Talk:Mother Gothel

Mother Gothel 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.
Review: October 4, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Disney Mid‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Animation Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Tangled#Franchise|Tangled: The Musical]] The anchor (#Franchise) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mother Gothel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 05:22, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, this article should first relate to the original Rapunzel character by the Brothers Grimm, and the Disney Character be mentioned afterwards or be given a specific character page stating her to be THE Disney version. I think it is a big must for all Wiki users to be fed correct information, and not let big companies over-shadow that which they took and used what was there before their creation... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oceanblueeyes87 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. — Cirt (talk) 05:22, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Yes, the article is both well written and succinct, with good structure throughout.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lede intro sect conforms to guidelines both with regards to size and scope.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Nominator did a good job citing the article throughout to appropriate sources.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Yes, in-line citations are provided for directly expressed facts and quotes in multiple locations throughout the article, these are easily checked and verified.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No issues here, article relies upon secondary sources throughout.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Covers multiple aspects of the subject matter in well organized manner.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Indeed, article is focused on a narrow scope about one character from one film, but does so in a way that is most educational.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	The article is presented in a neutral manner, giving sourced statements from multiple viewpoints and perspectives.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Some minor IP concerns to look out for in article edit history, looks like the nominator is on top of these for potential additions of unsourced info, etc. Talk page shows no outstanding major conflicts.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	3 images used, one with appropriate fair use rationale hosted locally on en.wikipedia, and two on Wikimedia Commons with appropriate image information pages and licensing.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are all directly relevant to material discussed in the body text.
	7. Overall assessment.	Good job overall on a most interesting topic about a female fictional character that is well covered in secondary source discussion.

Wowww well that was quick and painless. Thank you so much!!!--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IP Editor changing the info box

As many of the regular editors to this page are aware, an IP has been changing the infobox to claim that this particular character was created by the Brothers Grimm. It seems to be good faith, judging by their other edits, but it's been reverted three times by three different editors (including me). Could this person please stand up and give a rationale for these edits? There is already a consensus in place, and ignoring it means we will have to revert the next edit adding this to the info box. If this continues like this, we may have to take further steps against your apparent (note the word apparent) vandalism. We'd all like to avoid that, so if you could explain your edits so that we can discuss it, that would make everybody happy, Luthien22 (talk) 20:48, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not a witch

An IP editor using different IPs from same place (likely the person as in above comment) is adding the false information that this version of Mother Gothel is a sorceress and a witch. The article goes into a fair amount of well-referenced detail in the § Conception section of why the creators made that decision: "A departure from traditional Disney villains, Mother Gothel is not a witch or a sorceress. Because she lacks supernatural powers, the character is forced to rely solely on her wit, charm, intellect and charisma, a conscious decision made by Greno and Howard". Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:13, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ursula is not mentioned by critics

This "Ursula from The Little Mermaid (1989)" has been removed from the lead section [1] as no critics listed in the article stated "However, some critics felt that Gothel was simply too passive" and listed Ursula as an exemplar. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:50, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Potential source

Here is an interesting source for this article here for a more sympathetic reading of the character. Might be helpful in further crafting/revising the "Reception" section. Aoba47 (talk) 04:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mother Gothel. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141213001851/http://www.littlewhitelies.co.uk/theatrical-reviews/tangled-13713 to http://www.littlewhitelies.co.uk/theatrical-reviews/tangled-13713

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mother Gothel. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:54, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mother Gothel. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140813181827/http://www.disneystore.com/mother-gothel-classic-doll-12/mp/1355026/1000259/ to http://www.disneystore.com/mother-gothel-classic-doll-12/mp/1355026/1000259/

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:05, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mother Gothel. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 July 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 17:55, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mother Gothel → Gothel (Tangled) – Gothel redirects to Rapunzel. I request that the title be changed to avoid ambiguity. 107.0.6.250 (talk) 12:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Current title is already a good one per WP:NATDIS - "Using an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources, albeit not as commonly as the preferred-but-ambiguous title". Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:14, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Should Gothel redirect to this page? --73.100.199.220 (talk) 17:29, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gothel should probably be a disambiguation page that points to both articles. Wait for this move discussion to be resolved first. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Godmother" in German?

According to Kay Turner, author of the book Transgressive Tales: Queering the Grimms, "Gothel" means "godmother" in German.

This is sourced, but I can't find anywhere easily accessible any indication that "Gothel" (or "Göthel"/"Goethel") is or ever was anything but a name in German. Since such a thing should be fairly easy to find, I suspect this may fall under WP:FRINGE? Twin Bird (talk) 09:27, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]