Talk:Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Disney Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Disney on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.

Please limit discussion on this page to the Walt Disney Home Entertainment article. tregoweth 21:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Change article name to Buena Vista Home Entertainment

Shouldn't this article change its name to Buena Vista Home Entertainment in order to better reflect the video/DVD business of the entire Walt Disney Company, rather than to only focus on the Disney-branded stuff?RicJac 23:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FBIs should have their own article

The FBI warnings should have their own article along with other FBI warnings of other home video divisions. Imax80

  • Um, no. The logos are barely notable enough for an article; video FBI warnings are definitely not. Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. Also, this page is intended for discussing the article, not logos and whatnot. I've deleted all comments that aren't related to the article. —tregoweth (talk) 06:28, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I thought the FBI screen discussion was discussion of the article. Haven't people been trying to add that information? Powers 17:02, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
      • This is why one shouldn't edit late at night. :) I've reverted my deletions. —tregoweth (talk) 17:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This is not a message board for discussing logos or videos.

This page is intended for discussing the Walt Disney Home Entertainment article. If you want to compare your various video collections, please find an appropriate discussion area somewhere else. This is not the place for that. —tregoweth —tregoweth (talk) 15:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

  • (I get sweatdropped by the message) Uhhh... why not put what you see as "unrelated" to the article into another archive? I'm beginning to think of creating a separate discussion page for the sole purpose of archiving the messages you just deleted. --Ryanasaurus0077 20:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, technically, if they're unrelated to the article, they shouldn't be here at all. —tregoweth (talk) 00:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Add more trivia

I think we should ad more trivia to this article. Imax80

There is already too much trivia. Good articles do not contain lists of trivia. They should be put into sentences and incorporated into paragraphs in the main article text. Trivia usually causes negative votes for Good Article or Featured Article status discussions. Canadiana 15:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stock Numbers

I am confused because when the videos come out, they have a stock number. The initial video release of Pete's Dragon has the stock number 10 VS, that's the lowest Disney stock number I've seen. Does that make it the first video? Imaxination 80 --Imax80 14:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, 10 is the lowest stock number, so Pete's Dragon was the first title for Walt Disney Home Video, though I'm fairly sure it was one of several titles shipped on that day. Canadiana 15:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quick Question

Have a look at this: http://images5.theimagehosting.com/dis1.GIF http://images5.theimagehosting.com/dis2.jpg Can anyone help me? As these are not the covers the "Black Diamond" series had. --The Track Master 23:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorry, can't resist. Anyway, that cover and ad appear to be for the British releases, which is probably why they don't look like the U.S. "(The) Classics" releases. —tregoweth (talk) 01:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Woah! Sorry about the harshness, man. Actually, I'll say thanks! Do you know if UK copies exist? --The Track Master 13:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

  • I would guess so, but I don't definitely know. —tregoweth (talk) 16:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be looking. By the way, you are welcome to talk at my talk page. I will not break a rule again (maybe once :) ). --The Track Master 20:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course the Classic movies were released in the UK. Who said they weren't? Since all those pictures include UK ratings symbols on them, they are definitely UK videos. Canadiana 15:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Look at this

Talk:Logos of The Walt Disney Company - Strictly Logos My private forum. --The Track Master 23:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disney being Pixar

When the Brother Bear DVD came out in April 2004, the discs were just like the November 4 Finding Nemo release. Was Disney trying to be Pixar? I couldn't resist asking. Imax80 17:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I dunno, but what I do know is "why the heck did they do that?". --The Track Master 20:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
"Why did they do that?" Why did they do what? Canadiana 16:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
In what way were the discs like Finding Nemo? Disney owns Pixar and Disney has released all of Pixar's movies to date, so any configuration of Pixar DVDs to date was Disney's doing anyway. Canadiana 16:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Because one disc has widescreen and bonus features, and the other has full-screen and bonus features, just like the Nemo DVD. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Imax80 (talk • contribs) .
    • There are a limited number of ways to distribute two versions of a movie and bonus features between two discs. That two DVDs happen to use the same method is hardly evidence of copycatting. Powers T 13:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Disney owns Pixar now, but all the Pixar feature movies have been distributed by Disney from the beginning. They can't be copying Pixar, because Disney's Buena Vista Home Entertainment designed the Finding Nemo DVD in the first place. Besides that, the "Vista Series" release of Who Framed Roger Rabbit already used a similar configuation in 1993. One disk has the "full screen" version with special features that appeal to children, while the other one has the wide-screen version with special features that appeal to adult collectors. Canadiana 18:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was because Disney is having a meltdown nowadays due to picky critics. Imax80 05:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] October ??, 1980

The first titles released on October 1980, can we please get the day they came out? Imax80 16:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC) .

I don't know the answer, but I would like to remind you to please sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Powers T 15:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
It's official: October 21, 1980 (sale) and March 4, 1980 (rental). --Ryanasaurus0077 14:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Predecessor to Sing Along Songs

I am fairly sure that there were two cassettes from the mid-1980s that were a predecessor to Disney's Sing-Along-Songs. They were DTV: Rock, Rhythm, and Blues, and the other one was DTV: Golden Oldies. Imax80 21:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

There were five: three in 1984 and two more in 1985. There is an article at D-TV. They're not at all the same kind of thing as Sing Along Songs. DTV was non-Disney popular music with Disney visuals. Canadiana 04:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
I finally saw some footage from those tapes. Were they by any chance intended to be hit sellers? Because I don't remember hearing any popular thing about D-TV. Imax80 02:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
They were intended to be hit sellers. Actually, they were the main focus of the WDHV's Christmas ad campaign for 1994. I don't know how they sold. They didn't sell very well for us in Canada, where I think many people had never heard of MTV at the time and didn't really "get it". Canadiana 21:17, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Source for the DiscoVision releases

We need it so we can remove the cite source tab. Imax80 01:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, we need to know where the December 16, 1978 date comes from. The Blam site, which is cited, and which most of the rest of the DiscoVision information comes from, says that all the Disney DiscoVision titles were released in 1979. The first batch of DiscoVision players went on sale December 15, 1979, and were sold out within an hour or so. Were the first Disney titles actually available the next day, or did DiscoVision begin releasing them in the new year? (Blam is possibly basing their information on which catalogues titles appeared in.) Canadiana 05:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VS, VF, BS, BF on the end of stock numbers

I removed the letters on the end of the initial release stock numbers because the ones listed only applied to the VHS and not the Beta tapes and because I think the "S" may stand for sale and was not necessarily on the "rental-only" tapes. Many stock numbers also end in "F" but I'm not sure why. After the "S" designation was discontinued, the "sale only, rental prohibited" tapes ended in "VF" and "BF" for two years or so before the "F" was dropped (and the "rental prohibited" notice). Canadiana 05:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I must have been half asleep when I wrote that because it's kind of confusing. Actually, what I meant was that the "sale only" notices disappeared two years before they stopped the "F" (and possibly the "S") labelling. Canadiana 22:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Best-selling releases?

Should we include them in the article? Becuase Disney leads home video sales because The Lion King sold 55 million copies, Finding Nemo with 25 million, and Toy Story with 79 million. Imax80 19:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to move list of notable releases

I don't like having the list of notable releases here. I think it would be better in its own article. The problem is that the list is bigger than the article already and it is probably getting bigger.... Canadiana 00:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

This discussion has been moved to Talk:List of Walt Disney video releases to make it easier to follow. Canadiana 17:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikilink dates!

Hi, folks. I'd do this myself but I'm short on time. All those dates in this article need to be wikilinked. Powers T 14:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

As things stand, I agree, but given the "proposal to move list of notable releases" above and the discussion currently taking place at Talk:List of Walt Disney video releases, I think wikilinking the dates at the moment is premature. If the list is moved as I'm proposing, the dates may have to be in a different format anyway. See the discussion there and leave your comments. Canadiana 17:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

BVHE is officially changing its name to Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment. Be prepared to update this page soon. 69.231.233.61 03:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Development

The amount of missing citations is ridiculous; most of this is common knowledge. Also, why delete a new section? If it needs more information add it, don’t delete the section that needs help. This page is all about Walt Disney Home Entertainment, so why does it stop at 1985? Why is everyone against expanding it passed 1985?

Until recently this was the last paragraph

July 16, 1985 saw the home video premiere of Pinocchio ($79.95). After the price was lowered to $29.95 in late 1985 to encourage more consumer sales, Pinocchio became the bestselling video of that year. The prices on other videos available at the time had their price reduced to $29.95 as well.

That makes no sense, last time I checked it was 2007. I have tried to add information but I need help. I don’t want to sound like a whiney lazy person, but I am trying, and no disrespect to anyone. 53180 16:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)53180.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Kidnapped on DiscoVision.jpg

Image:Kidnapped on DiscoVision.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 Wikipedia: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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Pete's Dragon front cover (1980 release).JPG

Image:Pete's Dragon front cover (1980 release).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 Wikipedia: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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Robin Hood front cover (1984 release).JPG

Image:Robin Hood front cover (1984 release).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 Wikipedia: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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)