Talk:Cartoon

message: "Toon" or "tune" was a popular designation in the days when news reels and cartoons ran ahead of the feature presentation in films, it was not brought to popularity with Roger Rabbit (though this may have revived modern usage). Examples predating or concurrent with Roger Rabbit include "Loony Tunes" & "Tiny Toons". Modern MMO players refer to their online characters as "Toons" as well. It seems like this language should be conistant with the language [here] as well. 66.92.15.93 02:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Toon

message: I AfD:ed the article cartoon physics a few days ago, but the vote is definetly going to be keep. However, I still feel that if there are sub-articles of this one which are important enough to keep, the information should be mentioned here. Animated cartoons in general are very briefly summarized here when there's definetly a lot more material out there. 
Peter Isotalo 18:57, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animation 

message: What is the difference between caricature and cartoon? Is caricature by definition included as cartoon or the same as cartoon or else? Can probably somebody explain about the relation between cartoon and caricature in this article? Thank you. sentausa 11:49, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say a cartoon is a medium (probably several more or less related mediums/media), while a caricature is a drawing style. 惑乱 分からん 12:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caricature and cartoon 

message: Wikipedia seems to lack a page on cartoon style or cartoonishness, which is distinct from the various media we call "cartoons," and also distinct from caricature or caricature style. Cartoon-style art (in animation or print media) is characterized by heavily stylized and abstracted images, usually humorously distorted. There's also an argument to be made that cartoonishness goes beyond just visuals; as a style/aesthetic it can be applied to all different kinds of media, much the way camp and Symbolism go beyond any one type of medium. R.
Can you help me please to identify the distinction or the difference between a CARTOON and an ANIME, i just needed them in my research work.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.101.85 (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartoon style as distinct from cartoon media 

message: Hi,
Just curious. One day I placed an external link to http://www.cartoon.com.pl. Later it was removed, then it got back. Now it is removed again. Is it a vandalism or this link was considered as spam? In my opinion this site was OK, it was not commercial. Greetings --PhilYY 12:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if a link is not spam or vandalism, they are often removed because they do not fit the requirements of the external links policy. --Mdwyer 03:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartoons from Poland 

message: Wikipedia needs a page of "police mugshot"-like pictures of all cartoon characters (organized by what? Gender? Age?), so people have a chance of identifying a character if seen outside of his rectangular newspaper cartoon box or comic book.
Jidanni (talk) 01:59, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cartoon Character Identification

message: Language links need to be checked, it appears most of them point only to animated cartoon articles. --Janke | Talk 07:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language links 

message: Of all the nigh-infinite possible examples of unrealistic cartoons that could be used in this article, why ? Not only is it "not drawn to be realistic," it's just a crude eyesore.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saint Ethereal (talk • contribs) 02:27, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's free. See if you can do better. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  picture choice 

message: thumbnail  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.49.102.241 (talk) 08:46, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  cid 

message: * Charlie Hebdo shooting 2001:a60:1507:1c01:3db5:118:5573:d881  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:A60:1507:1C01:3DB5:118:6673:D881 (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  see also 

message: I chose not to add it myself due to possible recentism, but would it be acceptable to mention that recent occasion when somebody claiming to represent the target did fight back? tAD (talk) 15:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes that would be a very appropriate addition.  No it is not recentism; Mention also the Copenhagen newspaper cartoon threats. Rjensen (talk) 23:25, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Political cartoons can be humorous or satirical, sometimes with piercing effect. The target may complain, but he can seldom fight back" 

message: i would like to edit this article because i found a grammatical mistake, and wish to fix it
165.228.249.224 (talk) 03:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the right page to request additional user rights.If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request. - Arjayay (talk) 07:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2015 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Cartoon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091210212540/http://www.libraries.psu.edu:80/waringcollections/cartoons/toon.html to http://www.libraries.psu.edu/waringcollections/cartoons/toon.html#index
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080517145807/http://www.hnu.edu/ishs/index.htm to http://www.hnu.edu/ishs/index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cartoon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100731045026/http://www.harpweek.com/ to http://www.harpweek.com/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.libraries.psu.edu/waringcollections/cartoons/toon.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think protection should be removed, it's long enough. Super Mario Guy (talk) 01:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotection 

message: Imho this article has many problems. The "Mass media" label seems to be intended to set the medium that most people will associate the word with apart, but the fine art sketches that this medium got its name from has hardly been called "cartoon" in the last 100 years or more, and animation is as much a part of mass media as print. The first part of the "mass media" section seems to be intended as an intro to divide the subject in categories, but it's unclear, poorly written, and very US-centered. In the whole of the article, the artists that are not known from US publications are from English speaking countries and are mostly mentioned in the historical context. Honoré Daumier is the one non-English speaking exception I could find. The "Mass media" intro does not describe the subject's role in mass media. It mainly blurts out names of artists that are presumably popular in the US, most of which I never heard of. Maybe not so surprising if its source really was the referenced 1959 book, but only one mentioned artist seems to have published anything before 1960. I could quite easily add a bunch of artists from my home country and some others that may be as influential on an international scale. Presumably the biggest problem is that this type of art, especially the editorial variation, has usually not been made for local and national newspapers and not for international audiences. Creating a long list of international artists, possibly divided per nationality, may not be the best solution. I'd like to see some explanation of the development of the genre and about which artists really made a difference (and how or why). I suppose the history of cartoons is described in the "Political" section, but the many readers that are not interested in politics might skip that. The "Comic book" section begins with a very poor explanation of what comics are mainly in the mind of US-readers (in many other countries the magazine format is far from standard), then has a few lines about 1930s history for no apparent reason and closes off with a description of a totally random example of a gag collection that was specially made for a car factory. Not sure whether I'll get around to do it myself, but it should be quite easy to improve on the current state. Joortje1 (talk) 07:12, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a lot that's true here, but one bit that isn't is "the fine art sketches that this medium got its name from has hardly been called "cartoon" in the last 100 years or more".  This remains absolutely the standard, indeed pretty much the only, term in art history. Johnbod (talk) 17:32, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out; I should have looked it up. I probably just assumed that hardly any artist would have called such sketches "cartoons" after the term started to be regularly used for the humorous type, but I forgot that this might at least not have changed for the historical examples. Maybe it would be best to create two different articles for these rather different subjects, but as yet there's very little info on the fine art type. I'm considering turning this page into a description of that subject and refer to political cartoon, gag cartoon, comic books and animation for the other types, and adjust Cartoon (disambiguation) accordingly.Joortje1 (talk) 08:11, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this page should stay roughly as it is, as a kind of super-disam page, given how many potential meanings there are.  Animation is very rambling, and perhaps a split-off History of animation might help. Johnbod (talk) 15:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Eek, I see we already have that. This article needs a section on comic strips, to my mind.  Other sections have WP:UNDUE stuff, as you point out.  These can be moved to the more specific articles. This one should have a group of rather short, streamlined sections, leading to the main articles.  Johnbod (talk) 15:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The fine-art sense of "cartoon" is not the primary meaning of the word; that isn't even a contender. When people say (or link to) cartoon there's a roughly 49%/49% chance they're referring to the illustration or animation sense. We could replace this article with just a bullet-list disambiguation page, but I think the overview here about the history of the term and how the different senses relate to each other is interesting and informative. There's room to improve it (less detail would probably be better), but I think WP is better with topic-overview pages like this (when possible) than just lists of articles. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 15:50, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.  It's not "the illustration or animation sense" so much as the 5,6 or more possibilities in that area. Johnbod (talk) 16:00, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  In poor state 

message: Please add  so people can distinguish them. WikiTom-TheCat (talk) 16:54, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. I don't believe there is a reasonable likelihood of confusion. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:06, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2021 

message: Hi. This article needs a better example of a cartoon than :File:Dr. Seuss WikiWorld.png. That image might be a copyvio -- it very closely lifts elements from Dr. Seuss drawings -- but that's besides my point: that it's not at all like modern cartoons. A modern cartoon consists of what? an image, maybe some speech bubbles or a caption, and a signature. This file is a weird self-referential thing with a ton of text from Wikipedia and a large logo, etc. I'm sure someone on Commons could draw something more like what you actually would see in a newspaper. This is a very bad example of modern cartoons. We could even use like,,, one of Seuss's cartoons like :File:Dr Seuss and the wolf chewed up the children.jpg and it would be more representative of the common form of western newspaper cartoons in recent decades. DemonDays64 (talk) 09:05, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiWorld Dr. Seuss cartoon is a poor example 

message: I don't know the history, but this article used to believe there was a "main article" for animated cartoon, which is presently a redirect into the history section of animation, which does have a few paragraphs on the topic, as part of a much broader history lesson. 
It appears as if some mergist proposed a merge of animated cartoon, which carried, but actually neither editorial community (here at cartoon or there at animation) really wanted to deal with this interloper as a first class entity. 
I made the animation lead own the redirect for animated cartoon, by adding a bold term an a lead illustration (Felix the Cat) but for all I know it won't last long due to some allergic editorial reaction that seems to be lurking behind the curtain. 
Not my knuckle-walking animated bulldog, so this is my one-and-done contribution. — MaxEnt 13:59, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animated cartoon is getting short shrift