Talk:Mickey Mouse and Friends (comic book)

Page rewrite

The existing page needed complete rewrite, in that it listed the main stories in eight issues, the author, the publisher, but said nothing decades of other work, characters, format, publishing history. So I'm creating another article, along the lines of the Walt Disney's Comics and Stories article, which has been heavily worked on, and which currently doesn't have any tags for improvement.

I don't have the references at hand that would be desirable, and to avoid Original Research, quite a few things may be left unsaid. Please indulge in heavy reediting of my material here, if you've got sources, better information, etc. One exceptional source, unfortunately, has strict limitations for using or quoting their work that appear to be contrary to what Wikipedia allows: This is http://coa.inducks.org/. After looking briefly at their site, I'll recommend it to interested readers (without using their material myself here).

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 09:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Subject of this article?

It's not completely clear based on the content of this article. Is it intended to be about the concept of Mickey Mouse in comics books in general? Or is it about the specific U.S. comic book title originally called "Mickey Mouse" and later retitled "Mickey Mouse and Friends"? Macduff (talk) 13:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

There hasn't been much response to this, so I'm making the article focus on the specific U.S. comic book. Most of the information in the article, and the article's structure, seem to have that end in mind - the Publication History section, for instance, only applies to the one title. I'm not sure what to do with the little international information that's in here - it doesn't seem to be worth moving out into an actual general "Mickey Mouse in Comics" article, although I do believe there should be one. Mickey has a large number of comic books published worldwide, including more than a few in the U.S. Macduff (talk) 19:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't watching closely after I made these changes in August 2008 that added 3/4 of the content to that point.[1] After that, Dgabbard had been slowly making other changes that were constructive, and I was rather "letting him drive".

There's confusion caused by Disney's practice of reworking characters and publications to suit marketing concepts and country-specific needs. Even a young reader laying their hands on a 1930's "Mickey Mouse Magazine" will be struck by the huge change in the 1960s — to the point where it could be reasonably argued that "Mickey" is a different character. (The Gladstone editors called it a "wishy-washy incarnation", "Walt Disney's Mickey Mouse No. 230, Sept. 1987.) As a boy, when I got my hands on the Italian "Mickey" I was disappointed that there was nothing much recognizable there. It would be convenient to say "let's only include the U.S. Mickey", however there are Mickey strips originally written, for example in Dutch and German, that were translated into English (and were well-received).

This situation is familiar to linguists, when speaking of word senses, as a "cloud of meaning". That is, words do not just have the compartmentalized meanings listed in the dictionary, but gray areas of meaning — where words "mostly" mean something. (Is a piece of beanbag furniture a chair, a couch, a cushion, or a footstool?)

I had no intentions of disambiguating the senses of "Mickey Mouse Magazine" when I started, I was simply reporting the history of the numbered series. (And I didn't know about the Boom! Studios versions.)

The existing article now has much good detail, but in terms of answering your question, the Floyd Gottfredson article seems to be more successful at keeping a coherent focus. It emphasizes the continuity of his Mickey character. I think it would be legitimate to explain how Paul Murry was influenced by Gottfredson (with very solid references supplied). Then we could broach the subject: Who writes "Boom! Kids" and what is their vision? Is it a large stable of writers with group vision, or do they trade off, or is someone in authority? Is there a coherent "Mickey Magazine", now? I do not think that a version of the magazine that's been around less than a year should be given anything like the emphasis on versions which were best-sellers for decades.

As a piece of this whole puzzle, the "Publication hiatus" section seems successful. Except that the dates don't match Mickey Mouse Adventures at all. With Regards, Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 01:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

P.S. It would be worthwhile to make whatever assumptions we chose explicit, and right up front in the opening of the article. Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 02:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

The article is about the tradition of Mickey Mouse having his own comic book title. That is what I found when I began trying to improve it. I included a blanket comment that while in the U.S. such a title is devoted almost solely to Mickey in many countries it functions more like an anthology title a la WDC&S. I can understand the entry is a little unclear just what it is about. The new opening seems to help. Dgabbard (talk) 02:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Title of this article

Since the current publication is called 'Mickey Mouse', and most issues over the course of it's publication have also held this title, shouldn't the article represent that title and not the temporary 'Mickey Mouse and Friends' title that was used for only a few years? Donaldd23 (talk) 02:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)