Interlanguage links

Hello, does anybody mind if I add interwiki language links to a French version (fr.pixar) of this wiki on which I have made a bit of work ? It won't change anything except a link at the bottom of the page...--Gray Catbird 17:11, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

Some pages like Toy Story 3 already have a language link. If you add new ones, will they be right next to any existing ones? If so, I think it's fine. If you can, add one to a page that already has a language link so we can see what it will look like (Toy Story, Toy Story 2). Thanks. --Jeff (talk) 19:20, March 11, 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I added a link to the Toy Story 3 page. Yes, the links appear in the same way as that japanese one, as you can now see. What do you think ?... Gray Catbird 21:06, March 11, 2012 (UTC)
Yea, it looks good, thanks. --Jeff (talk) 22:26, March 11, 2012 (UTC)
Thank you ! Gray Catbird 14:24, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

Crew categories

Sigh, I've fought this for quite a while but I think it's time - I'd like to see what the rest of you think about adding some more crew categories. So far we're pretty limited - Directors, Producers, Animators. And my idea is that we keep it limited and not try to fit everyone into specific categories. But so far anyone in an artist or animation type position has usually ended up in the Animators category, which isn't right. I think we could at least have a few more:

  • Artist (could be for any general artist like layout, painting, production, etc)
  • Story Artist (sub-category of Artist. There seems to be a good distinction of crew that fall into this category)
  • Editors (I guess this already exists)
  • Technical Directors
  • Sound

I'm definitely open to other ideas and organizational structure. I don't want anything complicated, just a few well-defined categories beyond our very limited current structure! One question I have is that most of our current categories are action-type - Animators, Producers, Writers, etc. Artists fits nicely, and so does Editors. But what about something like Sound? Sound Designers or Sound Engineers? Are there other ones people like? What about miscellaneous production crew? Or a category for all the supervisors and managers? Thanks. --Jeff (talk) 03:25, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

New layout feedback

I'd like to gather comments on what everyone thinks about the new layout. Please, this is not meant as a rant zone - I'd like to keep it constructive. I dislike change as much as the next person but I think with time we'll get use to it and probably like it. I will remove inappropriate comments/language, etc.

So here's the start, feel free to add your pain points, questions, etc. Hopefully some of these things can be resolved within the new layout. I will see if I can get one of the wikia staff to take a look at the list and see what can be done.

Thanks. --Jeff (talk) 04:20, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Hey all! Thanks to Jeff for starting a constructive discussion to help figure the ins and outs of the new skin. If you don't know, this is part of a major redesign that is rolling out on all of Wikia's wikis. It's been discussed at length ont he Staff Blog, so I won't bother repeating here. Feel free to follow the link if you're interested in the all the details. However, I can help address this wiki and help the community here make sense of the changes. I'll post replies the bullet points below. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
I've responded to User:Raptr's problems with a certain page at Talk:Cars Die-Cast Linescarecroe@fandom 18:45, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • Fixed width is bad. It's a pain editing a page when the text scrolls off the side of the page. It also makes the pages needlessly longer.

Fixed width provides a format that makes the wiki the same size and layout for everyone, regardless of the size of your screen. This is important for a number of reasons; I'll name the main two. For Wikia, it helps sell ad space so we can keep the site going. For editors, it's essential in designing pages so that no one ends up seeing broken pages due to the differences in browser types, screen size, etc. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Not sure I understand this one. Ad space was being sold before and it wasn't fixed width. Why can't it be a user choice or a wiki choice to have fixed width or not? Fixed width really messed up a page I've been working on for a long time, the Cars Die-Cast Line. - RaptorWiki 18:36, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
  • Where are all the links that use to be in the left-hand column? I.e. "Upload an image", "Special pages", "Recent Changes", "What links here", etc.
"What links here" is under "My Tools" in the bottom right corner. "Upload an Image" is now "Add a Photo", the blue button on the right side of every page. "Recent Changes" is now the "Wiki Activity" button in the top right corner, below the "Log Out" link. Plus, some "Recent Activity" is shown on every page above the the "Add a Photo" area. It would be nice if these were grouped together, and if the "Add a Photo" button didn't have thumbnail images below it. Looks messy. And I don't believe the "Recent Activity" needs to be shown on every page. - RaptorWiki 12:11, October 23, 2010 (UTC)
  • When editing a page, the red "preview" line is at the top of the page where it's not obvious. It should be right above the edit box.

The red bar is a fairly prominent standout on the page. For wikis with a lot of red, it might be prudent to change the color, but it works as designed given our color layout here. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • After deleting a page (or at least a category), it doesn't have the usual links like "pages still linking here"

I must admit, I'm not familiar with that old feature. After I've deleted a page, I've always manually gone back and used What Links Here to clean up and dead links. After deleting a page now, you're redirected to the main page. I'm unsure of the reasoning behind this; I've just been using my back button to get to the What Links Here tool in MyTools. If you can be more specific about other features that used to be in the space visible after deleting a page, I'll put together a list and find out what we can do about improving this. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • Can't edit from as many locations on the page any longer.

Do you mean being able to edit using header edit links? They're still there, next to the text of the header accompanied by a pencil icon. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • Can't distinguish between different "headers" (?) any longer (breaking up by using differing amounts of "=" signs).

Headers are still marked using two equal signs on both sides of the text. Sub-headings are also still available using three equal signs, and show up smaller on the page than main headers. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Please take a look at a page I've been working on for nearly 2 years, the Cars Die-Cast Line page. Sub-headings with 3 or more equal signs are not easy to distinguish or not distinguishable at all. Look at the different levels of sub-headings. They were fairly noticeable with the old skin. - RaptorWiki 18:36, November 1, 2010 (UTC)
  • There is "dead space" on the right side of the pages, beneath the bar on the right side. It continues the whole way down an article to the bottom. This space should be able to be reclaimed for use.

This is a common piece of feedback about the new skin. The design team is still figuring out how best to use that space. Any news on that will likely be posted in the Staff Blog when it's available. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • I miss the left sidebar. It made the wiki so much easier to navigate.

All the navigation links in the left sidebar are now at the top of the page. All the toolbar links from the left sidebar are now in MyTools at the bottom of the page. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • The other skin seemed more personalized.

Editors can still personalize the tools you most use while editing the wiki. Just click on the MyTools menu and access the Edit link at the bottom. A box will come up where you can customize the links that appear by default for you. In my personal Tools menu, I've added Upload Multiple Photos and Special Pages because I use those a lot. As for personalizing navigation links, that's being considered by the design team right now. If you'd like to request this as a feature, feel free to submit your inquiry via Special:Contact. — scarecroe@fandom 02:22, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

  • No link for "Add a Photo" on the pages where a photo is being reviewed. Always use this to upload multiple photos in a row. Can we add the "Add a Photo" link somewhere there?

Sure, click on MyTools and then Edit My Tools. You can add the link to your menu there. — scarecroe@fandom 16:47, November 3, 2010 (UTC)

When adding this, search for "Upload Photo", not "Add a Photo". Thanks Scarecroe. - RaptorWiki 09:10, November 4, 2010 (UTC)
I am new to the site and am trying to understand the logic of why you only have image icons for some of the movies and shorts on their category page instead of all of them. Why not have an image for every movie and short on their respective page in chrono order, left to right, as you suggest elsewhere on this discussion page?Sbwinter2 03:48, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
Also - with the dropdown menus, why not include all of the movies and shorts (in their respective dropdown) in either alpha or chrono order (I think alpha would be better for this menu)? Why only some?Sbwinter2 03:50, June 17, 2012 (UTC)


Hey, I've been on other wikis, and lots of the templates are DECORATED! Can we decoarate them? For example...

Instead of this: {{Delete |this is just for example }} Maybe we can have something like:

This page should be thrown away.

The reasons for deleting should

be listed: here, or in category talk:

Canidates for Deletion

Update me as soon as you can about how to do it. i am harry potter 17:23, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

I think adding decoration is fine if there is a purpose to it. But I don't see a purpose right now. Can you give examples from other wikis and why it is helpful? Thanks! --Jeff (talk) 23:47, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
Guys, this reminds me of Pixar itself, and how they produce movies. First, they lay everything out, have a broad and general view of the movie. The last thing they worry about is adding the fine tuning and 'decoration' to only be followed by the final product. See where I am going with this? Of course, this wiki isn't going to ever be complete, as new products of pixar continue to flow. But unless the mods feel it is the correct time, and every aspect of how this wiki is run is set to their standards, beauty marks shouldn't be added. Not saying it is a bad idea though :D Rileyl 00:20, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
I know I'm replying to this almost 2 years later, but what I believe the original question was referring to is something like this , that Wookieepedia uses quite often. You'll see it has themed warnings and notices at the top of the page with the "We're doomed!" -- I like the idea, but some of it could be a little bit too much at the top of a page. Thejoeludwig 21:11, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
OK, I think I understand better, and I'm not totally opposed to theme-based messages, as long as the theme/image/quote matches the template/message. Now, funnily (ok, probably not a word), I don't like the "We're doomed" message - it's stating the page is a primary page and needs more information. Our philosophy has always been to not create either stub pages, or use a "needs content" template. A stub/empty page is basically worthless - there's no reason to say "hey, this page has no content", as that will be obvious if the page doesn't exist!
Anyways, if someone wants to come up with quotes and/or images for some of our templates, have at it and we can see how everyone else responds. Thanks. --Jeff (talk) 23:28, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
I'm on it! :) --Aaron (chat) 03:54, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
I am interested by such personalization of the templates, if it's well done. I mean, the templates shouldn't be too flashy and distract from the page itself. But one problem is that, as far as I know, we only have one template that could be stylized, the {{delete}} template... --Gray Catbird 13:45, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

TV and Upcoming movies

The home page feels perfect, but doesn't it seem more proper to have the TV series, that already aired, to be above upcoming movies?

Hmmm, I don't know. For me, since Pixar started with feature films, I think it makes sense that the films, both released and upcoming, come first. I'd like to hear what others think, though. Thanks! --Jeff (talk) 03:47, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Why delete redirect pages?

Excuse me, I want to ask, but is there a good, valid reason why redirect pages should be considered as candidates for deletion? --Longliveaki 01:12, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

The same reason any page would be considered a candidate for deletion - duplication, author request, not needed, etc. In general I'd be careful about deleting redirect pages but I think there are cases where no one would use or search by the name of the redirect page. In those cases I don't have a problem removing them. If there are any you feel shouldn't be deleted, write it to the corresponding talk page or the Category_talk:Candidates_for_deletion page. Thanks! --Jeff (talk) 01:30, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Quotes at the top of pages

How should we handle movie quotes? On many pages there is a Quotes heading near the bottom of the page. I like putting all the quotes in that section. I realize this may just be me, but I'm not fond of the quotes at the top of character/movie pages. I like to get to the meat of the article, rather than first go through a random set of quotes. I think Scarecroe brought this up a number of months ago and also felt we should keep quotes in the Quotes section. What do others think about this? --Jeff (talk) 04:02, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest putting the quote which is thought to be mainly about a specific character or place on the top, then keep the rest of the quotes under the Quotes section. My plan was to imitate Wookieepedia. Any other suggestions, anyone? --Longliveaki 04:53, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Short Films organization

Should we reorganize the short films so they're sorted chronologically like feature films, i.e. across rather than down? Now, every time we add a new short we need to move one from the right column to the left, seems like a pain. Should we make it consistent with the feature films? --Jeff (talk) 14:20, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Buzz Lightyear of Star Command

I hope it's all right with everyone, but I have just added Buzz Lightyear of Star Command to the main page under the TV Series category. I know that it's actually considered a Disney cartoon, but it's still about Buzz Lightyear so I figured it would work here. The direct-to-video movie was really as far as I was going to go with it anyway since I'm not wanting to do a summary of every episode of the series.

I also made an article on an unproduced TV special from Pixar called A Tin Toy Christmas. --Nick102 (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all your additions, they look great! I think it's good to have it here on the Pixar wiki even though it's a Disney cartoon. I would consider it similar to Cars Toons. There aren't as many episodes of that so it's a little less work to create separate pages for each summary. But over time, maybe the episode pages will get created. --Jeff (talk) 02:30, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
One question I have, do you think we should have categories under The Adventure Begins? Shouldn't we just have categories like Characters and Locations as sub-categories of the top-level Buzz Lightyear of Star Command? Why make them specific to The Adventure Begins movie? --Jeff (talk) 03:34, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Probably, but I was still figuring out how to make new categories when I was making them. --Nick102 (talk) 05:31, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

OK, if you agree I can move the categories around. I think when you create a page with the movie template it automatically gives you those categories. It won't take too much for me to move them. Thanks! --Jeff (talk) 14:18, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Sure, that would be fine. --Nick102 (talk) 19:27, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Turns out I can't do it. The movie template automatically includes those specific categories and I can't change them. So I guess we'll leave them as they are. --Jeff (talk) 01:06, January 29, 2010 (UTC)


Should 1906 be listed under features films on the front page? It is a live action film, and I'm pretty sure I read that it will not be made at Pixar. So it will not be a Pixar film. I don't have a problem having a page regarding the movie on the site, just that it shouldn't be treated like an upcoming Pixar film. Thoughts? --Jeff (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Upcoming movie dates

Disney announced that Cars 2 was being moved up to 2011. It sounds likely either newt or The Bear and the Bow will be pushed back. Box Office Mojo states newt will not release until 2012, but I haven't seen anything official about this. I can't find the official press release so can't confirm. Can anyone confirm this? Otherwise I think we need to leave newt where it was. — Jeff (talk) 23:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Cars 2 will now come out June 24, 2011 by numerous sources. All abord the S.S. Izzy! Next stop:Danvilleland! 04:27, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

I Am New

Are there featured articles on this wiki? McQueenMario 14:16, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

No, we don't have featured articles on this wiki. I'm not sure why? --Jeff (talk) 18:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
If you make them could I be in the featured article staff. McQueenMario 01:38, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Good question. Do you do this for other wikis? In any case it's probably best answered by someone like Scarecroe. --Jeff (talk) 04:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me, hi I'm Squallinoa_08. I'm a member of Final Fantasy wiki and an admin at Dead or Alive wiki. I would like to help improve Pixar wiki to make it the most interesting and best encyclopedia ever! I have alot of great ideas and the featured article idea is great! I've done featured articles in Dead or Alive wiki and I'm sure I can do it here. Also, you know the 4 picutures in the main page? Well I was thinking instead of the same 4 pics, why don't we created a template that will put 4 random pictures in the main page. Well anywho, if you guys want to renovate the wiki, ask me! I've had alot of experience in the wikia field, ultimately I also watch all the Pixar movies. So, I would love to help you guys and if you need help, just let me know! Thank you! Squallinoa 08 03:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


There is this oversized ad that shows up in any Pixar wiki article that is actually a website called 'HEAVY'. It started playing overlapped music. I tried to exit, but this big message "Are you sure you want to navigate away from this page? PRESS ESCAPE OR CLOSE THIS ALERT" appears and cuts out the entire width of the screen. Neither pressing Esc or closing 'this alert' didn't help. It just closed the window but not the website where the adware...whatever it is was taking effect. I had to force exit internet explorer using task manager and it worked. Anyone else experience this here? ChaosXFlame5 03:21, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

I haven't seen this ad. If you continue to have problems with it I would recommend opening an issue for it. Thanks! --Jeff (talk) 13:33, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Related and Supported Films

I know that for now this section is for upcoming non-Pixar films being made by Pixar directors, but if it remains in the future would there be a chance of adding Brad Bird's The Iron Giant to the list? Or would that be too unfitting for here on account of it being made before he came to Pixar? --Nick102 02:18, March 22, 2011 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with adding The Iron Giant to the list. If we're going to have a list of future, non-Pixar films then why not include something done prior to coming to Pixar? But I'd like to hear what others have to say. --Jeff (talk) 13:25, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
I don't think The Iron Giant should be added to the list. Planes is a related film because it's based off of Cars, and supposedly John Lasseter's involved with the film (slightly supported), even though it's not a Pixar production. 1906 isn't a Pixar production either, but it's being backed up financially by Pixar and being directed by Brad Bird. The Iron Giant and John Carter of Mars are solely just directed by someone from Pixar. How about we make a new page listing films directed (and maybe produced) by people from Pixar? And also not add those films to the list so people don't get confused. What do you think? --Aaron 04:49, April 1, 2011 (UTC)
Aaron, I think you're right. Planes should be a related film since it's based on Pixar characters, but the other ones don't have anything to do with Pixar, except a Pixar employee is involved. So if we're going to have The Iron Giant on the list, shouldn't we have Mission: Impossible IV? And now that Doug Sweetland has left the studio to direct a film should that be on the list?
So, what if we leave Planes as-is, and like you said, just make a page called "related-films" (or something better!) and put all these other films there. These films would most likely not have their own pages (except for 1906 and John Carter of Mars) - just a bullet with maybe a short description of why it's on the page (so and so directed it). What about the Film category? Should this category be reserved for true, Pixar films? That's my recommendation. Thanks. --Jeff (talk) 15:20, April 2, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah Jeff, we can add all those films to the new list. So we leave Planes as is and make the page with the list of related films. I guess we can make an exception and have Planes and the new list in the "Movies" category. As for 1906 and John Carter of Mars, I think they should be deleted. John Carter of Mars definitely, as it's only directed by Andrew Stanton and although 1906 is both directed by Brad Bird & being financially backed up by Pixar, that's still not enough to deserve its own page. --Aaron 00:02, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm, I don't know if we should delete the pages. There's some good content on them. I'm glad you removed them from the Pixar Wiki "Related Films" section. And as for any new films that end up in that same category (i.e. The Iron Giant), I would steer people away from creating new pages for them.
So what to call the new page? Is "Non-Pixar films associated with Pixar staff" OK? And how will this page be linked in with the rest of the site? Should that page be in the Movies category? The films on that page should have links to the Pixarian related to each work, so then from each Pixarian page there should be a link back to the "Non-Pixar films..." page. Thoughts? --Jeff (talk) 01:52, April 4, 2011 (UTC)
That all sounds good Jeff, but I really think 1906 and John Carter of Mars should be deleted. Yeah they have a nice amount of content, but I don't think they deserve pages. --Aaron 02:37, April 4, 2011 (UTC)



You know how, when you're reading something and a-word/words turn/s blue and you can click on it? How do I do that?



Monsters Inc.

Im a huge Disney-Pixar fan. It didn't happen but i thought it would have been cool if on Monsters Inc.,Sulley and Mike would have opened a door to Andy's Room and see the toys having a meeting


Gabe-Zebo 00:07, May 16, 2011 (UTC)Gabe WardGabe-Zebo 00:07, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

New Wallpaper

The new wallpaper on here looks really nice! Before it was just a white background and didn't look attractive at all. I bet it was Scott who added the cool new wallpaper. The Pixar Wiki logo also looks thinner and lighter. --Aaron 04:54, June 29, 2011 (UTC)

Just checked Scott's contributions. Yup, it was him who did both changes. Nice work man! --Aaron 02:50, July 2, 2011 (UTC)
The new wallpaper is good, man! --Puffle339 The Nyan Cat 13:38, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

let you know.

the 1995-2002 version of the Paramount Pictures logo was animated at Pixar. --Puffle339 The Nyan Cat 22:28, July 5, 2011 (UTC)

World of Cars Wiki

I've added a banner for any one wanting to join the World of Cars Wiki. ☆Madbomberfan

I don't think it's ok to make the promotion of an other wiki here... As far as I know, we are not associated with World of Cars Wiki... Gray Catbird 14:15, August 19, 2011 (UTC)I agree as well. Also, that is not the "World of Cars" wiki know, as well as the one linked on here. I believe this one is the right one. --Aaron 23:55, August 19, 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. I would say instead add it to your user page, or write a blog entry about it. Thanks. --Jeff (talk) 18:01, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, just a suggestion. I think we should add a Pixar logo for this page, the one with most of the Pixar characters, just to brighten it up and add a little style. Daniel Macgregor 14:38, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Not necassary stuff

Can we please delete all the "Newt" stuff, including pictures and categories? This might help out.

Newt isn't unnecessary stuff, it is a Pixar work, and therefore deserves a page on the wiki... What would removing all newt-related info would help out ? Gray Catbird 17:02, February 6, 2012 (UTC)


Guys, I think we should introduce something new to the Pixar Wiki; Transcripts.

We can apply it to all films and shorts that involve talking. Here's an example;


  • [On a table]
  • (A ball bounces and sees a Cube nearby.)
  • Ball: Oh, hi Cube! (Bounces)
  • Cube: Hi there, ball.


Whaddya say? The conditions I want;

1. It needs to include the dialog.

2. It needs to include the actions of the characters doing. (Optional; You can include background movements, like when in Finding Nemo, Bloat loses his temper and blows up, Bubbles gets thrown off-screen.)

3. It needs to include the location, like in my example, the ball and cube were on a table.

Let's try it and see. Cuzco! Chat with me. Watch my edits. 23:45, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

Helloooooooooooooo??? :/ Cuzco! Chat with me. Watch my edits. 00:40, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
Personally, I don't see a lot of value to transcripts. What would be the source of the transcript? For someone to manually enter them would take a lot of time and most likely have many mistakes. But I've never seen an official transcript released for any Pixar film. So my opinion is that we not create them. --Jeff (talk) 01:02, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
One source; Cuzco! Chat with me. Watch my edits. 01:56, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
So, are you thinking of copying/pasting the contents from scribd to a page here? Or downloading the entire doc and then uploading it? I'm not familiar with scribd, are there any copyright/sharing issues we need to consider? Rather than re-creating the transcripts here, why not just link to the transcript on scribd from the film page? I'm not seeing a lot of value in re-creating the transcript since it's already done and exists on another site? --Jeff (talk) 02:21, April 17, 2012 (UTC)
We can go with linking. However, I've only seen transcripts for WALL-E and Ratatouille on there so far. I'll look to see if there's any good ones for the rest of the movies. Cuzco! Chat with me. Watch my edits. 16:06, April 17, 2012 (UTC)

Film or Project?

For future reference, as it seems Pixar's upcoming films are being announced untitled, how should they be officially titled? For The Good Dinosaur we titled it "Untitled Dinosaur Project". We're calling Inside the Mind "Inside the Human Mind Project", but as for Día de los Muertos, it's titled "Untitled Dia de los Muertos film". Perhaps if we only find tidbits and behind the scenes pictures like how blogs did with The Good Dinosaur long before it was announced (or even on the wiki), we could use "project". Since we know Inside the Mind will be a feature film, might as well rename it to "film", correct? --Aaron (chat) 01:01, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

Well, the question has apparently been solved since now all pages are called "film". In my opinion, it would make sense to call a project we know is a feature film "film."... So for me, it's fine, and I agree with you. Anyway, since this question seems to be solved I have removed the talk template...( If you disagree, you're free to put ir back.) Gray Catbird (talk) 22:41, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Non-Pixar Films That Has to Do Something Differently About Pixar-Related Stuff

How about we can make a Wiki called "Non-Pixar Wiki" for only the CGI and stop-motion non-Pixar movies.

The list of non-Pixar movies including Despicable Me, Shrek, Shrek 2, Shrek the Third, Shrek Forver After, Shark Tale, Antz, Monsters vs. Aliens, MegaMind, Surf's Up, Open Season, Rango, The Ant Bully, Rio, Happily N'ever After, Flushed Away, Chicken Run, Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit, Everyone's Hero, The Lorax, Horton Hears a Who!, Doogal, Hoodwinked, Hoodwinked Two!: Hood and Evil, Madagascar, Over the Hedge, How to Train Your Dragon, Puss in Boots, Happy Feet, Happy Feet Two, Robots, Corpse Bride, Coraline, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Ice Age, Ice Age: The Meltdown, Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs, Delgo, Battle of Tetra, Planet 51, The Pirates!: Band of Misfits, Arthur and the Invisibles, Bee Movie, Kung Fu Panda, Kung Fu Panda 2, The Tale of Despereaux, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole, The Polar Express, Space Chimps, Monster House, Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius, Barnyard, Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa, Madagascar: Euope's Most Wanted and others.

There are wikis out there for works like that. One is the Dreamworks Animation Wikia:
Ice Age has one:
I'm sure if you look, you'll find the others. - RaptorWiki (Ryan) 09:19, June 14, 2012 (UTC)
Your list doens't include the Miyazaki/Studio Ghibli movies. Maybe have a page with links to other sites that already list info about these movies including the links already mentioned. Sbwinter2 03:43, June 17, 2012 (UTC)

Main page has been protected

Due to the recent rash of vandalism on the wiki, I have disabled editing the main page by new and un-registered users. I apologize for this action but until things settle down I think it's the least invasive measure to take. I don't know how the wiki decides who a "new" user is, but I think if you've been a registered user of the site for at least a couple of months you should be OK. If you feel this restriction is too prohibitive please let me know. Thanks for all the help in keeping up with the vandalism; the admins here greatly appreciate all your hard work in making this the best wiki on the Net! This is probably a good time to bring up what steps to take when you see vandalism on the site. I realize how difficult it must be to not write on the vandal's talk page, especially when you see your hard work being destroyed. But you must try not to do that - these people are looking for attention, and by even acknowledging them by writing on their talk page is giving them what they desire. Instead, please revert or undo their changes if you're able, and then notify myself and/or Ryan and we will make sure the user is blocked. If you have any questions, let me know! --Jeff (talk) 04:07, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe the entire wiki should be moved to semi-protected status, not just the main page. However, AFAIK only Wikia staff can do this. -- RobertATfm (talk) 11:39, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
I hope taking that kind of action won't be necessary. I haven't checked with other wikia sites, does this seem to be targeted just at the Pixar wiki or are other sites getting hit? Thanks for helping in keeping things cleaned up! --Jeff (talk) 12:27, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Updating the wiki

Wikia recently changed a bit its appearance, which now comes with some pixels of width of more (cool), a complex odd-looking header, and a space betwen the wikia header and the wiki's header...This has some impacts on our wiki, and there are several things we should correct. First, our background image has problems: there is a blank space that shows on the top, and the central body overlaps on the big Luxo on the right-hand side. Could an admin upload a new version of File:Wiki-background that doesn't has this ? I can volunteer to provide a corrected file... Second, the header is not good. The "Community" tab is redundent of the first one, I think it should be removed. Furthermore, all the content of the previous header (there were "Characters" "Movies" and "Shorts" sections) is gone. I think we should add back some content, at least put back the previously-used tabs...Gray Catbird (talk) 01:10, October 4, 2012 (UTC)

I doubt I will have time to look at this for a couple weeks. If you want to create the background image, that would be great. I could update it once you're done. I'll try looking at the other items as soon as I can. --Jeff (talk) 15:08, October 4, 2012 (UTC)
OK, I uploaded my modified file on the wiki, so you can uploaded it at the correct place (via the Theme Designer, I think ?). I hope it works ! Gray Catbird (talk) 14:55, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
I figured out how to update the "Community" tab, so it has our original categories. But I don't see where or how to modify the "On the Wiki" tab - I wanted to put our categories under that and remove the "Community" tab. Do you think the current structure works? I also wanted to update the entries listed in each of the categories (change the list of shorts, list of characters, etc) but don't know how to do that.
How long has it been since Wikia made these changes? I don't see anything in the recent history, and the "Wiki-navigation" page I modified hadn't been edited since September, 2010. --Jeff (talk) 15:33, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
I also updated the background image to your new image. I think you'll have to do a hard refresh (shift-refresh) to see the new image. Does it look OK? --Jeff (talk) 16:01, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
It's good the old tabs are back, but I think they should be out of the "Community" tab, which would make them more visible, or at least rename the tab, since it isn't exactly community-related stuff... I have no idea how to modify the entries of the tabs; I never got to use the Theme Designer. In the previous configuration, I thought the content changed automaticaly following some obscure criteria... Also, it appears the "On the wiki" tab is a default tab that cannot by changed..Wikia made these changes effective on October 3. They had made an announcement on the community central regarding it. The new wiki navigation bar style has been availble for quite some time, though, but as an option; what they have done now is put it as default on all wikis.Thanks for uploading the file ! It works correctly for me... Gray Catbird (talk) 21:19, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
I can change the title of the "Community" tab, is there something you like better? It currently points to the "Current Events" page on the wiki, I could change it to "Current Events" but that sounds somewhat generic. I tried moving the contents of that tab to the top-level but it's not allowed to have pages with the pound symbol at the top-level, they must be at level 2 or below. A long time ago we could control the entries in the tabs. Oh well, maybe it's better to have it be random or based on some criteria. And I agree, I don't think they allow us to modify/remove the "On the Wiki" tab. --Jeff (talk) 22:53, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
Ok, now I understand why the tabs had disappeared. I also realized it is possible to anybody to view the MediaWiki page were the header is controlled, and now I understand better how it works. But I still don't really like that the tabs aren't on the top-level; they are kind of hidden because of that... Something we could do is manually make a list of entries. Then it would be possible to have it on a superior level, and choose the entries that appear. But the big problem then is that it will have to be manually updated when new things arrive... If we limit to just rename the "Community" tab, I would propose the names... "Browse", or, "Content" ?... Gray Catbird (talk) 01:17, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

The Good Dinosaur, Finding Dory and Summer 2016

With the news that The Good Dinosaur is getting pushed back to 2015, and Finding Dory now moving to 2016, that seems to make the 2016 year screwy. Pixar already had announced a June, 2016 untitled release. Now that Finding Dory is coming out in summer of 2016, what happens to that untitled film? Does it get pushed back to later in 2016? If so, that would mean Pixar will have 3 years straight of 2 films in each year! Since they've never had 1 year with 2 films, I find this highly unlikely. But until we receive official information, let's keep all the untitled films where they are. --Jeff (talk) 01:18, September 19, 2013 (UTC)

I'm starting a wiki about animated Characters. Anyone wanna join?


I am starting wiki about animated characters. Anyone here care to join me?

CARTOONSROCK (talk) 01:22, September 8, 2014 (UTC) CARTOONSROCK

Coco and untitled fall 2017 film

I removed the November 22, 2017 untitled film and put in Coco as Fall, 2017, as stated in the 2015 D23 Expo presentation. I think it's obvious Pixar won't be releasing 3 films in 2017, so Coco is the 2nd film of the year, taking the November 22 spot. But since that date wasn't in the D23 presentation, only Fall, 2017, it's likely that date will change and Pixar isn't ready yet to give the new date. Does that make sense? --Jeff (talk) 02:33, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

I think you did the right thing. Though Coco is likely the film that was meant for the November 2017 date, the latest information didn't confirm that it'll be released that day. Of what I understand, no release date was actually mentioned during the animation panel itself? so it's probably best to just say Fall 2017.Gray Catbird (talk) 25px-Gray_catbird_cars.jpg 15:37, August 15, 2015 (UTC)

Khan Academy: Pixar In A Box

Recently, Khan Academy released a series of educational exercises involving drawing, math, and coding. This was entitled "Pixar In A Box." We need an article on this topic.

Link: Pixar In A Box


(Golam) (talk) 19:53, October 11, 2015 (UTC)

False edit notifications

Twice today I have been notified of an "edit" to this wiki's main page, only to find when visiting the page that there have been no edits to it for the past fortnight or so, and the users in question have only just joined and haven't made any edits yet. Of all the many wikis to which I have contributed, this is the only one on which this is happening. Is anyone else getting this? Should Wikia staff be informed? — RobertATfm (talk) 16:38, April 6, 2016 (UTC)

These have now stopped. Goodness knows why this glitch occurred. — RobertATfm (talk) 06:18, April 17, 2016 (UTC)
I never had anything like that occur, so I'm glad it stopped for you! - RaptorWiki (Ryan) 13:42, April 17, 2016 (UTC)

Time to cull / forbid enumeration trivia?

To my mind there are far too many instances on the trivia pages of things like "this is the fifth time that this has happened in a Pixar movie".

If it's the first time, yes, that is interesting and significant. The second time, maybe interesting or significant, but I wouldn't bank on it. The third (or subsequent) time? Boring.

And it's likely that some of them are erroneous anyway; one (since deleted) claimed that Riley Andersen was the "third person in a Pixar movie to appear naked". Whoever added that (a) counted Merida's brothers as one character instead of three and (b) omitted at least one other character, possibly two.

I think there should be a cull on items which claim to be anything later than the first (and possibly second) instance, and a ban on adding any further such items. What does anyone else think? — RobertATfm (talk) 06:18, April 17, 2016 (UTC)

In most instances, I think yes, that should be the case. - RaptorWiki (Ryan) 13:43, April 17, 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with this too. Limiting it to 2 seems reasonable. I will try crafting up a new policy over the next day or two and post it. --Jeff (talk) 14:10, April 17, 2016 (UTC)

Copying Content from Other Wikis

This discussion has been listed as an Active Talk Page.
Please remove this template when the question has been answered.
Recently, I realized that our The Good Dinosaur character pages are carbon copies of Disney Wiki (e.g. see this vs. this).
Now, copying content from other wikis is an old issue with which we have a long story; But I think we ought to address it at some point, as this latest example reminds me. I for one am strongly plagiarism, mainly because of an old, extreme case involving Disney Wiki, where a lot of our pages were actually synchronized between wikis, with editions on one wiki being slavishly carried to the other, basically preventing the homologous pages from diverging (you can read a complaint I had taken the liberty to write here). 

I guess it could be argued that in the absence of having our own content, copied content might be better than no content at all... But I think this would be OK only if the pages are then allowed to evolve into something original. And from my experience, that doesn't tend to happen. I've been trying to deal with plagiarism by paraphrasing things, but that takes me a lot of time, and clearly I'm having trouble to keep up.

In my view, it is in the wiki's best interest to have its own, original content. Plagiarism would be considered unacceptable in academic setting. And if we are merely a mirror of another wiki, what's the justification for a separate wiki? Therefore, as much as I hate removing content and think that it is better to fix than scrap, I'm thinking we should have a policy to ban copying, for instance when it consists of a paragraph or more. A zero tolerance for plagiarism could also help fight the synchronization issue I mentioned: we can't do much to stop the content export, but we could cut in the import.

A less destructive option could be to use a template to flag carbon-copied content, so that a user may paraphrase it if he can. Although I don't know how readers would feel if a page begins with a big "this page comes from this wiki and we are just copying it". Gray Catbird (talk) 25px-Gray_catbird_cars.jpg 05:24, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

This is a major problem on the Beatles wiki; if you come across an article there (especially a non-stub) that isn't flagged as having been copied from Wikipedia, that usually means that it was stolen from Wikipedia. This isn't helped by the fact that there are sometimes idiotors who remove the {‍{wikipedia}} tags, converting those articles from "copied" to "stolen".
As you say, this means that there's really no point in visiting the Beatles wiki, as people seeking Beatles information would be better advised to go straight to Wikipedia and cut out the middle man. I have just yesterday implemented a new policy, that further copying is forbidden; but it may be too late to undo the damage.
As for this wiki, better to flag pages which have been copied (which, in the case of pages copied under a CC-BY-SA licence, would satisfy the BY-SA part and cancel any copyright violation, although it wouldn't cancel the inherent pointlessness of this wiki just being a clone of another) than to just hope for the best (because, as the above case illustrates, the best doesn't happen if people don't work for it). — RobertATfm (talk) 08:48, May 2, 2016 (UTC)
I'd be open to other opinions to try and change my mind, but I'd argue we're better off with no content than directly copied content. I agree with both of you, if this wiki doesn't have original content, then what is the point of the wiki? I'd be open to either formalizing this in a policy, or more informally either marking pages for deletion or just removing the copied content from affected pages. --Jeff (talk) 20:42, May 2, 2016 (UTC)
In response to your first comment, Gray Catbird, if I get the home video of The Good Dinosaur, I might be able to rewrite the information on one of the wikis. In fact, I already started rewriting the Cars character pages on Disney Wiki starting in late 2015. --Lightening McQueen (talk) 00:44, May 6, 2016 (UTC)
Lightening-- Yes! I noticed that a couple weeks ago when I was randomly checking out the Professor Z article. Thanks a lot, it sure feels good to see a page with stuff I haven't written! You are welcome to rewrite the TGD pages if you want--in any case I'd prefer if the pages here on Pixar Wiki were rewritten, considering the content is original to Disney Wiki (i.e. Theoretically not ours to use); but I don't want to force you into anything, so if you do rewrite them, feel free to do it on whichever wiki you prefer.
Now, since Jeff agrees with me that a page is better a stub than a copy, from now on I will revert any occurrence of significant copying that I identify. Although nowadays cases of copying are a relatively rare occurrence, I'm fine with having a written policy.
As for copied content already existent on this wiki... I think that paraphrasing is what should be done ideally. But as I said above, that didn't work so well when I tried to do it alone. We could either A) delete entirely the passages which are clearly (it isn't always) taken from another wiki or B)just put a tag, so as to at least comply with copyright requirements as RobertATfm mentions, as well as invite users to rewrite the passage in question, which I ideally I at least should eventually do.--Gray Catbird (talk) 25px-Gray_catbird_cars.jpg 03:06, May 12, 2016 (UTC)
I still don't have a strong opinion on this, whether to remove the copied information, or flag it with a category or template. A category might be nice, it would let people quickly find pages that are marked as such. On the other hand, I kinda like "drastic" action, and maybe it would just be easier to remove the content, especially if it's pretty clear the page is just a copy from another wiki. --Jeff (talk) 14:05, May 12, 2016 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.