Board Thread:Wiki-Related Discussion/@comment-1916997-20150926141249/@comment-26159109-20150926210408

Eskaver wrote: Farerb wrote: Lady Junky wrote: Farerb wrote:

Anyway, the information provided by the book is not enough to create a page. A note in the Disney references page is more than enough. Can you tell me how you can affirm that? Did you read it? Yes I have. Having just two characters from the film is not enough (just like Cinderella and Rapunzel were not). The book was not even a rendition of The Fox and The Hound, which is about two peole that struggle to have a friendship because society decided that they should be against each other. So it is nice to have characters from that story blended in, but the whole theme of TFATH was not in the book, and the characters by themselves do not deserve a whole page, if so then Cinderella and Tangled should have one as well. Not at all. (Meaning, I disagree with the last statement) Tangled had literally no reference to it. Rapunzel didn't have magic hair or.....anything else that the film had. And the witch character does tend to show up in Rapunzel fairytale variations. Cinderlla doesn't deserve a movie page because there isn't much difference between Once's variation that particularly holds the Disney one over the other variations (well, sort of). I agree, however this is the same situationwith TFATH, that's why I don't think it deserves a whole page.