depended" — Typo?

That's all from me.    — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 09:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks Ssven2! All your points addressed and mostly adopteed. The only ones I've demurred on I hope are based on understandable rationales, and if others disagree with me, we can always readdress the point later. Thanks again. - SchroCat (talk) 11:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt edit

  • Here's my first part:
  • " in Chicago's Hermosa community area. " undoubtedly true, but I doubt whether that term was used in 1901. I would use a neighborhood as more relevant, and have the community area in perhaps a footnote.
  • Reworked a little: It was called Hermosa at the time (it had been a separate town until it was merged into the city in 1889) but I've played with the address details a little. - SchroCat (talk) 09:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1906, when Disney was four, the family moved to a farm in Marceline, Missouri, where his older brother Roy had just purchased land." I gather Roy was 12 or 13 at the time. Practical considerations seem to beg for an explanation. Roy would not have had the capacity to make a contract for the purchase of land, I think?
  • Oops - misread the source: now ammended. - SchroCat (talk) 08:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Disney developed his interest in drawing when a retired neighborhood doctor paid him to draw pictures of his horse." Disney's or the doctor's?
  • "Kansas City" which one? (not answered by the link)
  • " There, Disney attended the Benton Grammar School, where he met Walter Pfeiffer, who came from a family of theatre fans and introduced Disney to the world of vaudeville and motion pictures" Was Mr. Pfeiffer employed by the school in some capacity, a student, or did he just hang around recruiting children to the Dark Side?
  • LOL - added "fellow-student" to clarify - SchroCat (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Elias bought shares in the O-Zell jelly factory" You buy shares in firms, not facilities. I would state the name of the company, if available and if it would illuminate the reader (as in, if it's O-Zell Jelly Co. fine but if it's Finegold Brothers Co. probably not). I would say "stock" rather than shares as more commonly used in the US (though the other is not unknown).
  • "He borrowed the only book on animation available at a local library,[c] and a camera from Cauger, and began experimenting at home" somewhat awkward phrasing, very slow moving prose.
  • Re-worked, with semi-superfluous detail in a footnote - SchroCat (talk) 08:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The two produced short cartoons they called "Laugh-O-Grams"; their main client was the local Newman Theater, and the shorts were sold as "Newman's Laugh-O-Grams"" I would cut all up to the semicolon and change "shorts" to "short cartoons they produced"

Many thanks Wehwalt: all excellent stuff, as usual, and I've followed your suggestions in toto. - SchroCat (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here's more (and I've been hands on in some places:

  • "synchronized sound" Is this what is referred to as "talking pictures" or "talkies"? Such terms may be more familiar to the reader.
  • "After the release of Flowers and Trees," I would cut as adding nothing.
  • "with storyboard artists who would be dedicated to working on a plot's development phase of a production pipeline" seems very wordy. "with storyboard artists who would detail the plots of Disney's films" or similar
  • "The studio had previously been involved in a television special on Christmas Day 1950 about the making of Alice in Wonderland, which was seen as a success by Disney. " what was seen as a success? Alice? Its making? the TV special?
  • "From the first episode of Disneyland, the five-part miniseries Davy Crockett was broadcast " unclear. Was this a rerun? Or did they expand it from what was in the first episode?
  • "and used the technology to improve Disneyland" Consider mentioning what the exhibits for the 1964 Worlds' Fair were. As I recall, they included It's A Small World and Carousel of Progress. There is a good chance that readers will have been on them since I think all or most featured at both major parks for many years.
  • Having been dragged onto It's A Small World at Disneyland Paris at least nine times in three days a couple of weeks ago, I can guarantee that one is still in use! And that tune still comes back to haunt me in the dark hours... - SchroCat (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought it was really cool when I went on it for the first time. In 1979. It has shrunk on me since.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "1959 Moscow Fair" (lede and body). As far as I can tell, there was nothing except the American exhibit. I would simply say "1959 American National Exhibition in Moscow"
  • Done through the start of "Illness". Nothing in particular strikes me as missing or overdone, but I haven't read through all the way yet.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many thanks: all done, bar the Small World info. I've had a request from Montanabw to add a little more detail on that aspect too, so I'll address it as part of that. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 17:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm done, mostly hands on although of course feel free to revert anything that varies from the source or which otherwise you don't like. I think it fairly covers the field, though I am not an expert on Disney. I might make clearer if the controversies, i.e. for Song of the South was then or later. You've done a good job on this, and I've massaged out all the British feel that I can, it just reads formal to me. Well done and I look forward to the FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Wehwalt. I'll have a check through all your comments and make sure I've done them all justice (there are a couple of them I need to follow up on post-PR. I've been watching the edits and they're great—it's been fantastic to watch the development—Cheers. – SchroCat (talk) 21:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z105space edit

I applaud SchroCat for writing about this hugely iconic individual. Here is a few minor things I found while reading:

Early life - 1901-20
  • I believe Kansas City, Missouri should be one wikilink instead of two.
  • The two periods in US should be included to maintain consistency.
Theme parks and other interests - 1950-66
  • "He acted as consultant to the American exhibition in the 1959 Moscow Fair;" - acted as a consultant.
Criticism
  • Should racism be linked?
Personality and reputation
  • "Journalist Alistair Cooke call Disney a "folk-hero ... the Pied Piper of Hollywood" - called.
  • Yep, added

That is all I found. I will possibly have another look later on. Z105space (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks Z105space - much appreciated. - SchroCat (talk) 15:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Moisejp edit

I haven't read others' comments so apologies if I'm repeating anything.
Early life: 1901–20: Three minor suggestions:

  • "Disney also began to develop an interest in and ability to draw and paint with watercolors and crayons.[4] He also became..." Two sentences in a row starting with "also". Maybe change one of them to "additionally" or something or otherwise rework one sentence.
  • "Elias had purchased a newspaper delivery route..." I've never heard of purchasing a delivery route (I delivered papers when I was a kid but didn't "purchase" the route). But maybe that's the way it was done in those days? I can imagine that. But my suggestion is if you changed "purchased" to "obtained" it would still presumably be correct (he obtained it while paying money for it) but it wouldn't raise eyebrows from people like me who have never heard of the practice of purchasing routes. You probably don't want to go into detail about explaining that's the way it was done then, so that would be an easy way around it. Or you could leave it as it is if you're comfortable with it.
  • Can I leave it 'as is' at the moment? If someone else raises the point I'll switch it out for 'obtained'. - SchroCat (talk) 12:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Disney returned to the U.S. in October 1919,[23] returning to..." Repetition of "returned ... returning".

More to follow. Moisejp (talk) 06:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Moisejp. I've reworked the two uncommented points, so they should read better now. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another minor suggestion from the above section. "and catalogs, and met and befriended artist Ub Iwerks" (three instances of "and" in six words) → "and catalogs, and befriended artist Ub Iwerks" (very often we befriend someone when we first meet them, so maybe "and met" is unnecessary?).

Early career: 1920–28

Creation of Mickey Mouse to the first Academy Awards: 1928–33:

  • "With the loss of Powers as distributor, Disney studios signed a contract with Columbia Pictures, who became increasingly popular, including internationally." The footnote [k] which follows this seems to be misplaced, unless this sentence (I suspect) originally was saying that Mickey Mouse became internationally popular (perhaps this got lost in somebody's edit)? Moisejp (talk) 21:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It did - nice spot. I've tweaked slightly. – SchroCat (talk) 21:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Golden age of animation: 1934–41

  • "While a federal mediator from the National Labor Relations Board negotiated with the two sides, Disney accepted an offer from the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs to make a goodwill trip to South America, ensuring he was absent during a resolution he knew would be unfavorable to the studio." The [n] footnote that follows this says "The trip resulted in the two combined live-action and animation works Saludos Amigos (1942) and The Three Caballeros (1945)." It may be good to specify how the trip "resulted in" these films. I guess it means his trip, and exposure to South America, gave him the idea, but it's not clear as is. Moisejp (talk) 21:46, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

World War II and beyond: 1941–50

  • "In 1947, during the Second Red Scare, Disney testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), where he branded Herbert Sorrell, David Hilberman and William Pomerance, former animators and labor union organizers, as Communist agitators". I'm not sure if you have information about this, but did these three end up being blacklisted, and if so, do historians consider Disney to have had a big responsibility in this outcome? Depending on the answer, it might affect how big a "stain" it is on his legacy. But again, if you don't have information on this, no worries!
  • None of them were blacklisted as a result of Dismey's testimony (even tho Sorrell probably was a Soviet agent) – SchroCat (talk) 21:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Theme parks and other interests: 1950–66

  • "After obtaining bank funding he invited other stockholders, American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres and Western Printing and Lithographing Company.[54] Construction work started in July 1954, and Disneyland opened in July 1955; the opening ceremony was broadcast on ABC.[102] ... The money from ABC had been contingent on Disney television programs." Would it be better to spell out that American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres is the same thing as ABC Television? Then the reference to "the money from ABC" becomes all the clearer. Moisejp (talk) 19:43, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies:

  • "Disney was long rumored to be antisemitic; in 1938 he welcomed German filmmaker and Nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl to Hollywood to promote her film Olympia,[144] although three months after Riefenstahl's visit, Disney disavowed it, claiming that he did not know who she was when he issued the invitation." Does "disavow it" refer to the invitation or the film? Grammatically it seems to refer to the film, but semantically I wasn't sure if this was intended. Moisejp (talk) 20:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Disney had been accused of racism, because ..." Should this be "has been accused"? I wasn't sure what event in the past this was supposed to precede (and which would necessitate "had been"). Moisejp (talk) 20:43, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tomlinson views their argument as flawed, as "they simply assume that reading American comics, seeing adverts, watching pictures of the affluent yanguí lifestyle has a direct pedagogic effect". " Do you need some kind of link or explanation of "yanguí"? If such an explanation isn't available, you could possibly consider rewriting as follows: "they simply assume that reading American comics, seeing adverts, watching pictures ... has a direct pedagogic effect". Moisejp (talk) 20:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Honors:

  • Since you mention multiple stars for Disney on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, would it be worthhwile to also mention that Mickey Mouse has a star? Just an idea.
  • "Other national awards include Thailand's Order of the Crown; Brazil's Order of the Southern Cross; Mexico's Order of the Aztec Eagle; and the Showman of the World Award from the National Association of Theatre Owners.[173] In 1955, the National Audubon Society awarded Disney its highest honor, the Audubon Medal, for promoting the "appreciation and understanding of nature" through his True-Life Adventures nature films." I added "In the United States" to the sentence before this ("In the United States, he received the Presidential Medal of Freedom on September 14, 1964[171] and, in 1969, he was posthumously awarded the Congressional Gold Medal.") for clarity. However, the sentence I've quoted here is also inconsistent about specifying the country of origin of each award. Moisejp (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've re-worked this a little to put all the US and non-US in separate batches. - SchroCat (talk) 07:56, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personality and reputation:

  • For the last three commentators, the present tense is used, while the past tense is used for the others. I wasn't sure if you had a semantic distinction in mind to account for that difference, or whether you want to make them all consistent.

Minor overall comment:

  • In the dates at the head of each section, only 1928–33 / 1934–41 doesn't overlap from one section to the next. I wasn't sure if that was intentional. Moisejp (talk) 21:18, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, that's the only one with a break at that point – the others naturally break over the years. – SchroCat (talk) 06:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that's all of my comments. Cheers, Moisejp (talk) 21:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks Moisejp: there are a few I have to check against the sources before I edit, but I'll do those shortly. Many thanks for your thoughts on these: they are much appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 06:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ceoil edit

Looking good overall; my main quibble is with the lead. The timeline here is a bit lopsided in parts - in the 2nd lead para he his just starting out; then all of a sudden has lung cancer. Then we are back to late period in the third para. Suggest you fill this out more, prob with less emp on the rise, which is already well covered. Still reading through. To say, I'm more drawn in and interested than I expected; a credit to the main author. Ceoil (talk) 22:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To be brutally honest, the lead is the bit I like least too (it's a perpetual weakness of mine). I'll revisit this part shortly and rework accordingly. Thanks for your time and thoughts on this—and your edits too—any more would be gratefully received! Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 23:41, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thats fine Schro; have heard many editors say they prefer to leave it to last, but its always what I focus on most, so may pick a bit if thats ok. Ceoil (talk) 00:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
and life of Walter Elias Disney ... and to the talents, the dedication, and the loyalty of the entire Disney organization that made Walt Disney's dream come true."[145] Roy died in December 1971.[146] - The opening "" is missing, but its not a very enlightening quote anyway; suggest you paraphrase the jist, leaving out the "talents, the dedication". Also, we don't need to know here when Roy died. Ceoil (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ceoil, the opening " was there, but you're right about the quote and I've deleted the whole thing. I mildly disagree on the data of death (Roy was a huge part of Walt's life and work), but I've dropped it to a footnote rather than have it in the main text, which I hope works better. Thanks again. – SchroCat (talk) 06:23, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In that case I would draw out the point, and retain. Ceoil (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Curly Turkey edit

Sorry, I promised to take a closer look at the article, but I've been busy lately. A few comments:
  • I'd like to see some brief background on animation and Hollywood—Disney was in almost on the ground floor with both. So he moved to Hollywood in 1923—was that as obvious a thing to do then as it soon would be?
  • I'd like to see a bit on the technical innovations Disney promoted—we learn that Snow White was three times over budget, but we don't learn why. A multiplane camera technique patent, having the artists study live-action film to learn, say, how to animate water droplets, etc. Disney's films weren't just popular, they were hugely innovative.
  • The "Controversies" section seems pretty long to me—four or five rather long paragraphs on his alleged racism alone. Does it really require so much verbiage to get to the point?
  • There's only one for racism (there's on for each, aside from the anti-Sentism which has two). I've dropped some examples of works into the footnotes, but I'll trim a little further if I can. – SchroCat (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, that's the first time I've heard antisemitism wasn't racism, but choose the term you wish—from "Disney was long rumored ..." to "... can only be called exemplary" you've got a whole whack of text on his alleged bigotry. I know there are a lot of people who want to brand him a Nazi (I did, once upon a time), but I seriously don't see much in those paragraphs that couldn't be condensed into a single paragraph. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 07:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Must be a national definition thing: I don't think that in the UK we class religious discrimination as racism, which we keep to describe discrimination by colour. Still, your general point is well made and I will trim further. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 07:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 05:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many thanks CT. I'll deal with your first two points post-PR (when I have some additional material to add from Montanabw too). Cheers. – SchroCat (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Brianboulton edit

Hi, SchroCat. I've not found time for a full review, which I might keep for the FAC (along with a sources review), but I have a few points to raise here:

  • In the lead, "The results, seen in films such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937), Fantasia, Pinocchio (both 1940), Dumbo (1941) and Bambi (1942)" does not make a complete sentence.
  • Also in the lead, in the first sentence of the third paragraph I would redraft the second part: "...for this work he received his 22nd Academy Award out of 59 nominations, thus winning more individual Oscars than anyone else." (avoids ambiguity and slightly improves the grammar)
  • Final sentence (first part): "Although his reputation changed in the years after his death, away from an American patriot and toward someone whose work was representative of American imperialism..." That doesn't seem that much of a change to me – a "patriot" in my experience is often staunchly imperialistic. And the grammar is a bit off, anyway. If the sources permit I'd consider changing to something like: "Although his reputation changed in the years after his death, from that of a purveyor of homely patriotic values to that of a representative of American imperialism..." – play around with it, anyway.
  • There's a hidden note in the third paragraph, which adumbrates material in the "Controversies" section relating to antisemitism. In my view, hidden notes should not survive the article's development phase. As the question of Disney's possible antisemitism is discussed substantially in the text I feel the issue needs to be mentioned openly in the lead, not by a hidden message.
  • Categories: there's a huge number of these, and some of them seem frankly barmy. He is categorised as a 20th century American writer, a writer from California, a writer from Chicago, a writer from Missouri – writing was not his vocation even if he had a hand in writing scripts. And does the fact that he supplied the voice of Mickey Mouse really justify categorising him as a 20th century American male actor, and in separate categories as an actor from Chicago, California, Missouri, etc? Likewise, does the fact that he supported Thomas Dewey in the 1948 election justify his categories as a Californian Republican or a Missouri Republican? If I were you I would make good use of my winnowing fork and limit the list of categories to those of some substance.
  • Succession boxes are normally used in connection with significant public offices or titles. To have one for the "voice of Mickey Mouse" strikes me as hilarious, but also slightly cringeworthy. Perhaps reconsider?

I'll show up for sure at FAC. In the meantime, congratulations for taking on this very important article.

  • Many thanks Brian. I've addressed some of these already, but need to work on a few more. Many thanks indeed. - SchroCat (talk) 18:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Many thanks to everyone who has taken part - probably the most well-attended and constructive PR I've had to date. I have a list of comments from many of you which still to be worked on (largely those who have asked for major additions) and I need to re-address the lead again, but I will do this over the next few days and file for FAC for further comment and consideration. Thanks again to everyone who took the time to share their opinions. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 18:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Walt_Disney/archive5&oldid=1089911681"