Talk:The Land Before Time (film)/Archive 1

Sentence and Prose structure: Synopsis Section
What a poorly written article - noone wants to wade through hundred of lines without paragraphs, or without proper sentences. I've done a bit but theres lots more to sort out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.61.93 (talk) 00:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I've done quite a bit more work on it. I've shortened it and fixed a lot of the grammar, and I'm going to try to shorten it some more while still keeping as much of the sentences and styling of the original editor. Feel free to help. --RainbowWerewolf (talk) 13:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Sequels Discussion
My opinion is that this article should include a list of the movies in this series. Scorpionman 15:00, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Universal Pictures plans for an extended 20th anniversary edition theatrical re-release of The Land Before Time with never-before-seen footage in 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.21.37.49 (talk • contribs)
 * Do you have a source for this information? tregoweth 00:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * What is up with anons readding all those copyvios and stuff about excess songs and morality? Is it time to semi-protect the page? CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 21:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It will never go back to theaters. All the sequels have been on VHS/DVD only -24.92.41.95 02:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it is 2008 now, Universal should make a decision. November 18th is this month. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.213.74.151 (talk) 01:59, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Mysterious Beyond = Americas?
In the terminology section, there is a questionable statement linking the "Mysterious Beyond" to the Americas. What evidence exists that identifies any location in the LBT series with a real geographic entity. I've always interpreted the LBT world to be a fantasy one, home to dinosaurs from all lands and times.

Land Before Time
Isn't there another sequel for Land Before Time where they all go to a huge ocean and get stuck on an island there, and finally get off of it using a log? Yes there is. They get menaced by a shark (sharptooth that swims) and get stranded on an island after high tide hides the land bridge. Its only a brief segment though. The bulk of the movie is geared toward surving on an island stranded with chomper's parents, a pair of full grown T-Rexes. I think it was #5. The mysterious island or something --Darkling235 01:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

...Your point being??? Wilhelmina Will July 20th, 2007.

Neutrality?
The negative quote from rotten tomatoes towards the amount fo sequels brings up the question of Neutrality. Is that even neceassary at all? Claude 07:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it's a reference for a fact that indeed reflects the common discussion, that people dislike the sequels. Besides, you should see what the quote replaced!  CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 19:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * A website that dislikes the sequels isn't any kind of informative fact. Jumping the shark is all opinion too. It leaves a generally negative opinion in the article towards the sequels.Claude 02:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * At the moment, the article still contains criticisms of the sequels which are unsourced and there is no explanation as to who these opinions belong to. I personally am fond of the sequels, although I think the original is far superior. But our own opinions are unimportant in relation to the article. --207.75.34.158 (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

YouTube

 * The Pizza Hut commercial (first four minutes of the film included) was shown online. Sonofabeachey sent "This is awesome and brings back so many memories!", LemonKitty sent "Awww...no Littlefoot hatching?", and RidgeShark sent "Nope. One reason why I put the video up was to honor Judith Barsi's birthday is some small way. She voiced Ducky - so I ended it with Ducky. I tell ya though, I'd upload the whole movie if I could!". Well, if you want to upload the whole film, you've got to upload the widescreen version. I haven't seen the widescreen version because this film was released four years before I was born. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.132.104 (talk • contribs)
 * I'm sorry, but there isn't a widescreen version anywhere at the moment. Universal are too busy milking the cash cow on the sequels to give the original a chance for a proper release. The thing is, in my opinion, they don't care. Movingimage 16:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There is a pan and scan version on HBO and Cinemax airings and a widescreen version HBO HD and Cinemax HD airings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.132.104 (talk • contribs)
 * There's probably no widescreen version because kids aren't as concerned about aspect ratios and such. &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 23:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Except for HBO HD and Cinemax HD airings because they air most films in widescreen, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.132.104 (talk • contribs)
 * I used to be unconcerned about aspect ratios and such (because I have VHS tapes) until I got DVDs when I started liking widescreen better than pan and scan (by choosing widescreen DVDs when they're separated pan and scan DVDs). Now I only get full screen DVDs when they're NOT separated from widescreen DVDs or when past films, such as Dumbo, were created in full screen. I saw that The Land Before Time is seen on YouTube, but is only in pan and scan. The only reason why I wanted The Land Before Time to be uploaded on YouTube in widescreen is because it has pan and scan-only DVDs and the film was released in theaters four years before I was born. I believe that the only film that has a pan and scan-only DVD, but is uploaded in widescreen on Google Video is The Thief and the Cobbler. I have a Dish Network player, but not an HD one yet. If you have Comcast, Dish Network HD, or DirecTV HD, then look for the widescreen of The Land Before Time the next time it airs HBO HD and Cinemax HD (not on Dish Network HD and DirecTV HD). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.132.104 (talk • contribs)
 * Now I'm seeing that the film is removed from YouTube. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.132.104 (talk • contribs) 16:01, 16 April 2007

Possible merge
It has been sugested that all the characters are merged with The Land Before Time article itself. Why not, instead of that (since they appeared in countless sequels beside the first) make a List of The Land Before Time characters like the List of minor Star Wars characters? Dark jedi requiem 11:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, and don't forget a List of The Land Before Time voice actors, too.

Trivia
I was reading this article, and got down to trivia. I noticed that one part, takling about the similarities between this and Dinosaur by Disney, and immediately remembered some. However, I also want to know if thes should be included, so that people not as familiar with either Dinoasur or this film can get an idea of what scenes/plot ideas from the film they have viewed are similar to scenes/plot ideas from the other.--Comic Master

The Great Valley as an interpretation of heaven
Quite a few times this rumour has cropped up on this article. My belief is this rumour is original research because there is no evidence from other sources to back this up. The great article on cataroo.com, also an out-of-print book, The Animated Films of Don Bluth, has no mention of the dinosaurs dying and going to heaven, or "The Great Valley". If the rumour is true, the author would include it. So far, I've seen no proof. Movingimage 20:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Inaccuracies section
Is that section really necessary for a children's cartoon about troubled dinosaurs? Besides it left out the most glaring inaccuracy of all; "Dinosaurs don't talk" --Generalmiaow 21:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

That's TOO nitpicky, you! Anyways, we don't want people to take movies seriously! You think everyone knows this is just a cartoon? Sure they do, but do they know it's inaccurate? Maybe some people may take it seriously! Dora Nichov 09:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This is absolutely ridiculous and just not encyclopedic. Compare this to movies set in current times but star, say, a completely different President... no one will point out "hey, that guy isn't actually president in 2007". Unless I hear some merit for this section remaining, I'm deleting it. And if I do hear a valid case, I'm going to have to recommend we also point out dinosaurs talking, dinosaurs having knowledge of their possible demise, and the fact that cartoons didn't exist millions of year ago. AmberAlert1713 22:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That's just the start, since 80% of this article consists of indiscriminate or trivial lists. Tagging for WikiProject Laundromat -- Stratadrake 00:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

It's deleted. If you want to see it back, make a good argument here, or take it up on my talk page-- otherwise, it's just getting deleted again. AmberAlert1713 20:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Really, look at the examples you made! Not one is relevant:
 * Dinosaurs talking: Who says they don't? You just can't understand their language!
 * Dinosaurs having knowledge of their possible demise: When did they hint at that?
 * Cartoons didn't exist millions of year ago: That's the most irrelevant of the lot -- the dinosaurs in the show never filmed or watched cartoons, so that's highly irrelevant. Dora Nichov 11:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * One of the mistakes listed is that the Michael JacksonSaurus is in the film, what is that and where does it apppear.

Don't be silly. Dora Nichov 03:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

No seriously it mentions it in one of the pages in the history.

I don't know what you're talking about. Dora Nichov 00:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Heres the link from the history section look at the inaccuracies section (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Land_Before_Time&oldid=125975396#Inaccuracies)

Vandalism... *yawn* Dora Nichov 10:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Great Valley=South Los Angeles

 * Is there anything to support that?--Rex Imperator 14:23, 16 Febuary, 2007
 * I very highly doubt it.--Ye Olde Luke (talk) 18:26, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposal for a rewrite
So this article is a bit of a mess. Here's what I think we should focus on in a rewrite:
 * -Terminology- this section might just be right out deleted, merged with trivia (probably a bad idea), or integrated into another part of the article in passing (with just a few, solid examples).
 * -Order- I think that we should try to base this on other, good movie pages. Plot, development information, release info and critical responses come at the top of the page, actors in a side-box or neatly at the bottom, anything else (like trivia, popular culture) at the bottom, if deemed encyclopedic.
 * -Sequel Info- there's almost no way to make that look pretty... suggestions would be appreciated.

I'm going to wait a few days to see if you guys have any input, then I'll try to make some of those changes. AmberAlert1713 20:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I already started deleting/reorganizing things. This article was a mess. All of the sequel information should be kept to a VERY BRIEF paragraph or so in the "Sequels and spin-offs" section. Other than that, someone can make a The Land Before Time (series) page, or something. This article should focus on the 1988 film and little more. That being said, the plot should be embellished a bit and a development section would be great. The trivia about Bluth having to trim the film would fit in there nicely. And I thought about starting a "Reception" section myself, planning to merge the box office information with critical reception, but the Rotten Tomatoes page for the film is near-empty. Anyway, it's a start.Pele Merengue 01:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Ducky is.......
M'kay people, would you PLEASE stop changing her species designation? Yes, Ducky more closely resembles a Saurolophus. However, she is consistantly reffered to as a Parasaurolophus in official material, such as TLBT DVD extras and the official site. She's merely misidentified, like the "Raptors" in Jurassic Park- which are still referred to as Velociraptor, rather then Deinonychus, which they more closely resemble.

Calling her anything else is original research, which wikipedia explicitly forbids, kthnxbai. She's a Parasaurolophus because the people in charge of the movies say she is. Deal with it.

64.228.2.20 13:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

They do mention in the Sing Along Songs video that Ducky is a Saurolophus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.95.85 (talk) 00:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

In regards to the Jurassic Park raptors, the larger species of that kind of dinosaur were being called velociraptors around the time Crichton was working on the book and film. T.J. Fuller, Jr. (talk) 09:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Official material has also listed Littlefoot as a Brontosaurus and (quote from a DVD cover) 'Bracheosaurus'. Please note that the first term is not even in use anymore and the second is incorrectly spelled, as well as being the wrong species. The 'Raptors' in Jurassic Park actually have a reason for being called that; Deinonychus (the animals the JP Raptors more closely match in size) was once credited under the name 'Velociraptor Antirrhopus', a point that is also noted in Michael Crichton's book. Ducky does not have such an excuse, neither her, NOR her parents resemble Parasaurolophus. To keep on saying that her species is that just because official info (which is not always entirely accurate anyway) lists it is ridiculous. It would at least be useful if it was mentioned she resembled Saurolophus. Even Deinonychus gets a mention under the article about the Jurassic Park Velociraptors, so to not do a similar thing for Ducky would be highly hypocritical if you ask me. Clifftothemax (talk) 22:38, 11 February 2008 (GMT)

Notice for new redirects related to LBT movies
I want to let you know that I made redirects. For example, if someone searched for "Land Before Time 12" it would not say, doesn't exist, instead I redirected it to The Land Before Time XII: The Great Day of the Flyers. Test it: Land Before Time 12, Land Before Time 5, Land Before Time 9. See it works, it's just that I wasn't able to continue. For example if someone searched for "The Land Before Time 12," or "Land Before Time XII," or "The Land Before Time XII," it wouldn't exist. So, if anyone who's up to it, please do it.

Here's the chart that shows what needs to be completed:

And note to anyone who sees this and edits other movies. This might be an idea for other movie series. Thanks for your help! 4myself4 22:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll polish off the ones you missed. Thanx for the chart, makes this way easier. --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 23:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

This article should not cover the series in general
Because no one else has, I've created The Land Before Time (series). Put lists of the entire series and whatnot over there, they have no place in an article that should be primarily about the first film. Pele Merengue 05:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Inaccuracies section
I believe that this section should not be kept on this page. This is a children's movie depicting lovable cartoon dinosaurs. It makes no attempt to be scientifically accurate, and there is no reason to point out the ways in which it fails. MrCheshire 19:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, we don't want people taking things too seriously. Dora Nichov 09:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the inaccuracies section. It's very blatantly original research. It's not really worth noting since just about every dinosaur film ever made has mixed Jurassic and Cretaceous species and made creative liberties- it's not as though it's something that can be uniquely attributed to The Land Before Time. The rest of it is just nitpicking, some of which comes into conflict woith official sources, (such as claims that Ducky is a Saurolophus rather than a Parasaurolophus.)

K00bine 01:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The inaccuracies section is currently back on the page as of July 6 2007, but I wanted to make some points. First of all the inaccuracies should probably pertain only to this movie not the sequels. For example Velociraptors do appear in the sequels, but I do not recall seeing them in this movie. Also I don't really think we need to say that Pterosaurs were not dinosaurs, they lived with the dinosaurs, and in fact there is no mentioning in the film that Pteranodons were dinosaurs.

One other thing, if Ducky is a Parasaurolophus, should we add that, Parasaurolophus has longer horns.

Crests, not horns. Dora Nichov 03:17, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Landtime.jpg
Image:Landtime.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Japanese voice cast
I already know that Ikue Ōtani (the voice of Pikachu on Pokémon) voices Chomper in Japanese dubs of the second and fifth films and the TV series. So who voices Littlefoot in Japanese dubs of the first through twelfth and the TV series? Is it Ikue Ōtani (the voice of Pikachu on Pokémon) or a Japanese actor that provides Johnny Cade's voice in the Japanese dub of The Outsiders or Rica Matsumoto (the Japanese voice of Ash Ketchum on Pokémon) or someone else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.132.104 (talk • contribs)
 * Never mind, Etsuko Kozakura voices Littlefoot in Japanese dubs of the first through twelfth films and the TV series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.132.104 (talk • contribs)
 * Oops! She only does it in the Japanese dub of the TV series. Minami Takayama actually voices Littlefoot in Japanese dubs of the first through twelfth films. Now tell me, does she voice Johnny Cade in the Japanese dub of the 1983 film The Outsiders or is it someone else voicing him? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Why the hell should we care about the Japanese voice cast? This is an English language film after all isn't it, if the Japanese cast is here you might as well have the cast for every damn language it was dubbed in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.126.239.22 (talk) 03:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree, in a more nuetral way, that the Japanese voice cast should not be noted. Lots42 (talk) 03:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Let's get rid of them then...Clawandfang (talk) 15:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, since no-one seems to be doing it, I guess I'll remove them. Jan Panda (talk) 12:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Inaccuracies section... again
I've removed it because it's Original Research and mostly irrelivant or outright wrong. For example...


 * Pachycephalosaurus did not have horns.

The Pachys in TLBT didn't *have* any horns; merely the pointy clusters of bone circling the head and encrusting the snout which pachys are typically portrayed with.
 * Velociraptor most likely had feathers.

There were Velociraptors in the original TLBT? News to me.


 * Tyrannosaurus did not stand up straight.

They didn't leap around like kangaroos either. Sharptooth only stood erect once, and when he did he was sliding backwards, off-balance, into a cavern, during an earthquake.


 * A Meganeura appears briefly in the movie, smaller than it was in real life. Meganeura didn't live during the Mesozoic either.

Gee, did it occur to the person who put this in that maybe it was just a generic dragonfly? Where's the evidence for it being a Meganeura?
 * Rooter has some hair on him, but no dinosaurs had hair.

No dinosaur had eyelashes either, which, um, almost ALL THE MAIN CHARACTERS posess. Irrelivant.

The rest of it (Dinosaurs from different eras living together, no Tarpits during the Mesozoic, No grass during the mesozoic, etc) are merely cliches/inaccuracies commonly made in movies about dinosaurs that cannot be attributed specifically to The Land Before Time and therefore do not warrant notice or inclusion in the article.

Really, this inaccuracies section strikes me as similar to Marvel fans pointing out minor errors in the art to try and get a No-Prize. If you want to expand the article, how about doing something constructive (like, say, expanding the Plot Summary) instead of playing Jr. Professor and cluttering up the article with banal trivia lists?

K00bine 19:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Irrelevant points and inaccuracies from sequels removed. I still think inaccuracies are worth noting, for people DO take such movies too seriously, and other articles have "inaccuracies" sections too. Dora Nichov 02:35, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm removing the whole of this. The film features dinosaurs that speak colloquial American English, so viewed as a documentary about dinosaurs it's one gigantic inaccuracy.  Viewed as a pleasant entertainment for kids, however, it's pretty good.  Moreover that section is completely original research. --Tony Sidaway 13:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to make sure everyone knows what we wrote down is not made up stuff and here are the reasons why.


 * The dinosaurs featured existed in different time periods. Apatosaurus and Stegosaurus existed in the late Jurassic period, while Triceratops, Pteranodon, Saurolophus and Tyrannosaurus existed in the late Cretaceous period. Dimetrodon, which appears in one scene, lived during the Permian era, before the age of Dinosaurs. Therefore, the period where this film takes place is unspecified.

This is in books, websites, and other sources all over the globe.


 * Pteranodon ate fish and lived near beaches and coastal areas, and had no teeth. In fact, most pterosaurs were carnivores and not true dinosaurs.

Also is sources all over the globe.


 * When an animal is ready to hatch from its egg (including a dinosaur), it takes a few hours for the animal to come out.

In The Magic School Bus episode "Cracks a Yolk" Mrs. Frizzle mentions at the end of the episode that hatching is hard and that it normally takes 12 hours.


 * The Parasaurolophus depicted in the film more closely resembles its relative Saurolophus.

In sources everywhere you can see pictures of both dinosaurs and tell the difference easily.

So you see were not listing Original Reasearch we've got sources —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.95.85 (talk) 20:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

And I deleted it again; in all those instances you listed, Sharptooth is *rearing back*; he never maintains the "tripod" pose for substantial lengths of time.

Also, regardless of whether you deem Ducky a Saurolophus based on your personal observations or not, the filmmakers state that Ducky is a Parasaurolophus, as can be seen on the official LBT website and DVD extras. Stating that she is anything other than one, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE FILM, is original research.

As I stated before: If you want to expand the article, how about doing something constructive (like, say, expanding the Plot Summary) instead of playing Jr. Professor and cluttering up the article with banal trivia lists?

Also, please sign your comments. And try citing a more reputable source than "The Magic Schoolbus". :P

K00bine 17:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed Inaccuracies... AGAIN
Because it's completely irrelevant, original research, and more-or-less amounts to a trivia list, which is discouraged on wikipedia.

The plot summary is extremely bare-bones and in serious need of expansion. It goes into hardly any detail and might as well just be a footnote.

As awesome as it may make you all feel to prove a cartoon written for children by non-experts "wrong" about dinosaur facts, it would be far more constructive to focus on the film itself rather than to squabble over inconsistancies in a fantasy film compared to Real World Science.

K00bine 17:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Koobine if you don't like this article having an inaccuracies section on it, why may I ask have you made no comment on the inaccuracies section in the article for dinosaur. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.95.85 (talk) 20:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Because I don't like Dinosaur. Am I somehow expected to contribute to articles I have no interest in? What relavence does this have to the discussion at hand?

It's not as though nobody has objected to the inaccuracies section in that article either.

K00bine 21:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually they didn't. Plus, the movies aren't fantasy, they're realistic fiction and that's why the section is added. 68.164.89.22 23:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, reheheeeally? A quick look at the talk page completely refutes that statement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Disney%27s_Dinosaur

^I see plenty of squabbling over the inaccuracies section there.

Also: TLBT = Realistic Fiction? Since when are cute, anthropomorphized talking cartoon dinosaurs considered realistic fiction? It doesn't make any attempt at all at realism; hence the scientific inaccuracies. TLBT is no more "Realistic Fiction" than The Lion King. Ergo, it is a fantasy film.

K00bine 08:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Once again I must say this, it IS realistic fiction. Apart from talking dinosaurs, it's fairly realistic. In fact so is The Lion King in the same way, for evidence see http://www.lionkingpride.net/facts.html. They keep the movies grounded into the dino world as much as possible and barely make in-jokes and never make anything cartoonish happen. And the characters aren't anthropomorphic! They don't stand on two legs or wear clothes or do anything like people. By the way, real mature with that really thing. 68.164.89.22 23:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

''And the characters aren't anthropomorphic! They don't stand on two legs or wear clothes or do anything like people.''

You're using the furry definition of anthropmorphism.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism is defined as: "Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena."

Talking dinosaurs fits the definition of anthropmorphism to the letter.

They keep the movies grounded into the dino world as much as possible and barely make in-jokes and never make anything cartoonish happen.

Nothing cartoony EVER happens, eh? Like having a seven ton animal leap effortlessly through the air like a kangaroo, or survive a thousand foot drop onto solid rock without splattering like a bug on a windshield? Or a baby Pterosaur impacting the ground hard enough to break through it, and being later being bitten by a Tyrannosaur, again without serious injury? Or a baby Triceratops being able to ram an enormous boulder with a T. Rex on top of it hard enough to send both over the side of a cliff?

Nawww, of course the Land Before Time never does anything cartoony.

In fact so is The Lion King

Realistic? Oh really?


 * Lions having a monarchy based on inheritance rather than one based on the guy badass enough to overthrow the present ruler and murder his offspring
 * Zazu being able to support a rhino with his wings and survive having it fall on top of him
 * Rafiki fighting Hyenas like a martial artist
 * Timon and Pumbaa: Embellishment not needed

I suppose we'll need to put an inaccuracies section in The Lion King article too.

A somewhat realistic art style = Not the same as realism. The Lion King is not above cartoony embellishment or anthropomorphism. Neither is The Land Before Time. Your argument fails again.

If I sound irritated, it's because I've been putting up with this nonsense for months now and I'm sick to death of it. Faggotry like this is the reason nobody takes wikipedia seriously as a reputable source of information. If people want to know the science upon which The Land Before Time draws its inspiration, it's as simple as typing "Dinosaurs" into wikipedia's search engine and reading up on the real thing.

An article about a fantasy film that has an inaccuracies section longer than its plot summary does *not* have its priorities straight.

K00bine 08:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

That's not what I meant by cartoony. I meant like eyeballs popping out of the head, or the whole body falling apart or twisting, or someone's neck stretching. 68.165.173.157 (talk) 00:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Would personification fit more soundly than anthropomorphism? I can understand that personification is more oberserver-to-object than object-to-observer, but it's proly cause less confusion. Then again, never mind, the relation is wrong for the way these things are portrayed, but I'll post anyway, for teh lulz or somesuch. T.J. Fuller, Jr. (talk) 09:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The Land Before Time rated PG?
When did The Land Before Time get a PG rating in the United States? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.95.85 (talk) 00:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Never, because it was rated G in the United States.

Ok it's just that someone keeps switching the ratings for the U.S. as PG in the ratings list.

Title Note?
"The Land Before Time" is simply a fancy take on the term "Prehistoric," isn't it?. -- Is this fact ... ?  08:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Inaccuracies
Come on, peeps. The movie has singing dinosaurs. Of course it is going to be full of inaccuracies. This would be like going to a Tom and Jerry page and editing it to say 'A mouse could not survive being repeatedly beaten with a fireplace poker'. Lots42 (talk) 23:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Tell me right now, do any of the Inaccuracies listed have anything to do with the dinosaurs talking, getting hurt and magically surviving, or singing? NO!!! All the facts listed only involve the science of dinosaurs. I'm sure it's just fine to have an inaccurracies section here. None of the facts are irrelvent anymore, and I removed the facts pertaining to the sequels. Now about Original Research, I'm sure even the facts for the inaccuracies section for Disney's Dinosaur were not done by real scientists, but it's still there so I think thats a good reason why we can add it here too.
 * I've removed the inaccuracy section. This is a cartoon feature presented as entertainment for children. If there were inaccuracies that had been written up, say, in Paleontology Today, we might want to note that.  Otherwise it's obviously just a kids' story and listing so-called inaccuracies is original research. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 18:38, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've been observing the innacuracies issue for some time now, and I have a slightly different take. Altough this shouldn't happen, children see mice eating cheese in cartoons, they force the mouse to eat cheese, and the mouse could get sick and die because mice do not actually like cheese. There are some very relevant innacurracies that have been brought up in this article, and that many people have no doubt grown up believing to be true. However, if by leaving out the innacurracies section we are making a statement that people should focus on the artistic elements of this film and not so much the sceince, I can see that point. I would respectfully advise both sides to agknowledge that the other has a good point. Take a look at featured articles to use as examples. Also, look for references about the innacuracies in books, magazines and journals that seem very respectable and notable, such as mentioned above. But perhaps we should leave out the innacurracies section for now, as the article is still at an immature stage anyway with plenty of room to grow in the future... perhaps wikipedia guidelines will even change in the future. --RainbowWerewolf (talk) 12:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Voice acting for Petrie
User: 71.119.140.181 (and other IPs in the past) have changed the voice actor for Petrie from Will Ryan to Sterling Holloway. I've googled around and found no evidence to support this assertion. If anyone (particularly the IP user who keeps changing this has a source to support Mr. Holloway's involvement, please cite it in the article. Otherwise, I think we need to stick with the credited actor. qitaana (talk) 01:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Triceratops
I've reverted some edits relabelling Cera as a monoclonius. The film-makers clearly intended this drawn animated character to represent a triceratops, and if they've given it characteristics more representative of another ceratopsid that's a design error, not a change of species. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 06:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Jebus, first the stupidity over the Ducky Saurolophus/Parasaurolophus issue and now this!? The official website identifies her as a Triceratops, her father is *clearly* a Triceratops and her species are colliquiolly referred to as "Three Horns".

Next thing you know, people will start labelling Chomper as an Allosaurus on account of having three fingers, or calling Littlefoot a Camarasaurus because his head is boxy.

K00bine (talk) 21:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have notived this too, and have been editing accordingly, although I did add in a note on her page about the lack of horns.Clawandfang (talk) 12:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

The reason Cera only has one horn is because she hasn't grown the other two, because she's not fully grown. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.183.25 (talk) 18:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)