Talk:The Lion King/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

The General Release Was June, 24, 1994

June 15th was when was released for a limited audience The proof of it's general release is here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.35.253 (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Change

The release date in this article for The Lion King is incorrect. The film was released in American on June 24th 1994. Not the 15th. I know this due to the fact that my parents had purchased tickets to go to the movie premiere day but I was born instead and thus saw the movie when I was only 4 days old. The proof of the release date can also be found on Disney's website. The link below will take you directly to that page. http://disney.go.com/disneyfans/history/movies/the-lion-king —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.115.236.202 (talk) 00:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The Lion King Diamond Edition

I updated the information regarding the new Diamond Edition Release of this movie. I posted all the presentations that it will have and I put amazon as my source because they are accepting preorders for all the releases that I listed, so that is not speculation. Also all movie sites (dvdizzy.com, bluray.com, etc.) are listing this so I don't think it has to be deleted, it's verifiable information. Disneyfolly2 (talk) 01:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I made a few changes. See below on the talk page. --TravisBernard (talk) 18:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 70.116.71.166, 2 May 2011

filmed in Zimbawe

70.116.71.166 (talk) 03:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Not done:. No source provided. --McDoobAU93 03:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Diamond Edition release date

Could someone add the release date on the article? It will be released on October 4 as mentioned by Disney HERE. Thanks Elvis Yeah (talk) 17:56, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I revised and updated the release information for the Diamond Edition. The sources previously listed were not reliable sources, so I found new ones. Also, I revised the language and added details to the release information. Finally, I removed the new section that was created for the 2011 3D release. Because the 2011 theatrical 3D release is coming out in conjunction with the home media release, I thought that they should be lumped together. There are also some sources stating that the 3D re-release will occur in Los Angeles a week or two earlier, but nevertheless it will be made available to everyone within the US on September 16, 2011. I think that the nation-wide release is more notable. Let's keep the discussion open regarding this section. Feedback is always welcome. --TravisBernard (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Lion King's theatrical release date.

Good evening, I noticed that there was a possible error in the release date of The Lion King. It shows it to be released on June 15, 1994, with no other date. it was a limited release on that date, with the worldwide release date being June 24, 1994. My books and such have its release date as the 24th as well as the Disney Wikipedia. Should this be something that should be altered or fixed? I was just wondering. It would have been awesome to have had my all time favorite animated feature debut on my birthday...but alas I know it did notBahamutskingdom (talk) 06:17, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Coleogdon, 3 July 2011

The lion king was released officialy on June 24th, 1994, it was released to "select" cities on June 15th, 1994 Coleogdon (talk) 19:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 12:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thomas Disch and his King of Kalahari

"The original treatment, inspired by Hamlet, was written by Thomas Disch (author of The Brave Little Toaster), as “King of the Kalahari” in late 1988. Since his treatment was written as work-for-hire, Disch received no credit or royalties."

Please give any proof. The article about Disch himself doesn't mention it. And James_B._Stewart in his DisneyWar book states that the film was Jeffrey Katzenberg's idea.213.87.136.117 (talk) 10:47, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Date of release

The date of release was not June 15th.. it was June 24th, my 14th birthday (so I remember). Disney often releases movies on this date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.163.25.222 (talk) 01:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 89.215.143.187, 17 September 2011

Put a dash between the words "highest" and "grossing". "highest grossing" -> "highest-grossing", because that's the right way "highest-grossing" is written.

89.215.143.187 (talk) 17:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

 Done Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:12, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Box office performance

I think it's better to separate initial 1994 year release, 2003 year release and current 3D release. Then calculate overall. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.173.18.179 (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 7 November 2011

You need to add in that while Jeremy Irons vocalised Scar for his speaking and singing voice, that at the pause of the "You won't get a sniff without me..." line in the song Be Prepared, Jim Cummings emulated Irons voice for the rest of the song... Beleive me I work for Walt Disney World I know what i'm talking about, it's on discussion daily at the Magic Kingdom, yes we are a bunch of nuts, But we're Disney nuts, and there ain't nothing better than being a part of the Disney Family...

98.64.128.221 (talk) 01:31, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

 Not done I'm sorry, but knowing what you're talking about isn't adequate sourcing for such a change. Please feel free to make the request again when you find an independent and reliable source stating this. --McDoobAU93 01:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Adding more to the video game section of the Lion King

Isn't anyone going to describe the role of The Lion King in the Kingdom Hearts series? It doesn't seem to be mentioned at all in the wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.58.176.89 (talk) 02:34, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The Lion King: "Zero to Hero"

The song "Zero to Hero" is NOT seen in The Lion King (1994), it was featured in Hercules (1997). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.199.9.28 (talk) 23:36, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Quite correct, which is why this article does not mention that song. --McDoobAU93 23:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Lion King/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BrianDeeG (talk · contribs) 19:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Failed nomination

I'm afraid the article fails the verifiability criterion in the "quickfail" section of GAC. There are no citations in either the Plot or Cast sections and a lack of citation in the Legacy section. There is no bibliography which is a breach of MOS. Much more work is needed and I entirely agree with a comment by one of the main contributors on GAN that the renom has been made too soon. The article needs thorough research to obtain the necessary verification and I further recommend a full review of the lead when the content review has been completed. --Brian (talk) 19:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The Kingdom Hearts note in the video game section mentions aladdin for some reason :

"In Kingdom Hearts II, it is a mixture of Aladdin and The Return of Jafar.[102]"

31.205.72.46 (talk) 03:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Voice cast section

Edit summary not long enough to explain my edits to The Lion King#Voice cast, so:
1. Tidied up excessive listing of everyone's biological and marital relationships to everyone else. I don't think we need to have it explained that Sarabi is Scar's sister-in-law - we can work it out by the other relationships if we really need to know. Additionally, although the film does mention marriage, the terms 'wife' / 'husband' / 'in-law' are never used to describe the lions. I have left in only the relationships that are important to the plot.
2. Royal titles. "The Lion King" is the name of the film, it is not the royal title of the king. He is referred to in the film as simply "the king" or "King of Pride Rock", and sometimes elsewhere in the franchise as "King of the Pride Lands". Queens are never mentioned in this film but Sarabi and Nala are generally assumed to be queen consorts.
3. Removed time references. There is no 'current' King of the Pride Lands in a work of fiction.
4. Citation needed for Zazu's species. The hornbill referred to is black and white, Zazu is blue; this could be artistic license as Rafiki is not entirely mandrill either. However, the filmmakers' research trip for the film was to Kenya, which is not in the range of this hornbill. The Eastern Yellow-billed Hornbill is, but this is all OR anyway.
5. Added in very basic information about the character's function in the story, where the character was only listed as a relation of other characters.
6. Edited the hyenas' entries to be less waffly.
~ Kimelea (talk) 06:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 March 2012

i wish to bring certain changes to the lion king page

117.193.245.167 (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Not done:What changes would you like to make? You need to provide more detail. Karl 334 ^{☞TALK to ME ☜} 17:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 March 2012

why is the lion king protectid 71.206.18.99 (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Persistent vandalism, according to the protection log action summaries [1]. Dru of Id (talk) 15:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

Just as a note, one of the concerns of the previous GAN for this page was that the plot was too long. Since then the plot has grown to over 1000 words, from the previous reviewers suggestion of 400-600. --Kangaroopowah 00:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. (I'll try to do what I can, but there's a reason why a message of mine is singled out in the GAN page...) igordebraga ≠ 05:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Sundiata Keita - The Lion King (Controversy)

Hello editors,

For some time there has been a controversy regarding where the lion king idea came from. One of the most prominent is of course the epic of Sundiata Keita. I have gone through this article but found no mention of Mansa Sundiata Keita not even in Controversies (unless I missed it by accident). I think it would be prudent to atleast tackle that head on, if not in the lead, in the controversy section. I favour the lead because people familiar with the epic as well as the the lion king itself would espect to find Sundiata's name in the beginning which details where the idea came from. I would like to know what other editors think.

Thank you.

Tamsier (talk) 19:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tamsier. I have never heard of this epic before and certainly am not aware of it having been an inspiration for the Lion King story (the Disney filmmakers have said that the story was inspired by Shakespeare's Hamlet). Do you have a source for that? ~ Kimelea (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Kimelea,

Thank very much for your comment. Yes I am aware of Disney's stance on where it got the idea from. But the similarities are too great to ignore. The scenes, the locations, the name, etc. bears too much similarity with the epic of Sundiata. Sundiata as we all know predates Shakepeare. Even his successor Mansa Musa predates Shakespeare. Although Disney have also cited Biblical times, it does not negate the fact that the similarities with Sundiata's epic which was more a tragedy than a show, are very evident. I was just saying people would expect Sundiata's name (so called the lion king). The similarities (including the lion king's franchises e.g. the musical etc.) are too great not to mention Sundiata. Indeed it is a point of contentious. Here are some links Ellen Snodgrass, "Encyclopedia of the Literature of Empire", Disney Theatrical Animated Features: The Complete Guide, The Crisis. More on the epic itself : David C. Conrad, Sunjata: a West African epic of the Mande peoples also see Sundiata: an epic of old Mali by Djibril Tamsir Niane, G. D. Pickett, David W. Chappell.

Further:

• Sankofa Inc, Sankofa: a journal of African children's and young adult literature, Volumes 1-5, pp 50-9
• Trevy Ann McDonald, T. Ford-Ahmed, Nature of a sistuh: black women's lived experiences in contemporary culture, pp 245-7

My personal view is to tackle the issue head on.

Best Regards

Tamsier (talk) 00:57, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's the question ... which of these sources (if any) directly connect Disney to this story? If you wanted to have this added to the article, there would need to be published analysis comparing the two (i.e., the author states "The Lion King shares numerous story points with the epic story"). That would be part of the analysis of the plot, which would be good to add to the article. Using sources that merely describe the story, and your own establishment of the connection, amounts to original thought. All that said, this hardly merits any description even close to "controversial", since even if Disney was inspired by the epic, the story is obviously public domain and is not required to make any sort of statement saying that's where they got it. --McDoobAU93 13:28, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello McDoobAU93,

Thank you very much for your contribution. Some links and further reading materials have been stated above, you are at liberty to read them. I have no dog in this fight. I merely came upon this article and found out Sundiata's name was not mentioned anywhere in this article not even in the controversy section. If the consensus on this page is that Sundiata's name should not be added, I have no problem with that. For the purposes of transparency, I came upon Sundiata's article purely by accident which had some problems and I decided to improve it. I am still working on it. Being familiar with the epic as well as the lion king and its fanchises was what led me here. With that said I have no problem whether it is added or not. I just thought it would be prudent to do so in light of these controvercies. But if you believe that it should not be included in this article, then there is no problem. However I will be raising the issue in the relevant section of Sundiata Keita's article, of course in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Thanks again for your contribution.

Best Regards

Tamsier (talk) 18:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you've missed the point somewhat. You're free to add information to the article, as long as the sources are reliable and specifically connect the film and the epic story on their own. To that end, I started taking a look at the sources you mentioned earlier. The first book, Encyclopedia of the Literature of Empire, appears to be legitimate. The second is a self-published duplicate of a number of Wikipedia Disney articles, and since Wikipedia can't be a source for Wikipedia, it's right out. The article in Crisis mentions Disney, but does not mention The Lion King specifically, and the article doesn't appear to have anything to do with the film or with Disney itself (in fact, it's a review of a Harry Belafonte album); as such, you're making a contextual leap that's not supported by the article, so it's unusable, also.

I would suggest that other editors also take a look at the first source to see if this would be suitable; I'm thinking an inclusion in the "Story development" section, at the end of the paragraph where the Biblical versions and Hamlet are mentioned. Again, this is hardly a "controversy" and certainly doesn't belong in the lead. Specific mention in the lead should be given to those inspirations the animators themselves have mentioned (the Bible and Hamlet). Unless Disney itself specifically mentions Sundiata, the only discussion of that should be in scholarly analysis of the story, which would be appropriate. --McDoobAU93 18:59, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Ellen Snodgrass,Encyclopedia of the Literature of Empire, page 78: "By unifying the military force of 12 states, Sundiata becomes an emperor known as the Lion King of Mali, who controls tribes from the Niger River west to the Atlantic Ocean. Walt Disney Studios reprised the story of Sunditata in 1994 as an animated film, The Lion King, with animals substituting for the humans of Mali legend." And that's that. As noted above, this is hardly a controversy. Mr Stephen (talk) 20:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello McDoobAU93 & Mr Stephen,

Thank you both for your contributions.

Best Regards

Tamsier (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Tamsier, if you indent your replies with colons, it becomes easier for others to see which part of the conversation you are replying to. :)

It looks to me like the Lion King mention in "Encyclopedia of the Literature of Empire" was a misunderstanding on the part of the author - she seems to assume that the Disney film was a retelling of the epic, she is not providing any evidence of a link between the stories, or of any controversy. A quick google produced this Daily Planet (independent website) article about a commenter asserting links between Sundiata and TLK. This is the closest I can find to any kind of controversy. The commenter's source is this paper presented at a teaching conference, which is described as an opinion piece. The author of the Daily Planet article about it notes that the commenter didn't give any evidence that the Disney filmmakers were aware of the Sundiata story. I skimmed the paper and it's the same there - the author is indignant at Disney supposedly stealing a story, while not presenting any evidence that they actually did.

The questions are 1) are these reliable sources, and 2) is the point of view that Disney 'stole' the idea held by a significant number of people, per WP:DUE? With respect to Tamsier, my opinion is no to both. ~ Kimelea (talk) 23:22, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Adjusting revenue for inflation

When adjusting to inflation, The Lion King is the highest grossing animated film with a revenue equalling to $1.4 billion. As for Toy Story 3, that film's adjusted gross would make $1.3 billion, slightly smaller than the film of this article. 111.125.110.93 (talk) 14:24, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Sounds worth including, if you have a reliable source for that? ~ Kimelea (talk) 19:38, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request 10 April 2012

In the final sentence "The show's financial success lead to other productions..." 'lead' should be 'led'

91.125.45.253 (talk) 16:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixed; thanks for pointing that out. I was about to suggest you could fix it yourself but was reminded when I made the edit that the page is semi-protected. mwalimu59 (talk) 16:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request from 28 of April, 2012

Um, in the "plot" section of this article, someone (I don't know who, but that's ok) misspelled "Pumbaa" at least once. I should know that there's two of the letter "a" in his name, as I am a very big Disney fan (I have even been known to get very nerdy about Disney and start arguements w/ close friends if they don't know a Disney factoid). Obviously, the person typing there may have had a slip on the keyboard or a sticking "a" key that caused the article to say "Pumba" instead of "Pumbaa", or something similar. I can't edit the problem myself, because I am not currently a Wikipedia registered member (although I might join if I had a little more freetime on my hands, which should be coming soon :D), so someone else might be so polite as to please fix the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.196.90.249 (talk) 22:06, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done, changed to Pumbaa. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Adventure film?

Personally, I'd say it's more of a drama than an adventure film. The minor "adventures" around the film mainly revolve around drama. --99.226.14.126 (talk) 20:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Has anyone else noticed this...?

Females in a lion pride are usually related. So Nala and Simba's mothers may even have had the same father. The only male lion around at the time aside from Mufasa is Scar. Simba's uncle. Either way, there is some inbreeding going on - unintentional incestous relationships...? Simba would have had cubs with his mother, aunts, sisters, cousins et cetera. This is why male lions leave their pride... Realismvssurrealism (talk) 09:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Realismvssurrealism (talk • contribs) 09:51, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually, yes. If you go to Lion King fanboards there are people discussing this. Krystaleen (talk) 10:35, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Imtiaz Ahmed

. . . the fourteen year-old boy who hanged himself 'to become a Lion King'. Archived but nothing added to the article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Lion_King/Archive_2#Boy_that_committed_suicide.3F

Noteworthy? Perhaps in the 'Controversy' section? 92.29.225.109 (talk) 12:07, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Cast section

Could someone rewrite the cast section please? It reads terribly and use the word "respectively" 6 times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.176.192 (talk) 02:07, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Inspiration Should Include Bambi

Okay, what movie am I describing?: The film starts with royalty being born and all the animals rushing to see the young royal. The early scenes are taken up with the carefree life of the youth, interrupted occasionally by a foreboding danger. Suddenly, the main character's parent dies violently by the hands of the villain. End of childhood, the main character leaves his home to grow up. Flash forward, he's now an adult. He falls in love with a childhood friend. In the climax, the main character almost dies as the kingdom is set aflame. But life renews itself in a cleansing rain. The ending bookends the opening scenes as the main character has a baby and all the animals again rush for the first public viewing of the newborn royal, once again touching on the lifecycle as the story closes.

I could easily be describing Bambi or The Lion King with the above. It's pretty obvious that The Lion King is a virtual remake of Bambi (much more so than Hamlet to be certain). I think it should be included as a part of the Development section, but unfortunately I don't have any sources handy. Does anyone have a confirmation from Disney, or at least an acknowledgement from a trusted animation expert to confirm?76.108.205.225 (talk) 08:04, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

You've basically described a basic theme of many, many stories. A carefree young life, something horrible happens, the main character is torn from his carefree life and forced to grow up, grows up and returns to face some big threat from his youth, deals with it, happy end. But if you have sources for this, feel free to add it to the article, of course. --Conti|✉ 11:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 September 2012

"The hyenas ar friends of Scar, who then plot with them to take over the Pride Lands."

Shouldn't that be "are" instead of "ar"? Maxorq (talk) 15:38, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Done RudolfRed (talk) 18:57, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Grammar fix needed

Scar tells Mufasa tells him he used to be next in line until Simba was born.

Yeah...69.136.59.17 (talk) 01:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Untrue claim

Now the 19th highest grossing film, having been passed by The Hobbit and Skyfall. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.114.48.28 (talk) 20:23, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Not Hamlet

I don't really know where the "Lion King is Hamlet" claim started, or why it got so popular, but it simply doesn't stack up. Hamlet gets told by his dead father's ghost that he was murderd by Hamlet's uncle, and spends the rest of the play is spent exploring Hamlet's sanity as Hamlet bumbles around giving existentialist solioquies. Simba, on the other hand, sees his father die in a stampede, gets depressed, runs away from home, gets undepressed, and confronts his uncle. There are a small number of character similarities, and there are some common themes, but the total lack of Ophelia figure (an important part of the Shakespearean play), and the fact that the two plots take different directions after the murder really do make this claim quite painful. 143.92.1.32 (talk) 00:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

If I did have to liken it to a Shakespearean play, I'd personally pick MacBeth, though it doesn't correalate very well to either play. 143.92.1.32 (talk) 00:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

That's right, I wouldn't compare the movie with Shakespeare at all. But even less with the biblical stories of Joseph and Moses (?!!...). I really don't understand how some people get such idiotic associations. DameMitHermelin (talk) 13:13, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Films that passed this film

Shrek the Third did pass it worldwide in the past. Shouldn't that be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.6.110.131 (talk) 20:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Since 2008!

Okay, it been protected for about 5 years, you guys think that maybe it's time to take this thing off? 97.124.72.24 (talk) 04:51, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, IP editor, the article was protected due to persistent vandalism from someone using various IP addresses. As the blocking admin seems to be gone, I'd suggest taking it to WP:AN/I. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

On October 19th 2013 The Lion King The Musical celebrated its 14th Anniversary in the West End. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chloefreer20 (talk • contribs) 17:41, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Can one thing be removed?

The Lion King wasn't not actually "based" on Hamlet, per se. The inspiration for the story actually came from Jeffery Katzenberg's experiences during his youth. Can we have that removed where it says Based on?67.86.130.88 (talk) 01:26, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Worldwide Gross

Before the 3D release, Frozen wasn't made. So, someone should put "Later Frozen surpassed The Lion King in 2014". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.41.145 (talk) 17:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2014

197.78.190.66 (talk) 14:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: No request has been made. --McDoobAU93 15:20, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Country

Considering this is a musical, and the soundtrack was composed/sung by British contributors (namely Elton John and Tim Rice), should the United Kingdom not be credited alongside the United States equally? If not for the whole film, for the soundtrack/music under a subcategory? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yunchy (talk • contribs) 10:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

The "credit" for what nation produced the film is tied to the production companies involved in the film, not to the artists who made it (actors, musicians and, in this case, animators). If Disney had partnered with a British studio to develop The Lion King, then it certainly would be an American-British production. --McDoobAU93 13:12, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

In addition, both British Film Institute and American Film Institute databases identify US as the sole country behind the film. We could state in the article body that the soundtrack contributors were British, though it would be ideal to have a source to show that it was worth noting. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:39, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't think we should set a precedent like that. If readers want to find out that sort of stuff they can follow the links. Hollywood draws talent from all around the world, it's just the nature of the industry, but Disney films are fundamentally American. Betty Logan (talk) 21:22, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

That's fine. I'm sure the Anglo-American collaboration is too common to be worth noting. There are other films, though, where a juxtaposition has been highlighted and can be repeated on Wikipedia, like the upcoming Wolf Totem. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 21:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 March 2015

Add a Based on in the title box that says it's based on Hamlet by William Shakespeare 97.121.57.202 (talk) 23:55, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done:: The article says it was inspired/influenced by Hamlet; that is completely different thing to an adaptation. Betty Logan (talk) 00:11, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Controversies

The original phrasing, which I've restored, about perceived similarities between this movie and the TV show Simba the White Lion reads: "with characters having similar analogues, and various individual scenes being similar in composition to the show." This is supported by cites in the rest of this section. Saying "appears to be copied" is unsupported POV that directly makes an accusation of plagiarism, a crime, which the weasel phrase "appears to be" does not mitigate. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Disch

There is a statement that "Thomas Disch wrote a film treatment", and Thomas Disch links to the science fiction author Thomas M. Disch. I would presume these are two different people. Can anyone confirm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melnicki (talk • contribs) 04:11, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is the same man. Disch is no stranger to the animation industry as his children's novel The Brave Little Toaster was adapted into an animated film. The link in the "Development" subsection that has information about his unused treatment includes:

“ The works of Thomas M. Disch (1940-2008) include science-fiction classics such as The Genocides, Camp Concentration, and 334, a controversial study of science fiction, The Dreams Our Stuff is Made of, numerous volumes of poetry and criticism, and a genuine children’s classic, The Brave Little Toaster. ”

Christianster94 (talk) 02:49, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

gross revenue

Finding Nemo and Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs did not make as much money as this movie did.75.172.111.237 (talk) 05:00, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Evan Kalani Opedal

Animated film rank

The Lion King's gross was $987 million and is dropped to $968 million so it's behind Zootopia and Despicable Me 2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.58.55 (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Make a mention that Despicable Me 2 and Zootopia passed The Lion King. But seriously, don't forget to mention Zootopia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.58.55 (talk) 07:31, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Well you mentioned Zootopia all right, but The Lion King is behind Despicable Me 2, so can you add that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.58.55 (talk) 07:03, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Finding Nemo grossed only $936.7 million so it did not out-gross The Lion King. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.126.67.240 (talk) 04:56, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

film genre

We should add that it is a drama movie. 75.172.96.235 (talk) 02:43, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Evan Kalani Opedal

Removal of sourced content

The controversies section has been removed. It passed reviews and is fully sourced. Can we explain what rules it's breaking to have it being removed? Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:45, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

While Lord NnNn did remove the content earlier, I restored it back to maintain the status quo; which I think you somehow accidentally removed again. I don't think "irrelevant" and "gossipy" justify the removal of content as it's neither. -- ChamithN (talk) 12:09, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes. I accidently reverted the edit. It's back now. Waiting for NnNn's feedback here in the meantime! Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

CG Remake

https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disney-jon-favreau-the-lion-king/

Should be mentioned in adaptations, I think. Gistech (talk) 15:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

It's probably worth a mention. I would stick it in The_Lion_King#Sequels_and_spin-offs. Betty Logan (talk) 15:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Ranking

Finding Dory has passed The Lion King worldwide and you already know its' domestic gross has pass Lion King's domestic gross. Why not add it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.58.55 (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

genre

Can someone add that this film is drama and adventure? It says in imdb. --97.113.117.25 (talk) 05:52, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2017

i added many also considerer the loin king to be one of the greatest films of all-time

The Lion King was released on June 15, 1994, to a positive reaction from critics, who praised the film for its music, story, and animation; it finished its theatrical run as the highest-grossing release of 1994 and the second highest-grossing film of all time. The Lion King garnered two Academy Awards for its achievement in music and the Golden Globe Award for Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy. the film is also considered to be one of the greatest films ever made The film has led to many derived works, such as a Broadway adaptation; two direct-to-video follow-ups—the sequel, The Lion King II: Simba's Pride (1998), and the prequel/parallel, The Lion King 1½ (2004)—; two television series, Timon and Pumbaa and The Lion Guard; and a 3D re-release, in 2011. 64.72.210.21 (talk) 01:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Betty Logan (talk) 02:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Lion King. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150923072035/http://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/top_100_animation_movies to http://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/top_100_animation_movies

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2017

The Lion King was released on June 24, 1994, NOT June 15, 1994. The 15th was a preview for critics in only two theaters. June 24th, 1994 was a Friday, the day films are nearly always released; whereas the 15th was a only a preview, therefore on Wednesday the previous week. Albylion (talk) 21:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Reopened 6/4/17 - Please change the release date information from June 15, 1994 to June 24, 1994. Thank you.
Source #1 - I was there--a first-hand account.
Source #2 - Lion King.org has been in operation since shortly after TLK's release and correctly identifies the release as June 24.
Source #3 - IMDB also lists release date as June 24.
Source #4 - Roger Ebert listed June 24 as the release date on his review
Albylion (talk) 21:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: It certainly was not just for critics. As the article explains, it was a limited release at two theaters in New York and Los Angeles. The accompanying LA Times source elaborates: "In a move unprecedented in modern movie history, Disney will begin selling tickets to its animated feature "The Lion King" this Sunday--more than two months before the film's exclusive June 15 openings at Hollywood's El Capitan Theater and New York's Radio City Music Hall ... Ticket prices for the El Capitan and Radio City debut runs--$10 for adults, $6 for children and senior citizens." You can also see the box office earnings for its limited release run at Box Office Mojo. Betty Logan (talk) 22:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

That is to say it was a limited release. The two-theater preview was to build hype; it was a marketing tactic before the real opening. It is more correct to say the film's release date was the 24th, and the Wikipedia article (its sidebar) should reflect that.Albylion (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. (You are now autoconfirmed.) —MRD2014 talk contribs 14:31, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

References

• Comment A limited release counts as a release. Per WP:FILMRELEASE "Release dates should therefore be restricted to the film's earliest release, whether it was at a film festival, a world premiere, or a public release, and the release date(s) in the country or countries that produced the film, excluding sneak previews or screenings". This was clearly a public release; the film racked up almost $4 million prior to its general release ($8 million in 2017 money). The date currently in the infobox is consistent with the infobox guidelines. Betty Logan (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

---

I see. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Albylion (talk) 15:20, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 June 2017

In the Box Office section it currently states the film is the "sixth highest-grossing animated film of all time worldwide", however if you follow that link to the list of highest grossing animated films, you will see it is actually the seventh highest-grossing animated film of all time. It looks like this sentence was not updated after Finding Dory was released. 67.81.14.252 (talk) 00:55, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 05:34, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Speaking of seventh, Finding Dory and Despicable Me 2 are ahead of The Lion King. It only says, Frozen, Minions, and Zootopia are ahead of The Lion King. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.58.55 (talk) 19:32, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2017

Please write at the top "The Lion King is the highest-grossing traditionally animated film of all time." Thank you! :) 31.203.135.177 (talk) 17:39, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

 Done. DarkFallenAngel (talk) 17:44, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Mufasa and Scar not blood brothers

As revealed by producer Don Hahn. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:40, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

First, the original source is not comicbook.com but another site that interviewed producer Don Hahn and co-director Rob Minkoff. Second, Hahn does not say the two are not brothers. He speculates, based on real-life lion behavior and not on talking/singing lion behavior, that in his opinion it is a "very likely" possibility. But he's the producer, not one of the creators (writer, director). Notably, the co-director says nothing about this — does not corroborate it. So this is out-of-universe speculation by someone who is not a creator. Anyone who is not the creator can speculate anything. Non-notable. (And third, the headline falsely claims something definitive that Hahn himself does not, so it's an irresponsible website in that regard.)--Tenebrae (talk) 13:30, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2017

Change title from "The Lion King" to "The Lion King (1994 film)" Reason: 99% of other Disney movies have this type of title FriendlyChemist (talk) 02:27, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:38, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Lion King. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141027025919/http://www.suzieszterhas.com/a/pdf/BBC_WL_SUM08_HYENA_final.pdf to http://www.suzieszterhas.com/a/pdf/BBC_WL_SUM08_HYENA_final.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Lion King. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150525015758/http://www.filmiami.org/news_11May_Ron.asp to http://www.filmiami.org/news_11May_Ron.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2018

The worldwide box office ranking needs to be updated to "35th highest grossing film of all time" (or similar wording). AnonymousEditor101 (talk) 00:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Done Gulumeemee (talk) 02:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

"Andres Stupid" correction, 2018

In one section where Simba's return to Pride Rock is outlined, there is a section where it claims the ghost of Mufasa "stupidly" tells Simba that he is the rightful king. Immediately following this, there is a sentence in which the phrase "Andres stupid" was haphazardly inserted into the text. This is possibly some work done stupidly by some 12-year-old and his friends before this page became protected, but it's a glaring issue that should be edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samashrader (talk • contribs) 14:42, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done Samashrader— Newslinger talk 14:59, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Kimba should be in the lead

Disney has a habit for stealing & hiring good lawyers. Nevertheless, Kimba should be mentioned up-front. I don't know how to do that properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.222.148.189 (talk) 13:52, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2018

{ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.247.165.149 (talk) 09:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2019

DavidIsDAD (talk) 22:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

I will be able to make everything great

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. DannyS712 (talk) 02:04, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Suggestions about "Kimba controversy" part

The page writes, Yoshihiro Shimizu, of Tezuka Productions, which created the anime series Kimba the White Lion, has refuted rumors that the studio was paid hush money by Disney but explains that they rejected urges from within the industry to sue because, "we're a small, weak company. It wouldn't be worth it anyway ... Disney's lawyers are among the top twenty in the world!"

And I found a more detailed version of it at http://lkcontroversy.blogspot.com/, citing the same reference Kelts, Roland. Japanamerica: How Japanese Pop Culture Has Invaded the U.S. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006. Print. (Page 45)

---

First the is asked of the rumor that Disney paid the owners Kimba The White Lion to keep quiet about the apparent copyright infringement with “hush money” or otherwise known as a bribe to maintain silence towards the issue. He bluntly responds, “Zero”, Making a “O” with his fingers. After reflecting on the two works separately he states, “We think it’s a totally different story. Kimba is part human, part animal. The Lion King is just an animal. Of course, we were urged to sue Disney by some in our industry. But we’re a small, weak, company. It wouldn’t be worth it anyway. We received letters from lawyers in places like Iowa and Hawaii,offering to take up the case.” He then chuckles and blurts, “Disney’s lawyers are among the top twenty in the world!” ........ To further this notion of a strong admiration between the tow, Shimizu states, “If Tezuka were alive when The Lion King was released, and if he knew about even the rumor that Disney might have copied elements of his work, he would have been proud.

---

And Takayuki Matsutani, president of Tezuka Productions in Tokyo, was interviewed in "Welkos, Robert W. (July 13, 1994). "A 'Kimba' Surprise for Disney : Movies: 'The Lion King' is a hit, but reported similarities to the Japanese-created American cartoon of the '60s are raising some questions". Los Angeles Times. , and he said:

---

"However, quite a few staff of our company saw a preview of 'The Lion King,' discussed this subject and came to the conclusion that you cannot avoid having these similarities as long as you use animals as characters and try to draw images out of them," Matsutani said. "If the Disney Co. had gotten a hint from 'The Jungle Emperor,' Osamu Tezuka, a founder of our company, would have been pleased," he continued. "And, we feel the same way, rather than making a claim. "Therefore, our company's general opinion is 'The Lion King' is a totally different piece from 'The Jungle Emperor' and is an original work completed by the Disney production's long-lasting excellent production technique."

---

This is a kind of official statement. And I think it is of great importance to have it included in the page.

In the light of Takayuki Matsutani's words, the quotation of Yoshihiro Shimizu seems like sort of taking words out of context and tends to cause misunderstanding , which we can see that you can arguably say that he is more likely to complain about the endless urge from the lawyers and industry. I think putting the whole paragraph or a more accurate summary is needed here.

Another source from https://www.awn.com/mag/issue1.5/articles/deneroffladd1.5.html

---

"Tezuka was a big fan of Disney. In fact, Tezuka did a 45 minute featurette in which he used characters that looked like the seven dwarfs. So, when Disney proved to be an admirer of Kimba, the studio did not retaliate. When they were called about this, they said that they were sure that Mr. [Don] Hahn [The Lion King's producer] did not deliberately do this, and that, 'We are sure that Disney would not deliberately do this and it's all purely coincidental. Our leader [Tezuka died in 1989] would have been very flattered."

---

And the quotation in the page of Minkoff can be put together with Mr Matsutani's (citing https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/japanese-get-animated-over-disney-cartoon-1383466.html)

---

'Although there are some similarities in the characterisation of the animals, it cannot be helped,' Mr Matsutani said. 'For example, a monkey appears as a smart animal in both stories. But when you think about the monkey's cleverness in real life, it is natural he would be clever in the film also. .'

---

"Animators Tom Sito and Mark Kausler, who both have story credits, have admitted to watching Kimba, and assumed MANY of their colleagues had too, especially if they grew up in the 1960s."

And I cannot see Tom Sito and Mark Kausler assume MANY of their colleagues had in Ref.120, and I will try to get access to Ref.119. But according to the interview with the directors and producer in The Pride of the Lion King, the documentary, the animators working on the Lion King are probably mostly less-experienced and younger since the studio think Pocahontas would more likely to be a hit and placed less attention to the Lion King, and the directors and producer said they were "begging" others to work on the Lion King and even most of the animators leading the characters were first given chance to lead a character. (can be found partly at https://www.tor.com/2015/06/19/the-lion-king-was-the-most-unlikely-success-story-you-will-ever-hear/ but it would be better to watch that documentary) Hence, I would like to look up Ref.119 if possible to make it sure.

And I think it would be better to mention that they follow different screenplays, by the way. Timelimitexceeded (talk) 14:49, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2019

83.213.87.21 (talk) 17:26, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 18:27, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 20 February 2019

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved per WP:PTOPIC and WP:RECENTISM. (non-admin closure). Xain36 {talk} 12:35, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

---

The Lion King → The Lion King (1994 film) – Anytime there are two films with the same name, we should include a disambiguation that specifies the year of release within the title. OfficerAPC (talk) 13:38, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• Strong oppose, this still being the WP:PTOPIC. This is no more different than Ghostbusters. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 15:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose The nominator's statement doesn't apply to primary topics. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:05, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per above comments and primary topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose the 1994 film is the primary topic. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:32, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
• Comment Apparently the the stage musical has grossed $8 billion and is the top-grossing stage production in history, surpassing Phantom of the Opera. My instinct tells me the film is still the primary topic but perhaps this deserves a closer look. Betty Logan (talk) 19:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• It does seem like there's an argument to be made for moving The Lion King (franchise) to the base title. Dekimasuよ! 19:43, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. The original film gets far more views than the musical (85.51% comparing the two, by my count) and has greater long-term significance than the 2019 film, which of course is currently seeped in recentism. So I'm inclined to believe the evidence suggests the original is the primary topic for the time being. Nohomersryan (talk) 03:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

• I'm not sure why we should limit the page views to those two. Overall it's more like 51.8%. And it's pretty clear that part of that 51.8% is spikes created by people searching for the 2019 version. Dekimasuよ! 03:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

• It wasn't meant to be limitation, since I don't believe pageviews are extremely relevant in this case. Just emphasizing that I don't believe the musical is any more significant to the titling of this article than the 2019 movie. Nohomersryan (talk) 08:22, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

• Support although WP:RECENT the release date isn't till 19 July 2019 and it is already getting more views than all others combined, by June this titling is going to be very unhelpful indeed and we'll be back here repeatedly anyway. Best to get on with it. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:32, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

• Recent would encompass the advertising, word of mouth, and all the other things which will give the 2019 film more views in the next year. But primary per long-term significance should, like Ghostbusters, stay with the original. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:RECENTISM and the long-term significance of the original film. In terms of usage, it had a clear majority of page views before an article was created for the new film. We shouldn't pander to the hype surrounding a yet-to-be-released film. This is a discussion to be had in a few years time, at least. PC78 (talk) 10:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
• Strong oppose Major WP:RECENTISM and definitely still the WP:PTOPIC, per previous comments, likely will continue to be even after the release of the 2019 film. -- /Alex/₂₁ 12:18, 25 February 2019 (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.

Suggesting a change in the "Controversies" section

I've been reading through many different sort of "fact pages" on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and the like and they've all pointed out the fact that a hyena biologist sued Disney for defamation. I however, cannot find anything on this besides the one article cited here. When reading through the article, this seems like a minor detail and does not explain who this biologist is, or how he actually pursued this legal action. I wasn't able to find any court records on this or any other news article talking about this that doesn't explicitly cite the BBC article already talked about here. I'm not saying that this didn't happen, however, it doesn't seem as though the line should say that "Hyena biologists protested against the animal's portrayal: one hyena researcher sued Disney studios for defamation of character" As this makes it seem as though the legal action not only made it to court, but also that the biologist succeeded in his suing of a multi-billion dollar company. I believe the line should be omitted entirely, but if we really do want to keep it , it should read something like "Hyena biologists protested against the animal's portrayal: one hyena researcher is said to have even thought about suing Disney studios for defamation of character" Lockyourminivans (talk) 18:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 7 March 2019

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: speedy close. No need to discuss this again so soon. Nohomersryan (talk) 21:12, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

---

The Lion King → The Lion King (1994 film) – This article needs to be moved because there is another film with the same name. 89.242.11.4 (talk) 16:40, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

• Speedy close, see above requested move closed 2 weeks ago. SnowFire (talk) 16:50, 7 March 2019 (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.

Chaka(The Lion King) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chaka(The Lion King). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:14, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Simba and Nala's new-born cub listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Simba and Nala's new-born cub. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:50, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Simba and Nala's newborn cub listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Simba and Nala's newborn cub. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The cub at the end of The Lion King listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The cub at the end of The Lion King. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:53, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Kimba controversy

Why is the controversy mentioned on the Kimba the White Lion page, but not The Lion King? It would make more sense to have it here, since Lion King was the one to rip off Kimba, not the other way around. I came to copy-paste the section from the Kimba page, but it's locked; would someone be able to add the controversy section from the Kimba page to the Lion King page? EverAshwood (talk) 17:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Who says that it is not mentioned in this article? It devotes two paragraphs to the controversy:

• Certain elements of the film were considered to bear a resemblance to Osamu Tezuka's 1960s Japanese anime television series, Jungle Emperor (known as Kimba the White Lion in the United States), with characters having similar analogues, and various individual scenes being similar in composition to the show. Matthew Broderick believed initially that he was, in fact, working on an American version of Kimba since he was familiar with the Japanese original. The Lion King director Roger Allers claimed complete unfamiliarity with the show until the movie was almost completed, and did not remember it being ever mentioned during development. However, Allers had previously lived in Tokyo and worked in animation there during the 1980s, when Tezuka had already become known as "Japan's Walt Disney" and a remake of Kimba was airing on prime time television. Co-director Rob Minkoff also stated that he was unfamiliar with it. Minkoff also observed that whenever a story is based in Africa, it is "not unusual to have characters like a baboon, a bird or hyenas." Yoshihiro Shimizu, of Tezuka Productions, which created the anime series Kimba the White Lion, has refuted rumors that the studio was paid hush money by Disney but explains that they rejected urges from within the industry to sue because, "we're a small, weak company. It wouldn't be worth it anyway ... Disney's lawyers are among the top twenty in the world!" Fred Ladd, who was involved early on with importing Kimba and other Japanese anime into America for NBC, expressed incredulity that Disney's people could remain ignorant. Ladd stated there was at least one animator remembered by his colleagues as being an avid Kimba fan and being quite vociferous about Disney's conduct during production. Animators Tom Sito and Mark Kausler, who both have story credits, have admitted to watching Kimba, and assumed many of their colleagues had too, especially if they grew up in the 1960s. However, Sito insisted there was no conscious effort to derive work from Kimba, and Kausler emphasized Disney's own Bambi as being their model during development."
• "The 1994 release of The Lion King drew a protest in Japan, where Kimba and its creator Osamu Tezuka are cultural icons. 488 Japanese cartoonists and animators, led by manga author Machiko Satonaka, signed a petition accusing Disney of plagiarism and demanding that they give due credit to Tezuka. The controversy surrounding Kimba and The Lion King was parodied in a 1995 episode of The Simpsons, where a lion appearing in the clouds is saying, "You must avenge my death, Kimba... I mean, Simba."" Dimadick (talk) 12:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• TLK 1994 poster.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Edit Request from 28 of April, 2012

Um, in the "plot" section of this article, someone (I don't know who, but that's ok) misspelled "Pumbaa" at least once. I should know that there's two of the letter "a" in his name, as I am a very big Disney fan (I have even been known to get very nerdy about Disney and start arguements w/ close friends if they don't know a Disney factoid). Obviously, the person typing there may have had a slip on the keyboard or a sticking "a" key that caused the article to say "Pumba" instead of "Pumbaa", or something similar. I can't edit the problem myself, because I am not currently a Wikipedia registered member (although I might join if I had a little more freetime on my hands, which should be coming soon :D), so someone else might be so polite as to please fix the problem.

Checked the article today and fixed the only instance I found of misspelling "Pumbaa" with only one "a".--Thomprod (talk) 13:34, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Controversies section - Hyena Biologist

The controversies section states "one hyena researcher sued Disney studios for defamation of character" with the cited source linking to a BBC wildlife article that mentions that it "drove one hyena researcher to sue for defamation of character". I cannot find any other sources (outside of social media) for this claim at all, and there is no further details or sources mentioned in the BBC article. I think an actual source needs to be found, or this part needs to be removed.

122.110.131.109 (talk) 05:24, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree. I have been looking for another source as well. Lawsuits in the U.S. are generally public record, and a lawsuit against a household-name company for an extremely popular film, for highly unusual reasons (defamation of hyenas?), would certainly have gotten press coverage beyond a glancing mention in one article. The absence of wide coverage strongly suggests that the suit did not exist at all. But my research shows the claim typically shows up in various "Amazing facts"/"Did you know?" type articles, or on Reddit's "Today I Learned" board. The claim is usually sourced back to this Wikipedia article, if it is sourced at all. A recent-ish Reddit thread took on the issue directly:

The source in the Wikipedia article is:

McPherson, James (Summer 2008). "The good, the bad and the hyena" (PDF). BBC Wildlife. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 27, 2014.

From page 2 of that article:

I had to wonder what this blinkered opinion was based on - exhaustive research into the behavioral ecology of The Lion King perhaps? But it seems that hyenas were misunderstood long before Disney portrayed them as villains (which, incidentally, drove one hyena researcher to sue for defamation of character).

So, i searched google to find more about this, and nearly all quote this one article as their source. A few sites say "biologist" instead of "hyena researcher," and there is mention of "trying to sue". A couple links list Dr. Lawrence Frank, for example:

In 2006, Dr. Lawrence Frank of the California Field Station for Behavioural Research – a hyena researcher – sued Disney Studios for nothing less than defamation of character in response to their portrayal of spotted hyenas in the movie. Later that year, the same Dr. Frank also suggested a boycott of The Lion King as a way of helping preserve hyenas in the wild.

I wonder if we can find any court documents on this. Was it an actual suit? Was it laughed out of court? Was it settled? Or was it just a wish muttered by someone but never carried through?

(See [2]).

No comments on that Reddit post provided any further information. I googled Dr. Frank's name with The Lion King, and found this: "Frank jokes that The Lion King set back hyena conservation efforts. But the movie certainly sparked an interest in the animals, and the colony received many requests from zoos in the following years." ([3]). "Joking" about it seems somewhat inconsistent with having sued the studio. But we don't have anybody else's name as the supposed plaintiff either. (Personally, I doubt that any human would have real standing to sue anyway--who was damaged?--but that was just what red-flagged this issue for me; the real problem is a lack of sources substantiating that this suit ever happened.) For these reasons, I am going to remove this statement and refer to this discussion in the Edit Summary.

I do not think this claim should be added back unless sources exist that point directly to the case in a verifiable way. At the very least, I'd expect to see a source give the case caption/parties' names, and probably the court, in addition to describing the suit ("Peter Plaintiff vs. Disney, in the Central District of California" or "Biologist Peter Plaintiff sued Disney in a Los Angeles federal court Friday, alleging...") --EightYearBreak (talk) 16:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

(EDIT: I just noticed this article also cites Laurence Frank as the person who suggested a boycott. In the context of the article that he wrote and we cite, it seems sort of jokey or flip, added on at the end of a longer piece. That would be consistent with what was written at the link I posted above. I may add my link for clarification/completeness. In any case, it would seem that if Frank had sued--or if he was aware of the suit--he probably should have mentioned it in his article. That he didn't seems to further suggest that this lawsuit did not happen. --EightYearBreak (talk) 16:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC))

Requested move 19 January 2020

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus (not moved) (non-admin closure) ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 06:55, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

---

• The Lion King → The Lion King (1994 film)
• The Lion King (disambiguation) → The Lion King

– In order to disambiguate the 1994 film from 2019 version, this article needs to move in order knowledge that the original film was released in 1994. "The Lion King" in many moviegoers can be used to refer to 1994 version or 2019 version because it is hard to disambiguate these films despite same name "The Lion King" can used as disambiguated page. This are hardly to used as only Primary Topic, which 2019 version also highly notable. 180.245.111.65 (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

• Absolute oppose WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, WP:RECENTISM Ribbet32 (talk) 01:36, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose since the 1994 film is the primary topic with many related topics derived from the film. Furthermore, the 2019 film is too recent to make any claim to primacy. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 01:58, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose move. Not only is the 1994 film still the primary topic, but the base title if this page was moved would be for the franchise, not the disambiguation page. This request was doomed from the start. O.N.R. ^(talk) 02:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:Primary topic. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 08:22, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per the above, and per the two recent RMs (one, two). Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
• Support move to The Lion King (1994 film) but oppose to move disambiguation page This DAB page needs to keep because that target would be franchise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.67.43.44 (talk) 23:16, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
• Support moving to The Lion King (1994 film)　Despite it is primary topic, it need to renamed to disambiguate from 2019 version. I oppose to rename Lion King disambiguation page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.76.229.208 (talk) 23:29, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - this is clearly the primary topic by long-term significance until proven otherwise Red Slash 18:55, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - per the above. Timur9008 (talk) 21:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - the sequels, franchise, and 2019 film are all defined and named in reference to the 1994 original. The only thing that gives me pause is the 2019 film's status as the highest-grossing animated film of all time, but that's without adjusting for inflation; plus, the original held that distinction for almost a full decade. In light of that, I don't think the primary topic has changed. If, over the next few years, the remake continues to be very prominent, perhaps this title should point to the franchise or to a dab page, but we're not there yet. --EightYearBreak (talk) 16:19, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per everyone above, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:RECENTISM. –Davey2010^Talk 21:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Everyone else who cited WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is correct as the sequels, television series, and the remake mostly refer back to the original film. Christianster94 (talk) 23:56, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
• Snow close as oppose. Only supports are from IPs who are unfamiliar with naming conventions. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2020 (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.

"Wrong Translation"

Thanks Disney, I hate it. Abdullah Al Manjur (talk) 14:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

"The Lion King (movie)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect The Lion King (movie). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 17#The Lion King (movie) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. TheAwesomeHwyh 17:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Reception/accolades

It says the film won 2 Golden Globes, but it really won 3 (picture, score, and song). I cannot edit. Please fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.32.240.85 (talk) 04:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)