Talk:The 50 Greatest Cartoons

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.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Untitled

Link to archived deletion review discussion

Why list "runner-up" films?

Who cares? 97.126.4.237 (talk) 14:20, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah and why not list the actual list? 73.61.44.66 (talk) 07:31, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good question Espngeek (talk) 12:39, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On the surface, this is a most peculiar article. It would appear that the article once presented said list, but along the way it was decided that this violated the author's and publisher's copyright. So, only hints remain. A cartoon aficionado who refers to it will be told that there's a nice book on the subject, but that one can't assess the contents without buying it. Someone should rewrite this, perhaps collecting the top choices as picked by several experts or organizations, and referencing this book as one of the sources.WHPratt (talk) 15:38, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

I am removing the list itself as well as the link to the list. This is obviously copyvio as this is a published copyrighted book from 1994. Moonside 02:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a list of titles of cartoons is not copyvio. If any of the actual content from the book was reproduced here, then yes that would be a violation, but merely relaying the list itself is not.

plattopus^talk 05:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article was previously deleted as a copyright violation and then undeleted at DRV on the condition that the list was excluded. Many people believe these types of lists are copyright violation, but the important point is that it was decided by consensus to exculde the list, so anyone re-adding it is going against the consensus decision. Masaruemoto 02:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a link? That completely goes against logic. A list of cartoon titles can not be copyrighted. There are already MANY articles on Wikipedia that reproduce certain lists (for example, Top 100 film lists, etc) which are not even considered for copyvio.

plattopus^talk 23:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree wth Plattopus, this sounds fishy. --Philip Laurence (talk) 09:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose IMDB has better lawyers,, https://www.imdb.com/list/ls003537469/ Gjxj (talk) 11:30, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removing "trailers" unrelated to book

There may be a lot of great cartoons out there, but this isn't the place to link to them or their trailers, unless they're discussed in this specific book. :) Moonriddengirl 17:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1994 or 2007 and Saved By the Bell or What's Opera Doc?

Why Does the list have (2007) next to it even if the book was written in 1994. Also why is Saved By the Bell number one instead of What's Opera Duck? Which is known to be number one.

Someone seems to be playing games, given that Saved by the Bell isn't even a cartoon. It is most peculiar. Moonriddengirl 01:37, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which animation industry?

"The list itself aimed to be authoritative by taking votes from 1000 people working in the animation industry."

Which animation industry? Judging by the selections, I think that they likely didn't ask an international sample of people but only from North America (or only from the US). If true, this should be mentioned in the article. Esn (talk) 05:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the judges were selected from the Warner Bros staff. Specially those that hated Disney. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.221.97.14 (talk) 04:06, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect link

Old Man of the Mountain redirects to an article about the rock formation, not the cartoon. WHPratt (talk) 16:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why 1960

What is the significance of 1960? It's stated that all the films were released prior to 1960 except several exceptions, but why pick that date over another, say 1970 or 1950? Akademy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.203.55 (talk) 11:12, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because that is really where the drop-off occurs. There were 14 cartoons from the 1950's in the list, the last of those from 1957. Then no more until one cartoon from 1969. PatConolly (talk) 03:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Suggestion - Main Character

Since not all of the titles refer to the main character, I think it would be helpful to include an additional column listing the main character of the piece: Bugs Bunny, Betty Boop, etc. Cfitzpatrick3 (talk) 19:38, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged copyvio

An editor has removed the list of films. This article is pointless with either the list of films, or a link to the list. It would be akin to an article about the Academy Awards, but rather than list the winners, it merely summarized the number of wins by studio. A list of films seems to be fair use to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.113.162 (talk • contribs)

WMF legal has ruled on the issue in the past: reproduction of a list that was compiled by any form of creative effort is a copyright violation. Compromises have been offered, such as only reproducing the top ten, but those were ruled out as well. This doesn't apply to mechanical lists, such as an ordering by sales figures or population, but does apply to lists like these.—Kww(talk) 04:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

citation for runners up list??

weird the article doesn't say where this list comes from. Are the runners up in an appendix to the book or what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjxj (talk • contribs) 02:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]