Talk:Mulan (disambiguation)

Mulan

Cross-posted at Talk:Zhang Ziyi, Talk:Jan de Bont, and here.

Back in 2010, there were plans to produce an international movie adaptation of the Chinese folk-tale of Hua Mulan, featuring Jan de Bont as the director and Zhang Ziyi as the titular heroine. I created Mulan (2011 film) after reading this article by The Hollywood Reporter. However, months later, that same website revealed that the financing of the movie had fallen apart shortly before the shootings. Mulan (2011 film) was eventually moved to Mulan (upcoming film). I just userfied it, moving it out of mainspace, and requested deletion of the two redirects. Cheers, theFace 13:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Mulan (upcoming film) was edited by more than one editor and is not a private property. If it meets Wikipedia's standards of inclusion, it should be maintained as a main article. If it does not, then it should go through the process of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. --Pengyanan (talk) 14:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mulan (upcoming film). - theFace 15:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The AfD is closed. The content of Mulan (upcoming film) is now located at User:Face/Mulan (upcoming film). Cheers, theFace 20:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Mulan moved to Mulan (1998 film). Clear consensus for that, at least. Where should Mulan point? Clearly no consensus for that. I'm going to take that discussion up to WP:RFD and would invite you all there. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 01:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

---

• Mulan (disambiguation) → Mulan
• Mulan → Mulan (1998 film)

– It's not that the 1998 film is the primary topic, since the legendary character is also known as "Mulan", and is the basis of the film and already widely known prior to the film. Further, the Mulan franchise of Disney's and the Disney character vies for prominence in Disney related topics, as Mulan is one of Disney's "Princesses" heavily promoted in Disney merchandising separate from the film series, and we have a separate article on the Disney character. Even in the English speaking world, as Hong Kong and Singapore are part of the English-speaking world, and MOS:TIES to the original legendary figure means that we shouldn't treat the United States as the jurisdiction that proves what is primary. -- 65.94.78.9 (talk) 14:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support per WP:NOTPRIMARY - the legendary figure has clear long-term significance, with the popular Disney character being based on it. Even with respect to Disney there's ambiguity between the film and the character, with none of them being a clearly primary topic "highly likely to be the topic sought". I would prefer the name to redirect to Hua Mulan, similar to Cinderella and Snow White, but I see the case for a disambiguation page. Diego (talk) 15:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment I would have no objection to such a modification (redirecting "Mulan" to "Hua Mulan") ; I am the originating nominator of this RM discussion -- 65.94.78.9 (talk) 04:47, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose the move as proposed, but support a move to redirect this title to the original subject, Hua Mulan. This is actually more in line with Robin Hood, a mytho-historic figure about whom numerous film adaptations have been made, including a noted Disney animated version. Here's our chance to actually be an encyclopedia, rather than a mere compendium of what's hot in popular culture. Furthermore, I would note that adaptations of an original work or concept are not truly ambiguous to it, since they arise from a common concept which is capable of being written about in an article. Like Robin Hood, that article should be the one on the original figure. bd2412 T 15:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
• Support, disambiguation is always cleanest, and the film and the historical character are both highly likely to be sought. At least it should be a disambiguation page for a while to allow incoming links to be fixed more easily. —Kusma (t·c) 17:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
• Support. Additionally, I think that Disney's Mulan should be merged into Mulan (disambiguation), since information about the Disney character and movie is included on both disambiguation pages. Fortdj33 (talk) 03:36, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose (light), I also support Mulan redirecting to Hua Mulan as per rationale discussed above. This topic should be treated like Snow White, also with a simple hatnote at the top of Hua Mulan indicating the redirect and pointing folks to Mulan(disambiguation). I'd support the above proposal as a second choice, depending on whether a consensus can emerge about Primary Topic. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 06:23, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
• Support, to make it clear that once again, Disney made a movie about an existing faery tale, instead of coming up with a plot of their own. There must be almost twenty stories now that are better known as Disney movies than the original stories, which lasted decades, if not centuries, before the Disney movies. Nothing against Disney as such, but it has to be made clear that Disney did not invent these faery tales, as millions of children in the world must now think it did. JIP | Talk 19:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
• Support moving the film, but oppose moving the dab page per BD2412 and Metal.lunchbox - "Mulan" should redirect to the main Hua Mulan article as the encyclopedic WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as well as an effective WP:CONCEPTDAB for the other uses.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
• Mildly support but strongly oppose redirecting "Mulan" to Hua Mulan. Chinese speakers won't call Hua Mulan just Mulan; and Westerners searchin for "Mulan" almost certainly have the Disney character in mind rather than the Chinese character. Would anyone redirect Robin to Robin Hood? Timmyshin (talk) 00:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Of course we wouldn't redirect Robin to Robin Hood, because Robin also refers to a variety of birds that are unrelated to the Robin Hood character, and Robin also refers to Batman's sidekick, who is also unrelated to the Robin Hood character. By contrast, there is no "Disney character" and "Chinese character"; there is only Hua Mulan, a Chinese character about whom Disney made a film. The question is more like asking whether we should redirect Einstein to a disambiguation page to distinguish the historical German physicist Albert Einstein from the fictional depiction of German physicist Albert Einstein in the film, I.Q.. bd2412 T 15:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• MOS:TIES is about national varieties of English. It's not relevant to this discussion. --BDD (talk) 19:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
• Comment see also, a move request at Talk:Mulan (Disney character) -- 65.94.78.9 (talk) 20:11, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Mulan (film)"

The usage and topic of Mulan (film) is under discussion, see Talk:Mulan (1998 film) -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 06:05, 18 August 2015 (UTC)