Talk:Chip 'n Dale: Rescue Rangers (TV series)/Archive 1

message: I've changed the article Chip 'n Dale: Rescue Rangers (which refers to the NES game) to redirect here, and have copied the contents of that article to Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers (game). I've also updated the link to that page in the Internal Links section at the bottom of this page. --Psyk0 20:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers: the NES game 

message: Some episodes were released on VHS, but I don't remember when or which episodes. Hackwrench 22:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  VHS 

message: I was recently sent a warning for being a spammer when I readded a link that had been deleted.  A link to a Chip 'n' Dale site that (yes) I maintain had been added to Wikipedia by one of the visitors to my site and had remained in the Chip 'n' Dale Rescue Rangers external links section for months without incident (as well as in the regular Chip 'n' Dale article).  
Today, however, one of the site's regular visitors sent me a message advising that the link had recently been removed (supposedly without a reason given).  I looked at the article, noticed the link was gone, and readded it, assuming that it was removed by someone who was going around removing links <I>just because</i> (such as a vandal).  This action got me a spam-warning because, presumably, being the author of the site in question, the fact that I readded the link constitutes it as spam or self promotion.  Would it have been different if one the site's visitors had readded the link?  Personally, I feel that the site was originally added with good cause - it has "meaningful, relevant content" that is not already cited in the article, and is directly related to the subject in question.
I understand that the Wikipedia guidelines state that a website which one personally owns or maintains should not be linked to due to neutrality concerns, but previously, the site *was* added by a neutral party before it was removed.  If I cannot add the link myself, then the guidelines also state that "If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link."   -- So that's what I'm doing, mentioning it on the talk page, and letting everyone else decide if it's relevant or informative.  I know that Wikipedia is not a mere collection of links, but if the link helps provide additional information beyond what can be found in the article alone, then shouldn't that be appropriate?
--Duckyass, 03/29/06, 1317
: Greetings. I'd like to address you and welcome you to the encyclopedia...and I believe there may be a misunderstanding here which we can discuss. Several editors saw the link I removed, and there seems to be a consensus that it isn't appropriate for Wikipedia, and have asked you not to re-add the link. However, while it is a warning, it is one easily grown beyond by taking positive steps toward Wikipedia.
: Speaking to the link added in February 2006, I did attempt to remove this link immediately after it was first put in the article, in early February. The website was not very complete, and (with respect to Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers), was providing information like episode guides which, as the topic has been fleshed out, Wikipedia should have itself, and does now have.
: I was recently sent a warning for being a spammer when I readded a link that had been deleted.  A link to a Chip 'n' Dale site that (yes) I maintain had been added to Wikipedia by one of the visitors to my site and had remained in the Chip 'n' Dale Rescue Rangers external links section for months without incident (as well as in the regular Chip 'n' Dale article). 
: Again, I believe the notification is not to label you a 'spammer' as much as a suggestion to take a different course of action; the word 'spammer' wasn't even used in the suggestion. Unless your visitor knew your login and was logging in as you, I can attest to the fact that you yourself did add this link first, and did so here: . I did remove this link on every page it was added on, and removed it on the grounds that the website did not provide information that Wikipedia should anyway; and, in fact, most links on the page on 6 February were 404 errors.
: That said, the link was immediately added back by you, and I decided to let it go because I couldn't find an explicit policy about the matter (that day), and did not want a block because of the three revert rule (see WP:3RR). I state for the record that I was not happy with the link being there at that time, but left it for the time being.
: Recently, I found another page which addressed the issue and did point to a policy: WP:EL, which provides a standard by which external links should be weighed. An episode guide and information about the show itself can and should be added to Wikipedia to make them the best articles they can be, and those seemed to be the major steering points of the website. At least three different users seem to agree that the link is not appropriate for the pages it is being put on, so I would like to suggest moving on from this -
: ...but if the link helps provide additional information beyond what can be found in the article alone, then shouldn't that be appropriate?
: WP:EL actually addresses this, with the following: (Links to avoid): In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose.
: If I can make a counterproposal, why not add the encyclopaedic knowledge you do have to the articles that exist now, to make them better articles? You clearly have a vast knowledge of the program and episodes; why not add content to Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers and Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers episodes, to improve them? I imagine doing so can only improve the articles, and satisfy all parties involved. Content on Wikipedia is, ideally, about making the encyclopedia better, after all. Hope to see some contributions from you, Skybunny 20:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In other words, the link in question should be a reference, not an external link?  =)  Powers 23:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or better yet, simply add any relevant information from the website to the article. --InShaneee 00:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't that what I said?  =)  Powers 03:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  In an attempt to stop the slow edit war going on on this page about external links, I've attempted a strict approach to the external links that are present. Can all editors involved agree with the three links remaining (two of which are common enough to have their own Wikipedia template, and the other being Disney's official page for this show)? Skybunny 18:49, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most certainly. As policy, I would not be opposed to one informative fansite link either, but discussion here about what that should be would be prudent. --InShaneee 18:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Strongly agreed.  The fan community for Rescue Rangers appears to be larger and more active (even now) than that of any other Disney Afternoon show.  At least one fansite link should be included to help illustrate that.  Powers 15:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Removal 

message: I've noticed a bit of an editing disagreement going on in the history page about whether or not Peter Cullen ever provided the voice of Monterey Jack in the series.  Peter Cullen was, in fact, the original voice for Monterey - Jim Cummings took over the voice later on in the series, and the difference is very noticeable (especially to the trained ear who was used to Cullen's voice).  I wanted to verify this information with a reliable source before I posted here, so I checked the facts with Corey Burton, the voice artist who provided the voice of Dale.
This is what he had to say:
Peter was in fact the original Monterey Jack.  After the first batch of episodes there was a major shakeup on the production end of the show, when one of the "higher ups" at Disney TV Animation was displeased with the results from first-time writer/director Dev Ross - and was especially annoyed with Cullen's voice (featured so prominently, it must have really grated on a person already disappointed with the episodes).  So, while still employed as various incidental characters, Peter was dismissed as the lead character, and it was handed over to Jim - who basically just did an imitation of what had been done before.
I hope this helps in resolving the matter.  Duckyass 15:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It'd be nice to have a source for that quote. --InShaneee 16:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed.  As discussed at No Original Research, a personal interview is not a reliable source, no matter how impressive it might be that you have access to Corey Burton.  =)  What we need is a published cast list that shows Cullen as the voice of Monty.  Powers 01:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well that depends on who Tad Stones is and who published the interview.  Sound clips would not be sufficient, although it would satisfy a bit of curiosity.  The link you gave (Ulitmate Disney) is borderline.  It looks authentic, but we don't know where that information came from.  If it came from somewhere on the DVD, that'd probably be enough.  Powers 18:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow, I'm certainly convinced. Do a URL reference on the page next to Cullen's mention, and I think it's a lock. Skybunny 17:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed.  Thanks for the detective work, Duckyass.  I'd still be interested in those sound clips.  =)  Also, you may want to submit the information to IMDb, which lists Cullen, but only as the voice of Meps.  Powers 18:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The submission has been made to IMDb. :)  Regarding the sound clips, I don't know if BeeBot will ever get around to it, so I threw some voice clips together in two separate sound files that compare Cullen's Monterey to Cummings' to satisfy any curiosity. ;)  If my method of sharing this is somehow inappropriate, since they are hosted on my site (the recent subject of linking controversy), let me know and I'll find another means of sharing the clips. --Duckyass 18:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voice work 

message: I was listening to a fan video on YouTube (blending this show's theme with stuff from Cats Don't Dance), which made me wonder if The Jets (the group that recorded the theme) ever recorded a full version as a single?  WAVY 10 17:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also found a music video by the band that was likely created to promote the show. Should I add the link?  WAVY 10 19:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, You Tube links are NOT appropriate and those are copyright violations. AnmaFinotera (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theme 

message: It has been proposed that the individual character articles (except Chip N Dale) be merged into this article.  This would be in keeping with the MOS and with Wikipedia guidelines (particularly WP:FICT.  Except Chip N Dale, the show characters are mostly limited to this series and do not need individual articles.  The individual articles are mostly plot regurgitation and are unlikely to survive an AfD.  So I suggest we be proactive and get the merge done and this article nicely cleaned up rather than losing all of the character articles completely.  AnmaFinotera (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it would be good idea to merge these articles because some people don't alow a lot of images on one article. I would be best if people leave the templete on there as well.--Stco23 (talk) 22:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

text: After further debate, I've removed Rat Capone from merge and AfDed it.  He only appeared twice, which does not make him notable.  He is just a minor villain and was never even mentioned in the main article.  Throwing around inappropriate labels with an insulting tone really does not aid in the discussion. AnmaFinotera (talk) 08:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After further debate with who? Certainly not anyone here who cares about CnDRR, and certainly not with me on my talk page, and certainly not at Talk:Rat Capone. Just because he's not on the main article doesn't mean he can't be, which is precisely what a merge would do. And don't tell me you're not a deletionist, you say as much when you say you oppose trivia sections on your user page. Wl219 (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Further debate as in "I thought about it further."  It is a fairly common turn of phrase.  Saying I oppose trivia sections does not mean I'm a deletitionist.  Wikipedia is NOT a trivia haven or a place for such sections.  Its called enforcing the guidelines and policies behind Wikipedia to improve the encyclopedia.  If you want to throw labels around, though, fine.  However, while doing so, make sure you remember WP:Civility.  You might also want to read up on WP:OWN and WP:EFFORT and WP:FICTION. AnmaFinotera (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of Character Articles 

message: This is very inconsistent with the site in general and should be split or remade healivy. The merge was very poorly executed (not even an infobox) and needs an overhaul and considering probable future developements one might aswell restore the game specific pages in a proper fashion. (Djungelurban (talk) 04:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The merge was done in a fashion consistent with other video game listings in other show articles.  If you have suggestions for formatting changes, feel free to make them, however the game articles should NOT be restored - they were unnotable stubs that could not have survived an AfD. The articles should only be restored if they can be properly filled out and made into real articles.  Otherwise, listing them here is quite sufficient. The infoboxes were left off because there is so little information on the games that I think it would leave big blank spots, and I haven't seen it used in other articles which include video game information, but I'd certainly be willing to entertain the idea if it can be done in a way that doesn't detract from the article.AnmaFinotera (talk) 04:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm all for the gaming articles.  Most of the cartoon shows I know have their video games listed as seperate.  Look at Duck Tales.  And you have to remember you merge these two (really distinct) items and you looks categories, because Chip n' Dale is no longer listed in the Nintendo Entertainment System games cat, which it should be.  This merge is very shoddy and should be restored back to how it was.  Look at the NES Rambo game, for God's sake.  It has its own page -- Chip n' Dale should definetely as well. Berenlazarus (talk) 20:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The games are not notable enough to have their own articles and do not need them. They are fine where they are.  The redirects can (and have) been fixed to include the appropriate categories so the games still appear in the list. AnmaFinotera (talk) 22:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split of video games 

message: I'm not entirely sure where this should be put - as a reference? An external link? - but the Toon Disney page for Rescue Rangers is here... 196.21.126.135 (talk) 10:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That link was in the article as an External Link, but some people felt it should be removed because it isn't updated anymore.  I've added it back however. AnmaFinotera (talk) 12:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  CDRR toon disney link 

message: I'm curious as to why the credit for Peter Cullen as the original voice of Monterey Jack continues to disappear from this article.  It was agreed upon a year or so ago on this talk page that sufficient sources had been provided to verify this as fact, and the matter was settled.  Why is this suddenly an issue again?  Is it because the discussion has disappeared from the talk page?  If this needs to be verified again, I can provide several links to several different sources that credit Peter Cullen as one of the voice actors to contribute his voice to the character of Monterey Jack, including an official press kit released by Buena Vista (a source which was at one point linked to in the article).  How many times is this going to have to be reverified? 
These are some of the sources I managed to scrounge up again.  You may take your pick as to which you consider the most reliable (including a Wikipedia article on Cullen) 
Buena Vista's Official Press Kit for Pooh's Heffalump Movie which credits Cullen as the voice of Monterey Jack:
http://media.movieweb.com/galleries/2748/notes.pdf
About the Cast (Transformers) from Movieweb, which also lists Monterey Jack among Cullen's vocal work 
http://media.movieweb.com/galleries/3311/notes.pdf
Additional articles which continue to include Monterey Jack when mentioning his past vocal credits:
'''
http://www.visualhollywood.com/movies/transformers/cast.php#CULLEN
http://seattlepi.com/movietimes/moviepn.asp?movieID=46946
http://www.ultimatedisney.com/chipndalerescuerangers-volume1.html
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0191520/
http://www.cinemarx.ro/persoane/Peter-Cullen-52131.html?actor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Cullen
http:// www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Peter-Cullen
http://tripatlas.com/Peter%20Cullen
http://www.radiovideoactive.com/interviews.html
http://movies.ispy-blogs.com/movies/interview-with-the-vioce-of-optimus-prime/
 Duckyass (talk) 08:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of those are either dead links, non-reliable sources, or Wiki mirrors. For now, however, I've adjusted the article to note both voices, as the Disney Encyclopedia entry is also a reliable source. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Voices of Monterey Jack 

message: Re: this edit.  I checked the original source and Grant does indeed state that the recordings of MacNeille and Burton are sped up for Chip and Dale respectively.  But, I think two points must be considered here: first, that the tempo of the recordings is secondary to the desired effect of raising the pitch, and so perhaps need not be mentioned; second, that Grant's encyclopedia is chock-full of personal interpretations, and it would not surprise me in the least to find out that he simply assumed that the pitch-raising was accomplished by simply speeding up the recordings.  Powers T 17:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a reliable source, however, so unless another reliable source says otherwise, it should be considered WP:Verifiable (which may or may not always be accurate). I think it is relevant, though, as it is part of the production information. What about the other Disney encycs? Do they say the same? -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sped-up voices? 

message: That might not improve the article in any way but i didn't spot anything about their international image anywhere on the page. It is strange that their names were changed in many languages to "Knabbel 'n' Babbel" "Tic and Tok" or "Chip and Chap" as well as many others variants. I wonder what is the reason behind those name changes?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.58.145.47 (talk) 16:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Disney characters generally have different names in different countries, since the principle audience is children and Disney wants to make the characters' names easier to pronounce. Same is true for most classic Disney characters like Donald, Goofy, Mickey etc. --TheHande (talk) 19:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  In other languages.. 

message: Are the Japanese voice-actor names somehow relevant to the general context of the article? Why list only the Japanese voice-actors? Why not the German, French, Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic, Mandarin-Chinese, Hungarian, Polish, Russian, Arabic and Spanish actors as well? The Finnish wikipedia at least seems to list the casts for the Finnish dubs of Disney shows, does the English wikipedia really need to also contain this information? --TheHande (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Dub voices are relevant either. And why just the Japanese voices? What significance did they have to the English version of the show? Also the series has been redubed in Japan recently so if you're listing the Japanese voices should you list both Japanese voice actors? 98.92.201.24 (talk) 16:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely should be removed, though that info would be appropriate on the seiyus' individual wiki entries. Evan1975 (talk) 04:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It should stay on the Japanese Wikipedia article. 99.229.41.79 (talk) 00:54, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese voice-actor names