Talk:Cinderella (Disney character)

Cinderella's changes in appearance
This article does not mention the fact that the appearance of Cinderella changed from white to blue in the 1990s, or that her hair colour changed from reddish blonde to white blonde. The images cited here are stated as being from the 1950 film but they are most definitely from the most recent reiterations of Cinderella.

A good sample of the different images of Disney's Cinderella can be found here:

http://www.fanpop.com/spots/disney-princess/answers/show/19181/why-cinderellas-dress-always-portrayed-blue-when-white-movie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeslaine (talk • contribs) 23:20, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The page image looks edited to be white instead of blue though? Elsewhere online the same image appears with the dress in blue, and I can't find an official source, but I strongly suspect that's the official version of the image. I'm all for mentioning the change, but it's not Wikipedia's place to make the dress white where it's not. Spookiyu (talk) 19:19, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Ethnicity
Does Cinderella have an official ethnicity like other Disney Princesses do? --72.67.93.68 (talk) 04:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Joshuaj102003 has been identifying her as French when there are no sources identifying the Disney character as such. -- Neil N  talk to me  13:43, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

NeilN Cinderella is French because in the ride its a small world at Disneyland in Anaheim she is in France with Jaq and Gus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshuaj102003 (talk • contribs) 02:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NOR, specifically, "To demonstrate that you are not adding OR, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented." --Neil N  talk to me 03:56, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Needs a copyedit, but I can't quite see what it should be
This sentence under Voice needs a copyedit:

"Then, without saying a word to her, friends Ilene transferred to the office of film Disney."

The second comma is definitely wrong, but without checking the material referenced, I can't tell what the sentence is trying to say. It could be:

"Then, without saying a word to her friends, Ilene transferred to the office of film Disney."

But if it is that, I don't see the point in having the sentence at all. Whether Ilene worked for radio or film doesn't seem important to me as the next sentence says "[a]fter listening to the material, Walt Disney decided immediately that he had found the voice with which to speak and sing its main character, and contacted Ilene." That is the important part.

Or it might mean:

"Then, without saying a word to her, her friends transferred the material to the office of film Disney."

Or something similar, which makes more sense in terms of the story, but is a much bigger edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manolan1 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Moving to Cinderella (Disney)

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 00:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Cinderella (Disney character) → Cinderella (Disney) – See: Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 25 --76.175.67.121 (talk) 21:41, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose this is not about the Disney Cinderella franchise, nor the Disney film Cinderella, this is only about the Disney character Cinderella. The proposed name is therefore ambiguous disambiguation. And further, the Disney film Cinderella would be the most likely sought topic for the proposed title. "Cinderlla (Disney)" and "Disney's Cinderella" should both point to the Cinderella (disambiguation) page or the film article, and NOT the character article. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose Article is titled properly. --Neil N  talk to me 06:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The proposed title is too ambiguous. It could refer to the Disney character, the Disney film, or the Disney franchise. Egsan Bacon (talk) 03:02, 10 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cinderella and Aurora photos
Now that Cinderella is being shown in her original dress colors here on Wikipedia I think Aurora should be shown in the colors she was advertised in. On her page at Disney wikia, she is wearing a blue dress. That was the color of the dress she had for most of her original film and it's even the color of her dress in the Kingdom Hearts series. She was also originally advertised wearing blue. Look at these VHS tapes. Plus, there are these theatrical release posters. She also used to wear it in Disney parks. Heck at the El Capitan Theatre in 2008, she is even advertised wearing blue in the marquee. If we are instead going to base it on the colors, they are being advertised in now, then Cinderella's dress should not be silvery white if Aurora's is pink. Sb1990 (talk) 18:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Has been established — at fine retail everywhere
With her iconic glass slippers, ballgown, hairstyle, and transformation, one of the first on-screen makeovers of its kind, the character has been established as a fashion icon, receiving accolades and recognition from InStyle, Entertainment Weekly, Glamour and Oprah.com, as well as footwear designer and fashion icon Christian Louboutin, who, in 2012, designed and released a shoe based on Cinderella's glass slippers.

You just know something went wrong on the way to the forum when the lynch pin of a 62-word sentence turns out to be "has been established".

And it probably should be punctuated differently, to boot:

With her iconic glass slippers, ballgown, hairstyle, and transformation—one of the first on-screen makeovers of its kind—the character has been established as a fashion icon, receiving accolades and recognition from InStyle, Entertainment Weekly, Glamour and Oprah.com, as well as footwear designer and fashion icon Christian Louboutin, who, in 2012, designed and released a shoe based on Cinderella's glass slippers.

Nice. A "with" list containing three concrete items, followed by an abstraction, then an oblique comment on the aforementioned (does her makeover consist of adding these three concrete items to an old story, or does her makeover consist of her New Improved Transformation within the revised narrative itself?), and only then you arrive at the massive-passive main clause (character has been established), before descending into another gerund (receiving), a short list (accolades and recognition), a long list (InStyle, Entertainment Weekly, Glamour and Oprah.com), and a bonus, afterthought list (Christian Louboutin) about whose commercial endeavors this sentence still finds room at the back of a looooong bus to be strangely explicit. &mdash; MaxEnt 00:32, 26 January 2019 (UTC)