Talk:Melissa Duck

Destructive spammer on this page
Someone with terribly bad grammar is repeatedly coming onto this page and trying to add information about the new Looney Tunes Show character Tina Russo—a new girlfriend character for Daffy—as if she were the same character as Melissa. The makers of The Looney Tunes Show repeatedly note that Tina isn't supposed to be the same as any previous character. Meanwhile, the bad-grammar spammer is repeatedly adding garbled references to Tina and the new show all over our Melissa page. I've gone in and removed this crap before, but he/she keeps coming back. At present the page is a nightmare. What to do?Ramapith (talk) 05:37, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Ugh, I wish I would have read that before I tried to tidy up the "new information". --Enwilson (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The best thing to do is to block him from editing, so he won't cause any more problems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.174.21 (talk) 15:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Validity
I would like to call into question the validity of this article. If Melissa Duck is a character in Baby Looney Tunes, that's one thing but if there is no documented evidence that this character is based on previously unnamed female duck characters in classic cartoons, then that portion of the article should be removed. Wikipedia is not a place for original research. Furthermore, weasel words such as "many fans believe..." need to be removed also. Jeff schiller 15:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I looked around a bit and it is possible that the character in Scarlet Pumpernickel was indeed called Melissa Duck, so it lends some credence. I've attempted to rework the article a bit... Jeff schiller 16:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Documented Evidence?
Is there any documented evidence that the female duck in The Scarlet Pumpernickel was the basis for this Baby Toons character? I know that the female duck in the 50s was never named (unlike Petunia Pig). Jeff schiller 17:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I looked around and couldn't find much official word. However, I did find this: http://home.nc.rr.com/tuco/looney/tome/s.html. If you look at the entry for The Scarlet Pumpernickel, the character's name is listed as "Daisy (Melissa) Duck." Isn't that strange? It's quite hard to find any info on Melissa that doesn't seem like it was drawn from this Wikipedia entry, though this might suffice: http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/89-The_Scarlet_Pumpernickel.html. Kidicarus222 17:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I vaguely recall that there was another cartoon featuring a yellow or white duck with blonde hair as Daffy's love interest, although I don't know if this was intended as the same character. In it Daffy is a cute little duckling bought as a pet for a young girl, who quickly grows up to be an obnoxious pest. The girl won't let her father get rid of Daffy, so he buys her another duckling, which she transfers her affection to. Daffy plots to kill the duckling, but can't because it's so young, so he artificially ages it somehow, and it becomes a beautiful female duck. The last scene shows the father looking on in horror as the house is filled with ducklings.
 * This is Nasty Quacks by Frank Tashlin. That short is one of my favourite Tashlin shorts (unfortunately it will not be included in the upcoming Looney Tunes Golden Collection: Volume 4)... Jeff schiller 15:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Like I said, I don't know if this is meant to be Melissa, or not. Daibhid C 15:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Tina Russo Duck
If it wasn't clear from what was posted at the top of the page, if you intend to restore any information that Tina Russo Duck is the same character as Melissa Duck, please find a reliable reference before you do. I have yet to find a single online reference that refers to Tina Russo as anything other than a new character, and this Wikipedia article was the only source which made any connection between the her and Melissa. --Enwilson (talk) 05:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This is getting ridiculous. Does this type of persistent hit-and-run anonymous editing qualify the article for semi-protected status? --Enwilson (talk) 21:15, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Currently, it just says that it's a similar character, which is probably correct. The best course of action would probably be a new article on her specifically or adding her to List of Looney Tunes characters. I agree that the current status is not the best to describe this character, so I think you should just be bold and do so (unless there are enough sources, I think an entry on the list is better). We can then link to the new place from this article. Regards  So Why  21:42, 16 May 2011 (UTC)