Talk:Walt Disney

Active discussions
Walt Disney is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 5, 2016.
On this day... Article milestones
September 23, 2004Peer reviewReviewed
February 16, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
June 15, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
May 6, 2014Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 24, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
July 2, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
May 3, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
May 21, 2016Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 16, 2010.
Current status: Featured article

Semi-protected edit request on 5 September 2017Edit

"Please Change : Walt Disney was Born In Chicago, Irish Parents" To: Walt Disney Was Born In Chicago, French-Canadian Parents". Because It's True. (An Editor Embellished A False Fact, For Their Personal Preference.Someone's Ethnicity Or Origin Shouldn't Be Changed Or Embellished, Without knowing The Actual Facts of The Original Story. TruthSeeker1964 (talk) 16:33, 5 September 2017 (UTC) TruthSeeker1964 (talk) 16:33, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. General Ization Talk 16:39, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Steamboat Willie Was Not the First Sound CartoonEdit

Please change:

Following the 1927 sensation The Jazz Singer, Disney used synchronized sound on the third short, Steamboat Willie, to create the first sound cartoon.


Following the 1927 sensation The Jazz Singer, Disney used synchronized sound on the third short, Steamboat Willie. Although Steamboat Willie is often erroneously cited as the first sound cartoon, animator Max Fleischer first utilized synchronized sound two years earlier in My Old Kentucky Home (film) (1926) as part of his Song Car-Tunes series with Red Seal Pictures.[1] However, Steamboat Willie was the first sound cartoon to feature a fully post-produced soundtrack, and its popularity far eclipsed earlier efforts to bring sound into animation. 96whalers (talk) 14:05, 30 October 2017 (UTC)


  1. ^ Fleischer, Richard (2005). 'Out of the Inkwell: Max Fleischer and the Animation Revolution. University Press of Kentucky. p. 43. ISBN 0-8131-2355-0.
  • Too wordy in its present form (this is a biography of the man, not a history of animation), but I have tweaked the wording to read "to create the first post-produced sound cartoon", which covers it sufficiently here. - SchroCat (talk) 14:16, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2017Edit

Walt Disney birth home address is incorrect. It is 2156 North Tripp Avenue, Chicago, Illinois One Source - Chicago Tribune: NeilGale (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

No, it's not incorrect. When he was born there it was 1249 Tripp Avenue. It has subsequently been renamed and renumbered to its current address of 2156 North Tripp Avenue, but that address did not exist when WD was born. – SchroCat (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2018Edit

Please change "Aside from Disney, Elias and Call's sons were Herbert, Raymond and Roy; the couple had a fifth child, Ruth, in December 1903" to "Aside from Walt, Elias and Call's sons were Herbert, Raymond and Roy; the couple had a fifth child, Ruth, in December 1903" 3rd sentence is section Early life. REASON: ambiguity; everyone in the family was named Disney. Ianoptional (talk) 02:34, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

  Done L293D ( • ) 19:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Original citation links are working!Edit

A lot of the citations for this article are pointing to the archived version when they don't need to. For example, Ref. 4. (before my most recent edit)... If you clicked on the title "Walt Disney", it attempted to take you to the WebCite archive (which is currently down anyway), but the original version of the article is still working, which you could only find by clicking on "the original" in the citation. Why are we using the archive when the original is fine? The archive should just be there as a backup if it's needed in the future. So the deadurl parameter should be set to "no" in the meantime. I've made the change for Ref.4 to show you what I mean, but I've not bothered to change any of the others as I strongly suspect my edit will be reverted and I so hate wasting my time. For the record, the same thing applies to refs. 6, 17, 21, 38, 52, 69, 70, 81, 118, 129, 132, 150, 152, 156, 157, 160, 162, 165, 170, 171, 172, 175, 184, 188, 194, 200.

Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

It may have been a bot that added "yes", but it's of little importance. Webcitation works well enough for me, and the one you changed yesterday worked when I tried it on three different systems. - SchroCat (talk) 19:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Providing wikilinks for works/publishers in citationsEdit

Hi, I'm interested in what I call "Ref. maintenance" which basically means checking that cited sources are sound, with working links, correct titles, and all other parameters defined as appropriate. So that's my angle.

Apparently providing wikilinks for works/publishers in citations is just a matter of taste. I personally think the links are useful because if the reader is unsure about the originator of the source, they can easily follow the link and learn a little about the company behind the source, if they are interested. For that reason, I don't think there's anything wrong with providing the link where it's available, expecially for lesser known newspapers such as the Lewiston Morning Tribune or The Manchester Guardian (for example). In this second example, the link provides the reader with the opportunity to learn that The Manchester Guardian was a previous incarnation of The Guardian newspaper, which they might not otherwise have known or been able to find out easily without doing their own manual search (and we can't assume they even know how to do that!) The guidance on this just says "Name of publisher; may be wikilinked if relevant." which is rather ambiguous. My interpretation would be that, as it doesn't say "generally not wikilinked", it's preferable to provide the link whenever there's a related wiki article available.

So the long and the short of it is that I happen to think the links are useful, whereas other editors prefer to leave them out altogether. I've been advised that it's best to go along with the existing style in the article, which is fair enough of course, but this Walt Disney article is currently inconsistent. Some refs. contain links and some don't. So which do we prefer? Shall I add my links back in? Or shall I remove all the existing links from these refs... 4 (Encyclopædia Britannica), 150 (USA Today), 158 (New York Daily News), 163 (Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences), 164 (Hollywood Foreign Press Association), 167 (American Film Institute), 168 & 169 (Hollywood Walk of Fame), 170 (Academy of Television Arts & Sciences), 178 (The Blade), 180 & 184 & 188 (PBS).

I'm happy to remove these links (against my better judgement) but I'd prefer to add in the missing links for the other citations where relevant (as I attempted to do yesterday). This might be a small consideration in the grand scheme of things, but I also happen to think consistency is very important!

Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Links removed. Links can be useful, but that is limited when in the references. - SchroCat (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


He worked with the US government to make anti-Nazi and anti-Axis propaganda films and was prominent to the "Good Neighbor Policy" and countering the spread of Nazism in Latin America. Is Category:American anti-fascists appropriate? LittleJerry (talk) 02:08, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Walt Disney TALK PAGEEdit

Great work reporting on Disney. The credibility with the sources and info is exceptional, establishing trust for readers, and the outline after the introduction is chronological, making it easy to follow and understand the progression of Disney's life. However, it seems as though within the introduction, it jumps abruptly from theme parks and Disney's contribution, directly to his death all within one paragraph, ending frantically with his death stated. Mechanically, this could be edited to better represent info to readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Batcapital2020 (talkcontribs) 02:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Batcapital2020, thanks for your comments. The lead follows the same pathway as the rest of the article, and it was while Disney was building the parks and planning the next one that he died. The path of the lead follows that of Disney's life at this point. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2019Edit

Remove " to create the first post-produced sound cartoon" from line "Following the 1927 sensation The Jazz Singer, Disney used synchronized sound on the third short, Steamboat Willie, to create the first post-produced sound cartoon." As this is not completely accurate.

reference: Fleischer, Richard (2011). Out of the Inkwell: Max Fleischer and the Animation Revolution. Lexington, Ky.: University Press of Kentucky. ISBN 9780813134642. (talk) 19:36, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

We accurately represent the source used. Fleischer doesnot contradict what we have, if youread it agan and bear in mind the key words "post-produced". - SchroCat (talk) 19:42, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

First Appearance and Finest AppearanceEdit

He had a Child Amy Sydorick from 1950-1966.--2600:1702:4B28:F760:A515:6F88:3178:DBC7 (talk) 22:15, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2019Edit

change "Won 22 Oscars" to "won 25 Oscars". Change "59 nominations" to "62 nominations". SheriffWalt (talk) 04:27, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 05:03, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Weasel wordingEdit

Starting a discussion here as Smith0124 is edit warring to push what I see as weasel wording into the article. The lead has gone from straightforward description of the source material to introduce the phrases "many saw Disney as" and "some saw him as". I recommend not putting this kind of language into the article. --Laser brain (talk) 00:33, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring is implying that I’m reverting stuff, which is not true, I do not appreciate you attacking me personally. I’ve tried to adapt to your objections, all you do is revert. That’s not an edit war on my part. The current way it’s presented insists that it’s a general consensus that Disney is representative of American Imperialism, but the article just presents individual opinions on the matter. “Some” is a more accurate portrayal of what’s being said. It keeps it neutral, that’s the point. Smith0124 (talk) 00:39, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes, Smith0124, it is edit warring. If there is something obviously contentious and you keep changing it, that is exactly what it is. And you are not being attacked at all: Laser Brain is descring the manner of editing, not casting aspersions about you.
As to the salient point, while we use numerous sources to support the term in question, and they make it clear that it is a belief held by many; it is wrong to claim that these are "just" the opinions of individuals. In the lead we summarise this, with further information in the body for people who want to know more. We have guidelines about avoiding WP:WEASELWORDS, which is what you're trying to do with the rather convoluted language you're employing. - SchroCat (talk) 13:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Rather convoluted language? There’s absolutely nothing “convoluted” about it. Smith0124 (talk) 13:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Maybe not in your opinion, but there is in mine. - SchroCat (talk) 13:54, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

What about it is convoluted? It’s a simple sentence. Smith0124 (talk) 14:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

We've pointed you a few times to an essay about weasel words that you should read. I'm not sure how else to try to explain. At any rate, you do not have consensus for changing the wording in the lead so you should let it drop and find something else to do. --Laser brain (talk) 16:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Parental Heritage Phrasing is Needlessly ConfusingEdit

"Walt Disney was born on December 5, 1901, at 1249 Tripp Avenue, in Chicago's Hermosa neighborhood.[a] He was the fourth son of Elias Disney‍—‌born in the Province of Canada, to Irish parents‍—‌and Flora (née Call), an American of German and English descent."

Since he only had two parents shouldn't it be "born to an Irish father and Flora (née Call), an American of German and English descent." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Condiala (talkcontribs) 00:14, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

No. it’s not confusing, it’s correct. Your proposed version isn’t. - SchroCat (talk) 05:57, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 July 2020Edit

Footnote number 143 should be changed to: Mannheim, Steve, Walt Disney and the Quest for Community, Oxfordshire and New York, Routledge, 2017, 978-1-138-26968-2. This academic book analyzes the EPCOT concept and philosophy. (talk) 00:43, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

The citation used is absolutely fine. - SchroCat (talk) 00:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Both Barrier and Gabler cite Mannheim's book. It is the definitive academic book and Wikipedia readers interested in the subject would benefit from it. It is the most reliable source and not just a few lines in a biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:03, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

  Not done: the 2016 version is used as a reference in cite #214. And as indicated, the Gabler cite is sufficient for footnote 143. Thank you for your interest! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 07:09, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Was Walt Disney a grass: a spy for the Un-American Activities pogrom?Edit

According to many sources, he was: "In October 1947, during the post-war Red Scare, American filmmaker Walt Disney testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). Disney provided HUAC with information about union activity at his studios, as well as specific individuals he believed to be communists" If so, shouldn't that get a mention here? : Excalibur (talk) 20:38, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Leaving aside the hyperbole, we already have that information in the article. - SchroCat (talk) 21:02, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletionEdit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Unattributed claimsEdit

Although there have been accusations that he was racist or anti-Semitic, they have been contradicted by many who knew him.

What were the accusations? Who were these people who knew him? What exactly did they say? Seph Shewell Brockway (talk) 16:35, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The lead is meant as a summary of the article; you'll find the relevant content at Walt_Disney#Personality_and_reputation. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:39, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Return to "Walt Disney" page.