Talk:List of Shrek (franchise) characters

Untitled

this is not what the title suggests it is. It's really just a list of the fairy-tale based characters, which is essentially just a truncated character list. so in my opinion this either needs a total do-over or a change of title. Philmcl 21:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I am removing the copyedit tag, since I went through and made a slew of grammar corrections. Chrissypan 22:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cyclops Shrek copy.jpg

Image:Cyclops Shrek copy.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 05:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fairty Shrek copy.jpg

Image:Fairty Shrek copy.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 08:06, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:HeadlessHorseman Shrek copy.jpg

Image:HeadlessHorseman Shrek copy.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 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 23:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LittleRedRidingHood Shrek copy.jpg

Image:LittleRedRidingHood Shrek copy.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 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 00:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Threelittlepigs Shrek copy.jpg

Image:Threelittlepigs Shrek copy.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 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 01:56, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:HeadlessHorseman Shrek copy.jpg

Image:HeadlessHorseman Shrek copy.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 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 05:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LittleRedRidingHood Shrek copy.jpg

Image:LittleRedRidingHood Shrek copy.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 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 03:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Muffin man shrek.PNG

Image:Muffin man shrek.PNG 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 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 01:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mongo shrek.PNG

Image:Mongo shrek.PNG 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 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 06:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Move to List of Shrek characters

This really needs to be a standard characters list so some of these other minor characters can be merged in here and make one strong Shrek characters article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree, there's just so much tons of redundancy in and between both articles. Lots42 (talk) 18:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No main characters

Shouldn't there be some of the main characters here, like Shrek, Donkey, and Puss in Boots? I think there should be a section on major characters, instead of only showing minor ones. I mean, what is the point of a Shrek character page without Shrek? 98.166.139.216 (talk) 01:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I propose to merge the following pages into this list:

• Pinocchio (Shrek)
• Queen Lillian
• The Three Little Pigs (Shrek)
• Dragon (Shrek)
• King Harold (Shrek)
• Dronkey
• Three Blind Mice (Shrek)
• Big Bad Wolf (Shrek)
• Ogre Triplets
• Merlin (Shrek)
• Snow White (Shrek)
• Cinderella (Shrek)
• Sleeping Beauty (Shrek)
• Rapunzel (Shrek)
• Mongo (Shrek)
• Rumpelstiltskin (Shrek)

The reason is because all of this characters have not managed to prove Notability outside the Shrek, having very little pages with no sections about real world content showing the subjects' impact in popular culture or coverage by a vast amount of reliable secondary sources. As there is little content in all of this pages, almost all of it can be placed into this list, so there will be no content lost. Thoughts? --LoЯd ۞pεth 01:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Support. SpikeJones (talk) 02:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Support. They have no notability outside of the Shrek universe. BOVINEBOY2008 02:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Deny. Boxing245; the characters listed above should have their own separate articles so that readers can understand, comprehend and get into a level in which they could 100% know the characters. Most of these characters are secondary ones while Shrek and his gang are the primary ones. I believe that it's best to leave the articles the way they are. However, I would not support any tertiary character-article like Monsieur Robin Hood as they have not much info. to be explored nor told.

As I said in the proposal, the articles can be merged with their entire content, so there would be no info lost. The reader can perfectly understand with character lists, and that is recommended for secondary/minor characters that have not managed to prove Notability. As the creator of most of that articles and as you opposed to the merger, you have the burden of evidence to prove that the subjects of those articles are indeed notable to deserve their own page, otherwise they will be merged. --LoЯd ۞pεth 18:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The merged was performed. All articles in the previous list are merged into this article. --LoЯd ۞pεth 19:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Arthur as a Main Character?

I noticed the Artie is counted as a main character. Is this right seeing as he only appears in Shrek the Third and not in any other films? Ztyran (talk) 20:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Humpty Dumpty

Humpty Dumpty's appearance as Master Fu may actually be a reference to Egg Fu, a villain in Wonder Woman Comics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chang_Tzu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.250.155.126 (talk) 17:19, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Eclair / Debbie

As of my understanding, there is a conflict as to whether or not the name of the second female dronkey is Debbie or Eclair. I'd like to point out that the most reliable source is the one which gets into the article in case of a contradiction, and in this case, because the DVD content is directly affiliated with the movie series, the name must go to "Eclair" for now. MSN and AOL are not reliable enough to change the name, unless they specifically mention that there was in fact an error made on the part of the filmmakers. I've changed all instances of "Debbie" to the proper name and removed the paragraph outlining the contradiction, which you can get back in the history. Regards. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 21:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Was also completing an extensive copy edit, about 6,000 words through, but my browser crashed, and I really don't have the patience to do it again. Sorry. I would like to recommend that you cut the useless information such as dress color and extensive details about the characters' personalities, as well as their very minor appearances in movies. Remember that things which are unsourced can be removed at anytime, so speculation or original research should be removed as well. Now I'm going to go cry in a corner for a while. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 02:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Shrek's take on Arthur Pendragon does little to provide notability outside of the Shrek universe. Come on, we don't need an article for every single character who's prominent in one of the films. Harry Blue5 (talk) 16:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Agree completely. Based on the earlier merge of many secondary characters, I don't think this requires any further discussion. (The Artie material needs to be trimmed down as well.) Someone should just step up and merge it. It is a glaring inconsistency as it stands. Kace7 (talk) 02:39, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

scared shrekless and shrek the halls

on the appearance of characters list, can someone add shrek the halls and scared shrekless?

Drew Harris 00:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)User: pixiemasters

Why don't you? ➜GƒoleyFour (GSV) 02:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

shrek halls and shrekless

{{edit semi-protected}}

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Stickee (talk) 09:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

pinnochhio shrek 4D appearance

there is an apperance of pinnochhio at the end of shrek 4D. why does it say no?

69.236.168.233 (talk) 23:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't know much about shrek so, meh. →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 05:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

cleanup ideas

It seems to me that some of the characters here do not need to be mentioned at all, or can be summed up in a single paragraph, something along the lines of "Other fairytale characters are seen or mentioned briefly in the films, such as ..." Geppetto, Tom Thumb/Thumbelina, Wendy, and some others could be summarized this way, and probably don't need their own sections. Actually, if it were up to me, I'd probably remove/summarize about half the list. If the entire section amounts to describing one or two jokes featuring a character as cameo, I think it's probably not something we need to include. Along the same lines, it seems to me that the table should be greatly reduced in size (or perhaps deleted altogether). There's an entire column, for instance, for Puss in Boots with only 3 "Yes" boxes. Is that really worth the space it's using? --Fru1tbat (talk) 19:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge Lord Farquaad

The information in his article could easily be merged here; as it stands it is trivial and made up of plot summaries and speculation. After running a quick Google search I found little in the way of secondary sources or other assertions of notability--GroovySandwich 07:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support Androids101 (talk) 00:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

British and American English

There's a mixture in the article. Before copy editing, I counted about 100 occurrences of "film" and just over 30 of "movie", so normalized to the former. Elsewhere, I didn't go one way or the other except with expressions that night not be understood on one side of the pond. "Spit up" is unknown in the UK (we do understand "throw up", but I've used "vomit"). "Valley girl" isn't known in the UK either, but I left it as it's linked. "Jock-bully" is unknown in the UK, but I don't know what it means and it isn't in either WP or Wiktionary. I've tagged it; it anyone can replace it with something neutral, then thanks. --Stfg (talk) 22:50, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Lillian/Meriam

Which is her name? Her section is called Queen Lillian, but different sections use different names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.229.168.2 (talk) 20:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Puss in Boots (Shrek)

Who deleted the Puss in Boots (Shrek) page. Nicholasstaffiere 02:37, 7 January 2017

Muffin Man vandalism

The section on the Muffin Man was vandalized and now says slanderous things about a politician. For months before this it had the title of "Mr. Moore." Since I'm not well-versed in editing and it isn't a simple revert, can someone fix this? 195.64.79.61 (talk) 21:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

"Stabbery (Shrek)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Stabbery (Shrek). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:22, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Uncomfirmed and ambiguous final fate of Charming.

Regarding the last edit, that's exactly the point! Do you understand that it's just because of the lack of sources to prove or disprove and because of the confused and uncomfirmed final fate of the character that I chose to write it in a more netrual and less hazardous way? I thought it was clear, in fact there's written nowhere that Charming dies in Shrek the Third, and in fact the Wikipedia page of Shrek The Third doesn't states that Charming dies either. And his cameo still alive happens AFTER Shrek's nightmare at the end of the short film Thriller Night, not during. The only thing I did was writing a part of section in a neutral way without specifying an unsure and ambiguous "death" and corrected an inaccuracy in the plot of Thriller Night. P.S. Charming is the only main villain of the franchise that appears (alive) in the theater, Farquaad and Fairy Godmother don't appear, because their death is confirmed, Rumplestiltskin is confirmed to be alive, and all the other characters present never died in previous films and shorts.151.82.224.202 (talk) 09:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Separate page for Kitty Softpaws.

Even made a written written draft. XSMan2016 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Major NOTPLOT and original research issues

In light of the recent discussion at NORN, I've removed a large amount of information due to it focusing too heavily on in-universe information (see also WP:CRUFT) and containing original research. Wikipedia should mainly discuss fictional characters in terms of their development, design, reception, significance, and influence, and not regurgitate their roles in the works they are featured in, especially not in the level of intricate detail as was the case here. The fact that many (if not most) character articles and lists fall short of this encyclopedic standard does not make it right; it only underlines how chronic the problem really is. I've chosen to scale back this article in particular because I frequently encounter it at pending changes.

I provided a few ref ideas at the top of this page, which editors can use to re-work and expand the article. Any editor restoring or adding excessive in-universe info or original research will be directed to this thread, where inclusion can be discussed per WP:ONUS. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 13:30, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Someone vandalized the page

I swear like several months ago I looked at this page and it was complete but now someone has chopped out like half of the characters HiGuys69420 (talk) 17:25, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Articles for Kitty Softpaws and Rumpelstiltskin???

perhaps there could be articles for them as both are quite well-known HiGuys69420 (talk) 23:29, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep WP:GNG in mind. I'm not sure it's met in either cases. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 00:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)