Talk:My Scene
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Photos
[edit]Thank you for putting up the My Scene logo and concept art. I think we should have photos with the older My Scene face and the newer ones (their eyes are more slanted now) to compare the facemold change, and to also compare them with the Bratz dolls.
I also would like to see photos of the dolls next to their descriptions if possible. I'm a new user to this website and am still trying to find my place.. lol.
It is also interesting to know that the Fasshion Fever dolls have a new body for 2007, and this may apply to the My Scene line in future lines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MaoTao (talk • contribs) 11:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
POV?
[edit]Is it me, or does this page seem to be against My Scene dolls? 24.63.3.115 20:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Against My Scene
[edit]No, I don't think so. People vandalise it (mainly Bratz fans I believe) and they are the people who dislike the dolls.
(Maoo 23:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)) Mao
It looks like that trademark infringement lawsuit criticism isn't good enough to prevent vandalism and writing nonsenses. And by the way, I think those lawsuit events should have more details, and some people have really confused between the Bratz and My Scene dolls. In some videos uploaded by the users of YouTube video sharing site said to My Scene dolls as Bratz dolls. And Bratz fans vandalize the article? I don't really think so. However I read at the forums on 4Kids TV's website, where Bratz fans really hate the MyScene line. Or maybe ever since MyScene has been made by the same company as Barbie (Mattel), maybe little girls vandalize it, like as a British study made last year, which says about their feelings of Barbie dolls. And MyScene could be named as the teen-life version of Barbie, it can be happening that these girls have the same things, as the 47-year-old doll. Respond, if I am wrong. 86.101.211.226 20:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Long list of products
[edit]As I see the article of MyScene, it has the list of the line's products, which is becoming too long. Would the list have its own article, just like the list of the rival Bratz products? 86.101.211.226 14:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
The logo....
[edit]...oddly reminds me of the MySpace logo...am i the only one who's noticed?75.26.166.42 04:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Kennedy
[edit]You really think she's named after the airport, not the President it was named after?? Seems odd.
Fair use rationale for Image:Logo23.gif
[edit]
Image:Logo23.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Logo23.gif
[edit]Image:Logo23.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Why Did They Replace Barbie With A Look-A-Like?
[edit]Honestly, all they did was give her a new name. Why confuse kids like that? 67.184.223.232 00:18, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Stuff
[edit]The sad thing about this article is that it's probably full of a'lot of legit information.....but it's very poorly sourced/cited.....so a' lot of it needs to go. I did some basic copy editing, but I need to do a' lot more!! Still working on it.....please leave up GOCE inuse template. Buddpaul (talk) 00:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- Y'know....the sad thing is.....(and I usually don't get into this kind of stuff when I do copy editing)....but there's so much stuff here that's TOTALLY unsourced that I'm going to have to take a'lot of it out.Buddpaul (talk) 00:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- I found a cite for My Scene being launched to rival Bratz, which is probably the most significant fact about them. Most of the material in this article should probably be deleted per WP:NOT (or WP:FANCRUFT, to be more to the point.) There really isn't a whole lot here that is actually worth a copy edit polish. People seem to have slapped a lot of random maintenance tags on this article over the years, but the copy edit tag looks premature, at best. Siawase (talk) 12:52, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- I totally agree.....I did the very best I could to copy edit properly....but there's still about 87 pounds of stuff wrong with this article. Cleaned up to the best of my ability short of a monster re-write. I'm moving on. Buddpaul (talk) 14:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- I found a cite for My Scene being launched to rival Bratz, which is probably the most significant fact about them. Most of the material in this article should probably be deleted per WP:NOT (or WP:FANCRUFT, to be more to the point.) There really isn't a whole lot here that is actually worth a copy edit polish. People seem to have slapped a lot of random maintenance tags on this article over the years, but the copy edit tag looks premature, at best. Siawase (talk) 12:52, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Excessive lists
[edit]I removed the product list and the lists of minor characters (special editions and pets). Most of the significant aspects of this material is already covered in the prose sections. In my opinion lists like these are not compatible with the What Wikipedia is not guidelines, in particular, Wikipedia is not a directory/catalog and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. If some significant aspect of the releases are now missing from the article, in my opinion it would be better to re-add it in prose form, so it is accessible to the general audience Wikipedia is intended for, and not just fans looking for complete collectors lists. Siawase (talk) 02:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on My Scene. 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/20061109183605/http://promomagazine.com/news/mgaent_mattel_041905/ to http://promomagazine.com/news/mgaent_mattel_041905/
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) 21:47, 9 February 2018 (UTC)