Subjective trope pages for Disney

Following on from this ATT. Disney has a lot of pages for YMMV pages such as Adorkable.Disney. However, we normally don't allow pages like that for creators unless they have no trope pages already. However, as was pointed out here, it seems more like it was separated like it was a medium rather than a creator and I know that Disney was indeed considered a medium at one point. Should we clean these up or keep them?

Edited by Bullman on Jan 19th 2024 at 5:23:58 AM

This is also the case with Disney getting their own Complete Monster page. Monster.Disney

I assumed this was because of the very loose continuity of a franchise that is the Disney Animated Canon

But like...you even get films unrelated to that franchise like Pirates of the Caribbean and The Owl House listed there

I get Disney is a giant company and we want organization/convenience, but should we really do this?

I think in some cases it makes sense to organize by company, particularly when it's a trope related to the imagery or archive of a company, like Logo Joke, Production Foreshadowing, or Company Cross References.

But when just organizing examples not specifically tied to their company, I think it'd probably be easier to only split if there's some sort of recognized "canon" by which they're grouped, i.e. the Disney Animated Canon. So Monster.Disney Animated Canon could suffice, while the works that don't have a specific canon could be placed with their respective mediums. Since there's a lot of media that's "technically" Disney and/or undergoes Channel Hop, I think it'll keep things simpler. It's why I cut BitingTheHandHumor.Fox Animated Shows as there were examples duplicated between pages due to a Channel Hop issue.

I don't think it's a subjectivity issue when it's only really used for organization here, not the company itself.

Edited by mightymewtron on Jan 19th 2024 at 7:08:55 AM

to making Monster.Disney Animated Canon the page while moving entries not in the franchise to other Monster subpages.

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Jan 19th 2024 at 8:22:16 PM

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Edited by Bullman on Jan 20th 2024 at 12:23:31 PM

Eh, the Disney Monster page also has stuff like Kingdom Hearts, which is a crossover of a bunch of Disney stuff, including plenty of things not in the animated canon, they have several spinoffs of the animated canon stuff that's not listed as being part of the canon like Twisted Tales and the other non animated canon stuff also have plenty of other crossovers as well, Disney has built itself to not just be a brand, but a franchise as well

True and good point. Once Upon a Time also combines a lot of Disney stuff together.

Which is why I think there is a legit discussion to be had here.

Edited by Bullman on Jan 20th 2024 at 12:32:22 PM

Yeah, Disney in particular is kind of an oddball.

I can definitely see both sides here, since Monster/Disney and by extension Magnificent Bastard/Disney are out of place compared to other CM and MB pages. At the same time as Agentofchaos said, there is quite of stuff on the pages like Once Upon a Time, Twisted Tales and Chilled that are take stuff from the main animated canon.

I lean more towards keeping stuff the same but I think the other option is fine as well.

Yeah. Like, Cartoon Network it was pretty easy to merge back into Western Animation. Disney would be a LOT trickier. Some stuff would be relatively easy, but other stuff...

To be fair it's not the only creator based page we have. We have monster subpages for DC and Marvel video games, movies, animation, and tv shows which include disconnected series, as well as a page for games by Suda 51 which includes both his shared universe games and disconnected ones (and MB has pages for a lot of these as well).

I think the issue is that Disney is both a franchise and a conglomerate which technically also includes Marvel now among other properties.

I don't see a problem with this, to be honest. As other people have said, we have Nightmare Fuel/Heartwarming/etc. pages for various franchises, and it makes good sense to me.

The only issue I can think of would be overlap (e.g. people sticking The Owl House heartwarming moments on the Heartwarming page for both Disney and the show proper).

That's why we list the show subpages on those pages anyway.

Edited by mightymewtron on Jan 22nd 2024 at 2:41:34 PM

The thing is we literally don't do this for any other creator. For example, we deleted the Pixar Ho Yay page because it was a subjective page for a creator. So, I could go either way, because also like said before a lot if do have a lot of overlap.

Edited by Bullman on Jan 22nd 2024 at 2:35:48 PM

Agreed. I gotta come down on the side of "Disney Animated Canon = yes", "Disney period = no". And I'd honestly prefer to just roll them all into Monster.Animated Films etc. and not giving Disney special treatment, since hardly any of the Disney films actually share a continuity in any meaningful sense.

Edited by StarSword on Jan 22nd 2024 at 5:44:27 AM

I agree. The Disney Animated Canon is a franchise, Disney as a whole is not, that's just a giant company.

It's not like we have a Monster.Dream Works Animation page

The thing is Disney treats itself like a franchise, Dreamworks doesn't have that much crossover between their properties, while Disney has those all the time

As promotional things, yes, but that's not what I'm talking about. Like, I get having a hub page for, say, the MCU or Star Wars, because those franchises actually are single continuities in and of themselves. But if, for example, the thread was to pass a Complete Monster example for The Punisher (2004), that wouldn't go on the main MCU page because the film is a standalone: the MCU Punisher is a completely different version of Frank Castle.

Similarly, Fa Mulan and Pocahontas (for example) don't cross over in their own works, nor would you expect them to considering one film is (anachronistically) set in mid-Iron Age China and the other in 17th century Virginia.

Edited by StarSword on Jan 22nd 2024 at 6:49:26 AM

Given that CM and MB rank every character differently in adaptations, I can see the argument for not using the Disney Animated Canon page.

I do think people like specifically reading about those examples in that franchise, however.

Bumping this one with my input now that the issue of illustrating such subpages (in this case Adorkable.Disney) comes up again.

• I do not think "Disney" as a whole is worth keeping, and would go so far as to say it's a 'badge of honor' type (we got rid of the Disney/ namespace for a reason, I think this is broadly in the same vein).
• This also makes crosswicking trickier — if I had an example for (following the above example) the cartoon show Star vs. the Forces of Evil, the sorting on nearly other page would tell me to put it on the separate Adorkable.Western Animation page. Conversely, if I wanted to seek examples from the live action movie Star Wars: The Force Awakens, I would first think to go to Adorkable.Live Action Films. And yet, bafflingly, both of these are lumped together.
• For similar reasons, I dislike "multimedia" example sorting (and have made that clear before), which this just seems like a creator-specific version of. Those are broadly discouraged so I don't see why "Disney" should be an exception.

Maybe that isn't so much of an issue for CM/MB as the content of the pages is strongly curated, but if it came down to it I'd rather get rid of that way of sorting entirely.

(And yes, I would agree that "Disney Animated Canon" is an acceptable, but unnecessary, grouping.)

I agree for the most part. Like I said it feels weird to do this with Disney but no other company like we wouldn't make one for say Dreamworks.

I do think (as a lurker) Complete Monster specifically judges the candidates from the Disney Animated Canon against each other, so the grouping is probably partially because of that and may require different discussion. The other groupings could probably be merged onto their respective medium pages without issue.

That seems like a wonky way to do things even for Complete Monster. The Disney animated films don't actually share a universe in and of themselves: the crossovers are all in promotional material and Kingdom Hearts.

It's the whole "are they heinous by the standards of similar works" thing. Not about the universe they're in, but about the genre that is "Disney Animated Films".