I've been thinking. You know we only insert contents relating to the original characters in the infoboxes. Should we do the same with the song infoboxes? Only insert the original performers or add a new section for other performers? Looking back at my edits on The Bare Necessities page, I found it tricky how to list them and tell them apart.
I don't know. A section that defines other performers who covered the song in question.
Example: For the Bare Necessities, Phil Harris, Bruce Reitherman, Sebastian Cabot will go under a section labelled "Original Performers" while John Goodman, Billy Murray, Dr. John and so on go under a section labelled "Other Performers" (the name needs work).
That being said, should a section like Demi Lovato's Let It Go even exist? There doesn't seem to be much place for it considering all the information appears in the infobox and the lyrics are seperated with a tabber.
The Demi Lovato section has been their since the film's premiere. Have a look at A Whole New World. We only have the original performers in the infobox while the other performers are listed under "Cover versions".
There's some inconsistencies going on with song articles, specially the big, classic ones. What we need to do is establish a firm template for what our song articles should look like and go from there.
Is there a classic/popular song article that you feel should be the template that every other article should follow? If not, I'll look into creating one.
I'm picking Can You Feel the Love Tonight. It's informative and thick with information, but not overwhelmingly so. It's a template that can easily be adapted to all other song articles that need a cleanup.
Hello Hey. As you can tell I'm back from my block, which I hope, if anything, made me learn from my mistakes and to avoid them from now on. Your profile page lists Aladdin and its charecters among your favorites, which made believe you're the perfect fit for this. The topic of course concerns the images in "The Return of Jafar" and "Aladdin: The Series" sections in the Aladdin charecter page. The reasons why I find the previous images more fitting are as follows:
The previous TROJ image is less zoomed in and shows more of the charecter's torso, Fez, and hair than the current image. Also, the previous image is from an official source (animationscreencaps.com, can be found here) while current one is from a screenshot I took from a pirated copy of the film, which I no longer posses (the scene of the screenshot I took can be found here). (current - previous)
As for the previous tv series image, it has the charecter in a front and still position, instead of him raising his arm up in the air and tilting his torso in the current image. (current - previous)
I don't think it matters too much if I'm honest. I can see where you're coming from with TROJ, but that and the previous tv series poses were a bit awkward so this change isn't a downgrade in my opinion.
Also, the screenshot issue doesn't matter here; so long as the image is high quality, it doesn't matter how it's obtained.
If this argument over the two articles on Oh My Disney continues by the time the film premieres, I'm going to take the matter into my own hands by putting it into a vote among the community. I won't have corruption or revert wars on Disney Wiki, especially from our top administrators
What Silver did was sleazy and disrespectful, so frankly, her opinion no longer has claim in this situation. She needs to get over her issues and accept that these articles can be separate and that we have had multiple fictional and real topics with their own separated articles for years. This is nothing new, end of discussion.
I like to nominate User:Vulchak for the position of content moderator. He's been very helpful in spotting errors redirects we haven't deleted. I say he could do a lot more as a content moderator. Plus we could do with more active Content Moderators as I appear to be the only one who is.
A while back I asked you on Community Central if you like access to the Tumblr and Twitter accounts for Disney Wiki. You never gave me an answer. I want to pass on running the accounts to others, which I've already done with SilverFlight. Should you choose to accept we can meet up on live chat or Discord when we're both available and share with you the usernames and passwords for the accounts.
Hi Hey, I'm sorry about the bad atmosphere over editing from last week, so I want to apologize for the miscommunication and the way I acted. But there is a problem that's been bothering me though, and I want your advice on it. A lot of the navboxes for the pages are pretty randomly clustered with no arrangement, and it seems every time something new comes out, that navbox is added to the growing list. Do you think navboxes on a page should be alphabetized, or arranged in order of the subject's appearances in them?
Thank you very much, I'm glad we could amend that and still work together.
I am delicately neutral towards the matter of navboxes, because on the one hand, it would be nice to have some sense of organization and alphabetizing them could work. On the other hand, it will take a long time to organize all of them. I was advised, however, that perhaps it would be authentic to leave the main navbox of each page at the top and everything else alphabetized (i.e. KH navbox above the others on Kingdom Hearts articles).
That makes sense. I don't think we necessarily have to stress this by burning through every article immediately to rearrange the boxes, but rather we can simply tend to it when we have the time or while we're casually editing an article with a lot of boxes, like DH: Battle Mode.
That's fine, but I will say that I just saw what you've done with the Oh My Disney page days ago despite the argument not having been finished and I'm extremely upset and offended by it. I gave a counter to your last response and instead of responding, you went ahead and did what you wanted to do anyway. Completely ignoring me and choosing what you wanted to do. I'll be honest and say that infuriates me and I don't appreciate it whatsoever.
At the beginning of the film, when Jack Conroy arrives in Alaska to look for his father's claim, he approaches his cage and Buck growls at him. Beauty Smith warns him to be careful or he could be his breakfast and kicks his cage. Jack warns him not to do that, but Smith tells him that he's his dog before pickpocketing him.
Later, when Jack and Alex begin mining at the claim, White Fang and his Indian master, Grey Beaver arrive in Skagway and they encounter Buck. When Grey Beaver enters the store to buy wolf pelts, Smith plans to test White Fang with Buck to see if he's stronger than Buck and White Fang wins. When Grey Beaver emerges from the store, Smith blackmails him for White Fang for compensation for his injured dog.