|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.
This archive page covers approximately the dates between 17 November 2004 and 31 January 2007.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.
- What exactly is the infamous cocaine scandal in the New Adventures of Mighty Mouse? Can somebody clarify? [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 01:46, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
- Answer: A viewer notified media watchdog Reverend Donald Wildmon that, in one episode of this series, it looks like Mighty Mouse reaches into a pocket and snorts cocaine from his hand to regain his strength. Wildmon was disbelieving at first, but after investigating the episode and learning of producer Ralph Bakshi's background (e.g., directing the adult cartoon Fritz The Cat), alerted the media that this may have been intentional. Given the numerous other instances of risque humor and adult jokes in this series, a drug reference wouldn't be out of the question. Bakshi denies it to this day, maintaining that Mighty Mouse was merely smelling some crushed flowers and that the white jet leading from his hand to his nose was merely a cartoon "smell line" moving super-fast from the mighty inhale. The episode was immediately pulled from the rotation so that no one would see it. (Source: The Internet Movie Database (Ibaranoff24 02:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC))
The Flak magazine article  really isn't a "critique of Bakshi's style of animation," but more of a specific critique of his film adaptation of The Lord of the Rings. While it does critique the animation style of one of his films, it doesn't critique the overall animation style of Ralph Bakshi's entire filmography. It's a valid opinion (don't get me wrong--I loved LOTR. I thought it was an excellent adaptation, and he should have got to finish Part 2), but, in my opinion, it just doesn't belong here -- it would be better off on the Lord of the Rings page. (Ibaranoff24 05:21, 28 September 2005 (UTC))
- Since nobody responded, I deleted the offending link. (Ibaranoff24 02:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC))
Cleaned up the article, added some more information, expanded the current information. Etc, etc, Etc. Source References links have also been added, and the filmography is now organized. Plus, I added some more categories for this person. Great director, great man, great article. (Ibaranoff24 04:42, 20 November 2005 (UTC))
- Unfortunately much more copyediting needs to be done. I just spent the better part of an hour at it and have had enough for now. It just goes on and on: florid prose; awkward run-on sentences; verb tense disagreement; incorrect subject number; misspellings; confusing, needlessly redundant and superfluous phrasing. This reads like an extemporaneous composition at the junior high school level; I'm genuinely surprised that it was nominated. Canonblack 21:58, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Did some further copy-editing, but it's still not done. Also, it wants for someone with some further information on the subject matter to take a look at it. It would be lovely if someone could, for example, give concrete instances of this controversy the article references repeatedly. --Honeygnome 22:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Bakshi is a very controversial figure and the article doesn't reflect that at all, at present; the article needs to include criticism of his work. This article is far from being featured-article quality. Tempshill 19:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- I added a section on controversy. The five basic points of criticism include how some viewed Fritz the Cat and Coonskin when they were originally released, Mark Bode's claims of plagiarism, and Bakshi's extensive use of rotoscoping. (Ibaranoff24 04:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC))
i think i once saw his name as animator or something on the old animated spiderman series can anyone vouch for this? --Benkastin 23:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)ben
- It's in the article.(Ibaranoff24 22:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC))
- In 1968, Bakshi founded his own studio, Ralph's Spot, and headed a low-budget but distinctive animated series for television based on the Spider-Man comic book; new episodes appeared until 1970. After 1970, Bakshi left the world of television and went into full-length animated feature films.
I think it sounds very defensive
Is it just me or does this article have a very defensive and pro-Bakshi attitude to it? Comments? Fred26 10:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- No, it doesn't. (220.127.116.11 15:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC))
Okay, there's a reference in the article that I couldn't find a replacement for. This link: http://www.vapourz.com/frames/contentverbzbode_frame.htm was once operational, and now it appears to have been taken down. The page featured a statement from Mark Bodé, who claims that Bakshi ripped off his father's work. If anyone has a replacement link which shows the same quote, or a similar statement from Mark Bodé, please add it to the article in the appropriate place. Thank you. (Ibaranoff24 16:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC))
There are two user-created images of Bakshi on Wikipedia Commons. Which should be used? This image, or the one that I created (and is currently on the main page)? (Ibaranoff24 21:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC))
- It is a completely acceptable source -- it's Bakshi himself posting on his own forum, not something posted by a fan on an unofficial forum. You lose. Good day, sir. (Ibaranoff24 07:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC))
- Relisted back at WP:GAC. Anon editor cannot review the article, per WP:GAC. — Indon (reply) — 18:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, I agree with the anon editor that posting in forums is not reliable source. The only thing matter of relisting this page back at WP:GAC is the rule at the nomination page that non registered editors cannot review an article. — Indon (reply) — 11:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I second the Indon's concerns about this article's reliability. Anybody can claim to be Ralph Bakshi in an online forum (I have done it myself!). In any case, Wikipedia's policy (Wikipedia:Reliable sources) is clear: Posts to bulletin boards, Usenet, and wikis, or messages left on blogs, should not be used as sources. This is in part because we have no way of knowing who has written or posted them, and in part because there is no editorial oversight or third-party fact-checking. A self-published source is a published source that has not been subject to any form of independent fact-checking, or where no one stands between the writer and the act of publication. It includes personal websites and books published by vanity presses. Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources. Also, the sheer number of references coming from that one source is frightening. And for a man who had had scholarly works, biographies and numerous other publications about him, the overdose of on-line sources and primary sources over off-line sources and secondary sources is very worrying. I know its a pain, but some effort at a library would bring far more reliable sources. Otherwise dubious statements like "This was never Bakshi's intention" (one example of the problems in this article) will never stand up to questioning. That's all for my review. Thanks.
- This is not "anybody claiming to be Ralph Bakshi"...THAT IS RALPH. That is his official website. That is him. The website is completely reliable, and more reliable than any book discussing the director's work. (Ibaranoff24 05:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC))