Talk:Nelvana
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Nelvana has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review. | ||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Filmmaking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to filmmaking. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| A | This article has been rated as A-Class on the assessment scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canadian TV shows, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canadian TV shows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| A | This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Media, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to media. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
Contents |
[edit] older entries
At this point, I think the content of this article's a little one-sided (as far as the list of shows is concerned). At least it's a famous studio—from Canada no less—so why not let it have some history tidbits like what's on WDFA, H-B, Fleischer Studios and Filmation?
Last year, I created the pages on Nelvana's founders: Hirsh, Loubert and Smith. I feel this is the only history Wikipedia has on this studio...
So maybe I'll continue from this point soon. --Slgrandson 02:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Templates?
Maybe because Nelvana's empire has a lot of films and shows under its belt, along with it being a famous animation studio, I feel there should be at least three templates covering the studio and its history:
- {{Nelvana}} for use on the main article and pages on its notable figures;
- {{Nelvana films}} for films which Nelvana made or distributed, or whose production they were involved in;
- {{Nelvana TV shows}} obviously for use on articles concerning series made, in whole or in part, by the company.
I might as well give these three a try next week. --Slgrandson 01:46, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- And yes, I've thought of the possibility of another one: {{Nelvana specials}}. --Slgrandson 03:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Suggested link
As I'm improving this page (per AndyZ's comments at WP:PR/A), I wonder how useful this link will become:
- The Toughest SOBs in Business by John Daly, The Globe and Mail
The last part of this article contains useful info about Michael Hirsh that could come in handy, as the pages on him and his company approach their next edits.
(NB: Contains some mild language at start of page.) --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 19:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Word choices
In the second on the 1990's, a sentence reads: Purists of the original Japanese version criticised the resulting English dub, which was broadcast on Kids WB! in the U.S. market and Teletoon in Canada.
I would say this is a poor word choice, because it's implying a bias. It seems to be saying "While the changes were minimal, some whiney people complained about it." Is it even a neccesary comment for this article? Yes, there was a lot of internet furor, but as a history of the company, it's a very minor note. Meiran 01:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA Pass
It meets the standard. Well written in most areas, although in some, the prose is less than brilliant - for example, the lead sentence doesn't flow too well. A lot more citations are needed (page references for most sentences will be needed, and it'll be much easier for others to verify), and try to find another book to source from. Well done on providing fair use rationale for every image. CloudNine 16:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hah, I was reviewing this while you were typing your review. Anyway, I'll say what I was going to say anyways: There are an immense amount of redlinks in this article. Please, please, please either de-link them or create the articles in question. The middle part of the article has more red links than blue. --PresN 16:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Heh ;) Looking over it, I agree on that point. CloudNine 16:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Categories: Wikipedia good articles | GA-Class Good articles | Wikipedia CD Selection-GAs | Old requests for peer review | WikiProject Filmmaking articles | A-Class Filmmaking articles | A-Class Canadian TV shows-related articles | High-importance Canadian TV shows-related articles | WikiProject Canadian TV shows articles | WikiProject Media
