Talk:Toy Story 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Toy Story 3 has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
February 24, 2014 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know


Image of Woody and the incinerator[edit]

I have to question whether the image of Woody and the incinerator is really appropriate here, especially since there are multiple other fair use images in the article. Saying that the scene uses "special effects, photography, and music to emphasize drama" isn't really saying anything significant, since the same could be said for the climax of pretty much any other animated film. I believe that Wikipedia actually has a limit of two fair use images per article, although I'm not familiar with the exact policy. --Jpcase (talk) 17:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Is anyone actively watching this page? I'll wait a little while longer before doing anything, but unless somebody voices an objection, I'll go ahead and remove the image. --Jpcase (talk) 16:26, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Alright, I've gone ahead and removed the image. If anyone has an objection, please ping me and we can discuss. --Jpcase (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I had the same thoughts when I noticed it a while back - the image seemed unnecessary, and the caption sounded very generic. When I checked the cited source, I saw that it specifically mentioned the incinerator scene in the context of pushing the technology behind the movie, and another editor had previously reverted the image's removal (full disclosure: by an IP, without explanation), so I left it in place. All that being said, the source doesn't exactly support the caption, and it's still too generic to justify the image, so I'm fine with your removal of it. --Fru1tbat (talk) 14:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Change "Positive reviews" to "Critical Acclaim"[edit]

Hi, Toy Story 3 is an amazing film. It is only one of three animated movies to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards. It has been widely lauded as one of the greatest animated films of all time by critics and audiences alike. Rotten Tomatoes has given it a 99% rating, IMDB gave it an 8.4/10 and Metacritic gave it a score of 92%.

I truly find it hard to believe that a film that has been praised and acclaimed by so many different people from all over the world only received positive reviews. I urge wikipedia to change the "positive reviews" at the critical reception section to "Critical Acclaim" or "Universal Critical Acclaim".

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.139.90.82 (talk) 12:34, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The "Critical response" section says that "Toy Story 3 received very positive reviews.", which seems to me to be an appropriately strong statement. The section then goes on to enumerate what "very positive" means. To substitute "universal" is to make the statement too strong, as 99% is not universal. Is "critical acclaim" appropriately and indisputably stronger? Dhtwiki (talk) 20:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

"Universal critical acclaim" would mean that EVERY critic in the world LOVED the film. If this were true (which it isn't), there would be no way to source it. Rotten Tomatoes 99% means 99% of critics (surveyed by RT...not all critics everywhere, of course) gave it better than average reviews (from "Gee, it wasn't bad" to "OMG, this is the greatest film EVRRRRRRR!!!") 1% of critics gave it negative reviews (somewhere between "Most films are better than this" to "Holy crap, that sucks.") That 1% means reviews were not universally positive, let alone "acclaim". As for "very positive", vs. "positive" vs. "critical acclaim", it's a matter of opinion. By "opinion", of course, we mean WP:POV. As a radical suggestion, how about instead of combining what the review aggregators say into a new statement that neither on gives we say what the sources say? In addition to the advantage of not having to arrive at a consensus POV, it is actually verifiable. - SummerPhDv2.0 13:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Trash Truck driver... an adult syd?[edit]

How do you know that the trash truck driver is an adult sid philips? that is never mentioned in the movie, not even the toys mention anything about it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talkcontribs) 21:07, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Toy Story 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Toy Story 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)