Talk:Lightyear (film): Difference between revisions
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
:The content is already in the article and it is most certainly not a controversy--[[User:CreecregofLife|CreecregofLife]] ([[User talk:CreecregofLife|talk]]) 02:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC) |
:The content is already in the article and it is most certainly not a controversy--[[User:CreecregofLife|CreecregofLife]] ([[User talk:CreecregofLife|talk]]) 02:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC) |
||
::Including non-PG content in a kids film absolutely is controversial, which is probably why it was noted in several articles around the world. Not sure how I missed the paragraph. Missed the tree for the forest? [[User:人族|人族]] ([[User talk:人族|talk]]) 00:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC) |
::Including non-PG content in a kids film absolutely is controversial, which is probably why it was noted in several articles around the world. Not sure how I missed the paragraph. Missed the tree for the forest? [[User:人族|人族]] ([[User talk:人族|talk]]) 00:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC) |
||
:::It's not non-PG content. The reason it has articles is because it's ''positive representation'', and not controversy. In fact, it was in the midst of Chapek being under fire for donating to a Florida anti-LGBTQ legislation. [[User:CreecregofLife|CreecregofLife]] ([[User talk:CreecregofLife|talk]]) 03:28, 27 March 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:28, 27 March 2022
This article was nominated for deletion on 29 October 2021. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
83 million views
I believe it should be mentioned that at this time, the Lightyear trailer uploaded by the Pixar Youtube channel has 8.3 million views. The 83 million views that is sourced in the Hollywood Deadline article is erroneous. 100.2.137.190 (talk) 05:56, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned references in Lightyear (film)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Lightyear (film)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Soundtrack":
- From Brave (2012 film): "Sounds Of The Highlands; Disney-Pixar's "Brave" Transports Moviegoers to Ancient Scotland with Oscar-Nominated Composer Patrick Doyle, Plus Performers Julie Fowlis and Birdy (with Mumford & Sons)" (Press release). Walt Disney Records. May 21, 2012. Retrieved May 22, 2012.
- From Turning Red: Burlingame, Jon (September 7, 2021). "'Black Panther' Score Headed to Hollywood Bowl for Live-to-Picture Performance". Variety. Retrieved September 7, 2021.
- From The Lion King (2019 film): Chitwood, Adam (June 24, 2019). "'The Lion King' Soundtrack Details Revealed; Includes New Elton John Song". Collider. Archived from the original on June 24, 2019. Retrieved June 24, 2019.
- From List of Pixar films: "Ludwig Göransson to Score Pixar's 'Turning Red'". Film Music Reporter. July 14, 2021. Retrieved July 15, 2021.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:47, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Homosexual Content Controversy?
Should the controversy over Pixar's decision to include homosexual content in children's entertainment be covered? 人族 (talk) 00:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- The content is already in the article and it is most certainly not a controversy--CreecregofLife (talk) 02:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Including non-PG content in a kids film absolutely is controversial, which is probably why it was noted in several articles around the world. Not sure how I missed the paragraph. Missed the tree for the forest? 人族 (talk) 00:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's not non-PG content. The reason it has articles is because it's positive representation, and not controversy. In fact, it was in the midst of Chapek being under fire for donating to a Florida anti-LGBTQ legislation. CreecregofLife (talk) 03:28, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- Including non-PG content in a kids film absolutely is controversial, which is probably why it was noted in several articles around the world. Not sure how I missed the paragraph. Missed the tree for the forest? 人族 (talk) 00:09, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class Animation articles
- Low-importance Animation articles
- Start-Class Animation articles of Low-importance
- Start-Class American animation articles
- Low-importance American animation articles
- American animation work group articles
- Start-Class Computer animation articles
- Low-importance Computer animation articles
- Computer animation work group articles
- Start-Class Pixar articles
- Unknown-importance Pixar articles
- Pixar work group articles
- WikiProject Animation articles
- Start-Class Disney articles
- Low-importance Disney articles
- Start-Class Disney articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject Disney articles
- Start-Class film articles
- Start-Class American cinema articles
- American cinema task force articles
- Start-Class Animated films articles
- Unknown-importance Animated films articles
- Animated films work group articles
- WikiProject Film articles