Template talk:Mickey Mouse in Disney animation

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fictional characters This template is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character Disney This template is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney Animation This template is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation

This template was considered for deletion on 2014 October 5. The result of the discussion was "keep".

The titles should be italicized, not the dates. Also, this is going to be a really big template, might be nice to break it down by decade or something. It also assumes that every Mickey Mouse film meets the notability guidelines for films. Probably they do, but most of them have not been created yet which makes me wonder. And last of all, I wouldn't add this to more articles until it's more developed. Just my $0.02. :) Pigby (talk) 06:19, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the template creator actually intended all the titles to be italicized, but there were a few misplaced apostrophes. i fixed them, and now it works fine. i don't have an opinion on the other points you make, except to say that i think that probably a case could be made for individual notability of all these early ones. no reason to try to make it now, i don't think. — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 22:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

they have dates  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:183:CB00:4310:AD20:C27F:FF68:9EC (talk) 12:31, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]