Talk:How the Grinch Stole Christmas! (TV special)

Image copyright problem with Image:GrinchSpecial.PNG

The image Image:GrinchSpecial.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Toonopedia

@Walter Görlitz: Hi, Walter. I understand your concern asking whether Don Markstein's Toonopedia is a "notable" source at your edit here. I wanted to address that.

Leaving aside that it's notable insofar as having a longstanding Wikipedia article, Don Markstein's Toonopedia more importantly fulfills the Wikipedia definition of reliable source for self-published work: "[I]ts author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications." The late Markstein was editor of Comics Revue, published by a party other than himself, from 1984 to 1987 and then again 1992 to 1996, and he edited the 1992 book A Prince Valiant Companion. Per the respected third-party source Editor & Publisher:

For journalists researching stories, these online resources can be golden. A case in point is Don Markstein's simply amazing Toonopedia, a vast repository of information about comics, past and future. Now, honestly, unless you're a comic book collector or a cartoonist, you're probably not going to put this on your frequent filer's list. However, if you're working on a story that deals with pop culture, that focuses on a particular time period, or that touches on classic villains and superheroes, Don just might become your own personal hero. The site serves up illustrated entries on nearly every comic strip, cartoon, and comic book you can think of, from the world famous Blondie and Peanuts to those ultra-obscure strips, such as The Pie-Face Prince of Old Pretzelburg.

Additionally, Markstein and Toonopedia are recognized as authoritative by animation / comics historians including Mark Evanier here, who said Markstein and his wife/collaborator were "responsible for much scholarship and research about the field of cartoons," and that, "We engaged in some friendly e-mailed debates about some of his facts but I never questioned Don's devotion to getting things right." Judging by the care we share for good research, I'm sure you know that, obviously, no source is perfect. That said, Jerry Beck calls Toonopedia "indispensible" [1], and in an obit he quoted

• Animato! magazine founder Harry McCracken (now a technology editor-at-large for Time), saying he was "happy to see Toonopedia succeed and bring his work to a large audience", and
• another respected author / historian, Fred Patten, who considered Markstein "a rare expert scholar" in the field and said he (Patten) himself "would go to his Toonopedia website for accurate and informative details about cartoon-related facts."

I believe the EL could be restore under WP:RS, but I'm hoping you read this first and that we might be of like minds. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 21:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Feel free to restore it. The article you linked to doesn't seem notable and I would be prepared to challenge it for additional sources, but feel free to restore it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. As it happens, the Toonopedia cite proved handy to verify the airdate, which hadn't been cited. Also, the WP:LEAD should summarize the article and not include information not found elsewhere in the article, so i took some of the lead and created a new section, "Background." Additionally, I trimmed some wordiness and some tangential stuff about Rankin/Bass and other specials, plus some WP:DATED vios.--Tenebrae (talk) 06:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

References

Looks good - thanks Tenebrae! Ckruschke (talk) 19:41, 12 February 2016 (UTC)Ckruschke

Songs

In the section "Plot", the line: "The Grinch (voiced by Boris Karloff, other than in the songs, which are sung, uncredited, by Thurl Ravenscroft)" is misleading. Ravenscroft only sang "You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch", not the other songs included on the soundtrack (Trim Up The Tree, Welcome Christmas, etc) which were M-G-M Orchestra and Chorus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maineartists (talk • contribs) 02:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Seems pretty straightforward to me in both the plot and the soundtrack sections. Ckruschke (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Ckruschke

Combine content

Before I attempt to combine content, I thought it best to start a discussion here first regarding the double-statement in sections: Plot and Soundtracks. An editor recently removed a short reference to Ravenscroft in the opening line: The Grinch (voiced by Boris Karloff, other than in the song "You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch", which was sung, uncredited, by Thurl Ravenscroft and extended the section further down by stating practically the same information later given in the Soundtrack section regarding Ravenscroft's uncredited involvement. How many times should this be mentioned ... and where? Furthermore, the wording: "Interspersed throughout the special" is misleading, as that implies that the song's 7 verses are sung at various moments throughout the 26 minute program; which is not true. It is sung only during the absconding scene. Given this and the double statement of fact in 2 sections, I recommend combining content to the Soundtrack section since no actual "character" sings within the storyline for the song "You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch" to be included within the plot section. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 02:01, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Agree. Ckruschke (talk) 15:20, 7 October 2016 (UTC)Ckruschke

Any other thoughts or comments regarding this matter before I go in and combine? Maineartists (talk) 23:36, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Move

Why was this article moved? What indication is that that this is the COMMONNAME (by far)? It's not at Rotten Tomatoes or the Deadline.com article. Karloff's britannica.com entry uses the short name, as does their article on Dr. Seuss. IMDB's entries (all of them) omit the author's name, while Amazon seems conflicted and uses both (both without is more common) and AllMovie.com lists the 1965 version without whila 1957 version has it. Can't do an ngram since the title has more than five words. So I'd be happy to know how it was determined that this was the COMMONNAME, and it had better be by far or we should have a discussion about the move. Walter Görlitz (talk) 09:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

A simple google search makes it clear. Also, not sure where you got your Rotten Tomatoes info? Anyway, besides this being a clear cut COMMONNAME case, the person who moved this article without discussion was only interested in the official title. The article should be moved back regardless, and if anyone has a problem with it, a requested move should then be initiated. — Film Fan 10:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@Film Fan: I did do a simple Google search, which is why it was not clear and why I asked. You provided one link. It supports the title, How the Grinch Stole Christmas!. I'm prepared to move it back but would like to hear from @Status: first, but as that editor made the move in 2012 and is technically retired, think it's save to move it back over the current redirect. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:02, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done:-Winged Blades^Godric 14:26, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

Resolved

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:14, 3 May 2018 (UTC)