Talk:List of Toy Story characters/Archive 2

Nonsense
I have just | removed | some | speculative and non-notable | edits. None of them are sourced and some do not meet WP:NOT. They are also original research. trainfan01 19:31, September 19, 2010 (UTC)

Shorten
If nobody objects I'm going to cut out a bunch of the small background characters. They make unnecessarily long. JDDJS (talk) 03:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I definately agree. I have removed the Magic 8 ball from this article as one example (especially since it is not really a character).trainfan01talk 20:35, November 10 (UTC)

Even with the minor characters cut out, it's still pretty long. Perhaps some characters should get their own pages. The biggest problem with that though is, who should get it? Possibly all of the toys that appear in all 3 movies (Hamm, Mr. Potatohead, Slinky, and Rex) and Andy. Any thoughts? JDDJS (talk) 01:41, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "Unnecessarily long" isn't much of an argument - perhaps you should stop edit warring and wait to see what people think? I's obvious that there are people out there who who disagree with you... TheRealFennShysa (talk) 13:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The article itself says it's too long with all of the characters in it. Why should characters that only briefly appear and play no plot role be included? It's just a waste of space. JDDJS (talk) 01:35, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

The problem is not the minor characters. The problem is the overdetailed sections of some of the major characters (Rex, Potato, Lotso, etc.). The readers have repeated versions of the plots from the films over and over again in each character's section. Sections should definitely be trimmed but not splitted, because most of those characters have no enough notability to have a separate article. Furthermore, per WP:SIZE, lists like this are considered exceptions to the rule of size, which means that it does not matter that this article is over 100 KB since it is a list. Featured lists of characters like List of Naruto characters, Characters of Carnivàle or Characters of Final Fantasy VIII are all over 80 KB and have achieved featured status. -- LoЯd  ۞pεth  06:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Something's not right...
All right. This is really getting out of hand. There has been a mass move from the section on Lotso to its own section, as well as Andy Davis. Rather than getting involved in an edit war, I am going to post the discussion here. Can someone look into this issue please? Thanks. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:52, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I do believe that the character shouldn't have its own article but your use of rollback was inappropriate as the IP's edits were obviously good faith. → ♠ Gƒoley ↔ Four ♣ ← 03:22, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I apologize for my inappropriate use of rollback. The characters need to meet notability requirements and reliable sources in order for it to have a separate article. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes I know; I just wished you used the "undo" button... → ♠ Gƒoley ↔ Four  ♣ ← 21:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand. By the way, should we do a merge discussion if it is possible? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I support the view on Lotso's lack of notability. He should remain in this list, there is no notability at all for a separate article. -- LoЯd  ۞pεth  04:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Cudders?
Halfway through the section about Bullseye, it suddenly starts referring to him as Cudders. Who the heck is Cudders? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.187.129.2 (talk) 22:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea, but it is most certainly vandalism. It has long been reverted now. trainfan01 talk 19:17, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Major cleanup redux
This article contains far too much plot detail. I haven't removed it entirely, but I've tried to trim it down to reasonable levels. Plot points that provide significant insight into a character, or involve the character in significant ways, should be kept, but all the other minor stuff is just making the article unreasonably lengthy and hard to manage (and not really adding anything worthwhile). The reader doesn't need to be able to reconstruct the character's entire journey through a film from this article, just see how the character fits into the film overall. I've also started cleaning up most of the nicknames. What Buzz (in whatever form) calls the characters when he is not himself isn't really necessary to mention here -- it's not the character's real name (same for others, like Bonnie's toys). I also think the characters' aliases in Andy's playtime, while they should definitely be mentioned in the appropriate place, maybe shouldn't clutter the intro line for the character. It's not really an "also known as". Unless the character has a legitimate alternate name, I think the article reads much better if the intro lines are kept clean. That's how I'm going about this, anyway. If I were writing this from scratch, I'd probably include even less, but I didn't want to make the changes quite that extensive (yet). I've only had the time to do a couple so far, so take a look at the Rex and Hamm sections and see if they read OK. --Fru1tbat (talk) 18:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Some stuff here seems to be made up on the spot
...especially for the Daycare center people just seem to be shoe-horning names of lines they like into this article. On Sparks the flint-sparking action was seen on many toys and was not new or specific to Transformers (in fact I seem to recall it was rather old hat by then). Chunk is nothing like a Rock Lord apart from being a bit rocky (he doesn't transform, and no Rock Lords had changeable faces). There's also a spurious link between Zurg and Transformers' Megatron. Now, it is possible that Pixar dropped the ball here (though considering the research they put in to other toys it's highly unlikely) and they have stated all the above is true - but I think it's necessary to provide citations for such odd claims. To me, though, it seems much more likely that this is the product of a typically overimaginative Transformers fan who struggles with the concept of a whole trilogy of Toy Story films that don't make any reference to their favouritest ever line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.101.33 (talk) 14:48, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Organization
If nobody minds, I'm going to make subsections in the ToC for each character. rachel.stewart.42 21:50, March 28, 2013 (UTC)

Trimming down list
Hello. I'm thinking about trimming down this list again to reduce scene-by-scene clutter, fancruft and over detail (detail like this is better served on a Wikia such as Toy Story, Pixar or Disney). I've started to trim down the Hamm and Lotso sections, but I think we can get all of the character descriptions cut down to size without eliminating the essential information. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Rearrange by film
I was wondering if it might be simpler to arrange this list by film. The current back-and-forth order of this list seems needlessly complicated, with characters from each film spread all over the place. Because of the way the page is arranged, it starts off by listing toys from the first two films, then Bonnie's toys from the third, but then it goes to Sid's toys from the first film. Then it shifts to Mason's toys from the 2014 TV special. Then it resumes listing the Toy Story 2 characters. Then it's back to Toy Story 3, then some characters from a short film and another TV special, and then it's on to the human characters. I think it would be somewhat easier to navigate the list if the characters were arranged by film, which seems simpler than the multiple sections that are here now, and it would do a better job of keeping each film's characters closer together. AJFU (talk) 15:22, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I'll probably rearrange the list next week. There would be four main sections, one named for each of the films. A fifth section would be called "Other projects," and would include three subheadings: one for Small Fry and two for the TV specials. This seems simpler than the current arrangement. AJFU (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Bo Peep
Certainly, after the fourth film Bo has gained much notability. There are several articles by reliable sources that are devoted to her major role and her feminist twist. Should the character get her own article back? -- LoЯd  ۞pεth  16:26, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Forky (Toy Story) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:19, 23 August 2019 (UTC)