Talk:Pixar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pixar article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1, 2

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

WikiProject Companies (Rated GA-Class) Companies Portal This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale. High This article has been rated as high-importance on the assessment scale. San Francisco Bay Area WikiProject     (Rated GA-Class) This article is within the scope of the San Francisco Bay Area WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of San Francisco and the Bay Area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. GA This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. WikiProject Films     (Rated GA-Class) Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. 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. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale. Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film. Additional Information: Related task forces (general): Filmmaking task force WikiProject Animation / American Animation / Pixar       (Rated GA-Class) Animation Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. GA This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject American Animation. (rated as Top importance) This article is supported by the Pixar work group. (with unknown importance) Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	Pixar has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles 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 reassessment.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 21, 2006 Peer review Reviewed February 24, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted April 23, 2008 Good article nominee Listed Current Status: Good article

Contents 1 change in opening sentence? 2 Teaser Trailers 3 cross posting 1906 from Template_talk:Pixar_Animation_Studios 4 Pixar#Acquired_by_Disney 5 GA review

[edit] change in opening sentence?

Now that 1906 has officially been announced (see citation) and we can talk about it openly, it looks like we may need to change the opening paragraph from Pixar Animation Studios is an American computer animation studio to Pixar is an American movie studio that began as a computer animation studio before branching out into live-action films. And we may want to start considering changing major portions of this article for things that are not animation-related. I can't imagine that Bird will include a Pizza Planet delivery truck in earthquake-rattled San Fran. Or could he? SpikeJones (talk) 02:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Teaser Trailers

It says in the teaser trailers area, "Refer to each film's page for more information." But on the pages for the films there isn't much information. Why not? Mollymoon (talk) 12:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, teaser trailers are not encyclopedic. If you have worthwhile information to add to those articles, feel free. SpikeJones (talk) 14:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] cross posting 1906 from Template_talk:Pixar_Animation_Studios

You said "1906 is a CO PRODUCTION only FUNDED by Pixar, so it's not Pixar canon, it is Warner Bros". We agree that 1906 is a co-production between Pixar and a different company. Toy Story was a co-production between Pixar and Disney, yet it is accepted as Pixar canon. You tell me what the difference is between the two. SpikeJones (talk) 03:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pixar#Acquired_by_Disney

I think that the bulleted points at Pixar#Acquired_by_Disney is not useful and will also quickly fail this article for any Featured Article Nominations or Good Article Nominations. Could we please either convert it to prose, or better yet, simply delete it? Because the information is a little excessive and almost reads like a "terms of condition" sheet between the two companies rather than any useful encyclopedic content to most readers. Gary King (talk) 19:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

bulleted points do not automatically fail FA noms. But from the perspective of the article, it does provide information specific to how pixar was incorporated into the disney org, along with the reasoning behind the disney-pixar branding. Prose it, if you would like, but there is reason to include at least some of it herein. SpikeJones (talk) 21:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, but it reads like an SEC filing. I'll see what I can do by the end of today :) Gary King (talk) 21:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs a little work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Well done.

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

• For the Early history section, does Reference 1 cover this sentence ---> "At NYIT, the researchers worked on an experimental film called The Works; it was never released for public viewing"?
• Is there a source for Steve Jobs leaving Apple?
• Same section, "The sale reflected George Lucas' desire to stop the cash flow losses associated with his 7 year research projects associated with new entertainment technology tools, as well as his company's new focus on creating entertainment products rather than tools" needs a source.
• Does Reference 4 cover all in paragraph 4?
• Also, does Reference 5 cover everything for paragraph 5?
• Are there any more sources available to back the information in the Disney and Acquired by Disney section.
• For the locations section, it would be best to add the DVD ref., for all the films that have "Pizza Planet" and "Dinoco", as the cameos the "companies" take in the Pixar films.

1. C. No original research:

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

3. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   "Pixar wanted complete financial freedom", sounds like POV, it would be best for it to be re-written.

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

6. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

All done! Gary King (talk) 00:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you to Gary King for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats on your hard work. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)