Jump to content

Talk:Walt Disney

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.197.172.107 (talk) at 17:14, 1 December 2011 (→Awesome!: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:VA

Why is my "BORN IN SPAIN?" section keep being deleted.

i provided a sources . i even put that these are rumors and urban legends! whats going on here? Alex43223 posted that my section was controverial. so why is the" anti semitic controversy" section still on when there is no strong proof that disney was an anti semite? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.79.40.88 (talk) 06:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced, rumours, unencyclopedic, etc, etc, etc TbhotchTalk C. 06:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First you were reverted because you provided no verifiable reference/citation. Next, you were reverted because it appeared that you were citing a forum, which is not a reliable source. However, when I went and looked at the forum, it was an incomplete reprint of an article from The Guardian in 2001. The Guardian is a reliable source. And, the full article is available at The Guardian here. You just have to use it and cite it correctly as follows:

<ref>Tremlett, Giles. “The Spanish Connection,” The Guardian. Friday, 30 November 2001.</ref>

You can cut and paste the following for the reference:

<ref>Tremlett, Giles. “[http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2001/nov/30/artsfeatures The Spanish Connection],” ''The Guardian''. Friday, 30 November 2001.</ref>

For further information on how to properly cite material, see WP:CITE and WP:REFBEGIN.

As for using this material, just be sure to write the section well and to use the article correctly. If you do it well, it could be an interesting addition to the article since it involves the FBI, background checks, illegitimacy, etc. The Guardian article is a fascinatingly interesting article. Good luck! — SpikeToronto 06:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe any portion of this section is being allowed to remain. No real evidence exists to defend the Spanish parents claim. Unlike most folks, I've actually read the Eliot book; it is based entirely on fragmentary bits of hearsay and rumor, combined with wild speculation. Not a single piece of substantive documentation is provided, and no component of the theory stands up to even the most superficial critical examination. I disagree that the Guardian article is a reliable source, as it also offers no legitimate documentation. Unless some real evidence can be cited, there is no place for this fairy tale in a serious encyclopedia. DoctorJoeE (talk) 20:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is presented as rumor and allegations. Secondly, it is not the job of Wikipedia to verify the primary sources used by biographers and journalists. In fact, use of primary sources is strictly proscribed (see WP:PRIMARY). Thirdly, The Guardian is a reliable source inasmuch as it satisfies WP:RS. Whether or not the Guardian reporter got it wrong, is not for us to say. Doing so would violate WP:NOR. Rather, if you have other sources that satisfy WP:RS and refute the allegations, then you should write an additional paragraph at the section of the article, an additional paragraph that is fully referenced with verifiable references/citations. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 20:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So now we have to include unfounded rumors and allegations to articles, using tabloids as reliable sources? Silly me, I thought we were creating an encyclopedia. But I'll be happy to add a paragraph explaining why the Spain rumor is pure speculation. However, if this is the route we're taking, you have a bunch of additional sections you need to add, covering some of the other Disney rumors that have been written up in schizoid rags like the Guardian and thus, apparently, qualify as valid, and Wikipedia-worthy. For starters:
  • that he was born not in Spain, but in Robinson, Illinois
  • that his will designated a substantial bequest to be awarded to the first man who manages to become pregnant
  • that he left a detailed, videotaped set of instructions for his creative team
  • that the Seven Dwarfs, by his direct order, represent seven forms of drug addiction
  • that he was dishonorably discharged from the Army
  • and of course, that he's cryogenically frozen (since the brief mention already in the article is woefully inadequate).
Once you get those done, I'll debunk them too, and by then I'll have a new set of stuff that bad publications have gotten wrong about him over the years, and we can start on those. I hope you don't have any pressing commitments over the next few months. DoctorJoeE (talk) 22:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since when did The Guardian become a tabloid? It’s not The National Enquirer after all! It’s the third highest circulation daily newspaper in the U.K. and, on the Internet, has the second highest readership, after the The New York Times. — SpikeToronto 22:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
E/C I disagree with DoctorJoeE about his view that the Guardian is a tabloid, or that the article in question is unreliable. However I agree with the conclusion that this material doesn't belong in the article. While the Guardian piece is an interesting article on a belief held by a small town, the assertion does no rise to the level of importance such that we should include it here. If anywhere, it should be included in Mojácar, as it is more notable in regard to that topic than to this one. DoctorJoeE is correct that there are too many rumors and speculations about Disney to include them all.   Will Beback  talk  22:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rumor has it??? This is along the lines of a certain actor who rumor has it needed a gerbil removed from his azz. Please create one of those shat sub articles and title it "Rumors about Disney" and knock your self out. --Threeafterthree (talk) 23:07, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder how the rumor mongers explain that his brother Roy O. Disney and his nephew Roy E. Disney looked reasonably similar to Walt. Or especially that Walter looks sufficiently like his parents.[1] Unless they all came from that same Spanish village. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And Snopes[2] riddles that one author's theory with a hail of logic bullets. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<--Tb, Bugs, Dr. Joe, Will--those are the prime reasons I removed the section in the first place. When the reference to the Guardian was added the game changed a little bit, and I thought that Spike's edits made for a more balanced text. But I personally feel that this is giving UNDUE weight to one individual article reporting a bunch of sangria-infused gossip, and I would not object to it being cut--that The Guardian is usually a reliable source has nothing to do with it (Spike is right, of course--it is reliable, but not everything printed in a reliable source is automatically to be included). Drmies (talk) 02:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Antisemitic" quote

The primary subject of that one source is the totally bogus idea that Disney was born to a Spanish couple. That casts the entire column in doubt, hence it is not trustworthy as a source. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Maybe so, but it's still in a reliable source. If you want to cut it, though, I suggest you cut the entire paragraph; if you add a note in the appropriate section which says that the MPAPAI were a bunch of antisemites, that would be appreciated. I personally don't care, esp. since there isn't that much coverage and UNDUE always lurks around the corner, and in all honesty, I pursued it because I thought it was a striking quote in a rather not so exciting article. Drmies (talk) 02:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • If that piece of hack research is an example of their journalism, I question that publication's value as a "reliable" source. Regardless, even if the quote is true (and keep in mind the agenda of that column is to slam Disney), the primary topic remains that bogus Spanish connection, which is a way of slipping it back into the article. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that all should just be removed from this section: Look at the first line: "Disney was long rumored to be anti-Semitic during his lifetime" If we can include rumors in personal profiles can we add a bunch to Obama's page? Maybe one about his SS number being from Connecticut that was once used by another person before him? I think I'll go and add that now since rumors are obviously allowed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.102.219.239 (talk) 04:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DoctorJoeE on Mojarca

Yes its true that there are other rumors that are OBVIOUSLY not true like Disney being frozen and being awarded the first male to become pregnant. The point is those rumors dont sound credible and are completely ridiculous. The reason why i only put the spanish rumor is because it was the only rumor that sounded earthly possible considering that there is no evidence that walt disney was born in chicago since there is no record of his birth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.79.40.88 (talk) 00:47, 13 October 2010 (UTC) --184.79.40.88 (talk) 00:52, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no evidence that he was born in Spain, either; and as snopes points out, the author had to make some seriously illogical leaps to try to string his theory together. All the available evidence supports a midwestern birth. Plus, this is not a very well-known rumor, and it's not wikipedia's place to promote rumor-mongering. The cryogenic myth is much more widely known, so it merits mention here. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest i really dont know if walt was spanish or not. he did have an olive complexion and features of an Andalusian. I read one time that when Disney was asked if he was spanish he would smile and replied quien sabe. meaning he DIDN'T deny it. Salvador Dali was even convinced that walt was a Spaniard and they were friends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.79.40.88 (talk) 17:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you account for Walt looking like his "adoptive" father, Elias Disney? Also, since you present no sources for those comments, I'm assuming you made them up. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah right, if i cited them it wouldnt change anything. you people would say they are unreliable resources lol. as for elias looking like walt. i cant say they resemble each other. i saw pics of elias when he was old.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.79.40.88 (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was Walt an atheist?

Was Walt an atheist? Several sites claim so. I consider that a refreshing possibility, at least, even though I am not one mhyself (I am a polytheist). But if so, why hide the fact? My big problem with this article on Walt is the title "Walt Disney the Person" It tells us very little about him as a person. I suggest it be retitled "Walt Disney; the Career and Public Image". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.89.134.128 (talk) 19:46, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've never read anything to suggest that Disney was an atheist. Gabler and Barrier never suggest anything of the sort, although it's evident that Walt was not a deeply religious man and did not regularly attend church. Disney's statement on faith is pretty generic and nonsectarian, but it is not the confession of an atheist. Uncle Dick (talk) 03:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On this subject, what about the paragraph entitled "Christian Ethics Questions Raised?" Is this paragraph necessary at all? And if it is, shouldn't the claims of atheism be in there too? I vote for removing the entire paragraph, as it contributes nothing of substance, and will be the first obvious target if we ever submit this article for "good" or higher status. Thoughts? DoctorJoeE (talk) 02:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since there has been no further discussion on this topic, I vote once again that we strike this paragraph. I have revisited all the authoritative references (Gabler, Barrier, etc.) and none of them even raise the question, let alone discuss it. IMHO this topic falls into the same category as the "born in Spain" thing, which was finally deleted by consensus, thank Goodness. It's unencyclopedic, and frankly none of anybody's business. Let's get rid of it. Cheers, DoctorJoeE (talk) 14:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Done. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 15:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Racism

Why isn't there anything about how racist he was? There is a ton of proof, look at pretty much every film they have ever put together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.59.17.234 (talk) 03:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources, man. We need sources. Of course, there aren't any sources because your claim cannot be proven. Ethnic caricatures in Song of the South and Fantasia are discussed on the articles for those films and don't have much to do with Walt himself. Uncle Dick (talk) 07:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is indeed clear evidence that Walt Disney had racist tendencies, and I am not referring to the characters in Disney movies. For a long time racial minorities were banned from Disneyland. Walt Disney also expressed his anti-Semitic beliefs several times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sepmor (talk • contribs) 17:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What clear evidence? His company was behind plenty of anti-Nazi cartoons during the 1940s and while Disney did not have many Jewish employees, some that were Jewish like Maurice Rapf have defended him and specifically have stated that he was not an anti-semite. RG (talk) 19:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would also love to see documentation that "racial minorities were banned from Disneyland." That's a libelous statement. DoctorJoeE (talk) 02:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly biased source

The article quotes Schweizer, Peter. Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty-Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism. Doubleday, New York. 2002. ISBN 0-385-50471-3 as its source for the contention that one of Disney's employees was a Russian spy. The title seems to indicate a particularly biased view of history. And its lack of on-line accessibility makes it unclear what the book's source for such a claim is. 97.80.156.59 (talk) 20:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mickey Mouse

Just something I noticed in passing - the second paragraph duplicates the information in the first regarding the voicing of the character. Worse, the given dates are contradictory. I'd fix it but I don't know which is correctTriumFant (talk) 00:22, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Walt Disney birth

I wonder why there is nothing written about the Spanish origin of Walt Disney. There was an interested article written in USA by an American journalist in 2000 about the origin of Walt Disney, unfortunately I can't remember the name of the magazine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.66.87 (talk) 16:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was covered farther up this page. There is no credible evidence for that story. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:51, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

response to walt disney birth

it could be true. even though there is no evidence ,yet there is no evidence on both sides for the people who say that walt was born in chicago. plus this is the only legend (out of all the disney myths) that actually had some investigation done. here are a few videos i found on youtube that are pretty interesting. this vid shows the 2 photos that the guardian article mentioned bearing a photo of disney and the unknown man that has a strong resemblance to walt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKGk3ckLWpg

the vid is in spanish but just watch the vid from 0:12-0:15 and see what i meant.

this other vid is pretty good. it has jones talk about disney and the mojacar connection.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-ztCenNf2c —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.79.40.88 (talk) 05:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was just another make believe rumor that was started by a Spanish magazine called Primer Plano during World War II in order to promote Spanish importance. I suggest you read this book which dismisses the rumor as a wild claim. RG (talk) 00:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's more proof that this was just a hoax from that Spanish magazine: Walt Disney: The Triumph of the American Imagination By Neal Gabler. RG (talk) 01:04, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just keep wondering why Disney in particular is a perennial victim of these sorts of hoaxes, either trying to self-glorify by association, to indict by association, or make up completely bogus contentions (usually something to do with his being a closet evil person). Just a question, how many of folks here actually saw Disney on TV? PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 06:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is because he's such a household name, I mean you can go anywhere in the world and people will know who Walt Disney is, and people know that a cheap way to make a buck is to fabricate some false, outrageous claim about him. RG (talk) 03:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how the two books you've presented prove that walt disney wasn't born in spain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.79.40.88 (talk) 02:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps our anon IP can give it a rest. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 15:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Amen. He wasn't. End of story. DoctorJoeE (talk) 16:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's relevant here isn't that he wasn't born in Spain; rather that he had his origins investigated and that he was told he had been. That's notable. MartinSFSA (talk) 11:41, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Except that it wasn't "investigated", it was made up, according to Gabler and other RS. The Eliot book is based entirely on fragmentary bits of hearsay and rumor, combined with wild speculation. Not a single piece of substantive documentation is provided, and no component of the theory stands up to even the most superficial critical examination.
I suppose the argument can be made that it is "notable" in the sense that the rumor comes up a couple of times a year, and some folks seem to believe it, so it couldn't hurt to mention it in the article *as a rumor*, accompanied by debunking from RS. After all, we have included the anti-Semite rumors and their debunking by Gabler -- although anti-Semitism is a bit more serious an issue than place of birth. DoctorJoeE (talk) 17:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for Walt being Christian?

Though Walt's Wikiquotes mention reverence for God much, and we even saw Snow White and Gepetto both kneeling at bedside and praying aloud, I've never run across explicit evidence that Walt was Christian. While this would please me very much, can someone please verify this with a reliable source? Thanks. ObiWanBillKenobi (talk) 04:15, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We've been through this more than once. (For latest dialog, see "Was Walt an atheist?" above.) I continue to maintain that it's unencyclopedic, and frankly none of anybody's business, to speculate about an article subject's religious beliefs, unless those beliefs are relevant to the article, and in this case they clearly are not. Cheers, DoctorJoeE (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Niavaran palace library (7).jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Niavaran palace library (7).jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Mattheviewer, 12 June 2011

The section DISNEY ANIMATION TODAY is missing a key fact which is listed on the Wikipedia page for Walt Disney Animation Australia, or Disney Toon Studios:

"On July 25, 2005, Disney announced that it was closing DisneyToon Studios Australia in October 2006, after 17 years of existence."

this fact should be included within the DISNEY ANIMATION TODAY section of the WALT DISNEY article as Disney Animation Australia was an important overseas studio for Disney, creating a number of sequels, the last being CINDERELLA III.

Mattheviewer (talk) 03:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your request. However, this is the incorrect location for such information. This article is about Walt Disney the person; while it does describe some information about his company, that information does not go into great enough detail to warrant inclusion of information such as this. I have instead added your information to The Walt Disney Company. Quinxorin (talk) 00:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 27 October 2011

He also met Ms. Nestor at a Math Convention. She helped him come up with the idea of the bugs bunny. Ariboosalis (talk) 04:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um, no. Bugs Bunny was created by Tex Avery at Warner Brothers. DoctorJoeE (talk) 04:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ariboosalis do you have a source for that? --Jnorton7558 (talk) 15:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome!

I didn't know his signature looked just like the Disney logo. That's so cool. Thanks, Wikipedia :) 71.197.172.107 (talk) 17:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Walt_Disney&oldid=463524317"