Talk:The Wizard of Oz (disambiguation)
![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 30 October 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved to The Wizard of Oz (disambiguation). The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Untitled
[edit]This is a selected entry on MediaWiki:November 3 selected anniversaries (may be in HTML comment)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mav (talk • contribs) 09:07, 13 March 2004 (UTC)
Merger of Wizard of Oz (movie) disambig page with this one proposed, so I did it. Thatcher131 04:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Disambiguation
[edit]I'm afraid this disambiguation goes into too much detail, and sort of defeats the purpose of a disambiguation page. As I see it, disambiguation pages should help direct people to articles they are likely to be looking for, whenever options exist. This means that a disambiguation page does not have to be comprehensive or detailed: just give people enough information to identify the page they need. Scott, while I respect what you're doing here with film and stage adaptations, I don't think the disambig page is the place to list esoteric adaptations like the Turkish films. I also think that in a disambiguation we should aim to list links in order of importance or centrality, rather than chronological or alphabetical order. Perhaps what you should do, Scott, is create a new article, something like List of stage and film adaptations of The Wizard of Oz, where you can go into all the production details, and link to it from here. Or else there could be a List of articles related to The Wizard of Oz. I think this disambiguation page should be further shortened and cleaned up. (By the way Scott, I'm somebody you know. Welcome to Wikipedia.)--woggly 21:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'd go even further. A disambiguation page is really meant for the case where there are two or more topics that have the same name but otherwise aren't directly related. Trust and series are good examples. I would submit that everything on this page, except two entries under "Other meanings," really relates to one main topic -- namely, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and its sequels and adaptations. The title Wizard of Oz should redirect to that page, which should (if it doesn't already) include a list of adaptations, and this should be a much, much shorter Wizard of Oz (disambiguation) page. --Russ (talk) 22:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Is it coincidence that the bible figure job comes from the land of uz?? just a funny coincidence (as many will soon say), or did someone read secondary literature on Oz?<<FlammingoParliament 14:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- In all probability it is a coincidence. Frank Baum was not a religious man, in fact he was in some ways anti-church, and it would be very out of character for him to plant biblical references in his works. He did however have a penchant for naming his fairylands short, one syllable names, often with odd letters, such as Ix, Quok, Ev or Mo. There are several theories for why he chose the name Oz, one that crops up in several places and seems credible is that he happened to spot a filing cabinet labelled A-N and O-Z just as he was seeking a name for his invention. By the way, in Hebrew translations of "The Wizard of Oz", Oz is translated עוץ, precisely as in the book of job; this translation seems to have originated with a translator named Yerushalayim Segal who translated the subtitles for the film in 1940. It makes for nice alliteration in Hebrew, but proves nothing about Baum's intentions! --woggly 16:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
was the wizard of oz the firs movie in color?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.184.213 (talk) 15:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:57, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
- Note: the discussion is closed. older ≠ wiser 16:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- I have corrected the link to the current discussion. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:21, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- Actually you broke the link, which is intended to go to the archived discussion. There is a new discussion at Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 film)#Requested move 31 October 2013. older ≠ wiser 18:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- I have corrected the link to the current discussion. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:21, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress 31 October 2013
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — Steel1943 (talk) 00:03, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Requested move 30 October 2021
[edit]- 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: not moved. There is a consensus that there is no primary topic. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 22:20, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
- The Wizard of Oz → The Wizard of Oz (disambiguation)
- The Wizard of Oz (1939 film) → The Wizard of Oz
– Move this page to The Wizard of Oz (disambiguation) and redirect The Wizard of Oz to the The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. I think there should be a redirect to the original novel in a similar way we redirect Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs to Snow White. Many editors are saying that the 1939 film is primary so editing request to match that. Interstellarity (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose if anything, the 1939 film is primary. But I don't see there being a primary topic. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:03, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per User:力. If the 1939 film is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, then no other dab page entry should be primary. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:27, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- Tried to fix request. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 01:51, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose. Having the target be a disambiguation page also prevents incorrect incoming links from being used, which in situation like this with plenty of "popular" entries, could very likely happen. Gonnym (talk) 07:49, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, and also because AFAIK the original book was never published under the title "The Wizard of Oz". 162 etc. (talk) 16:46, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose move per all above. If anything's the primary, it's the 1939 film, not the original novel. O.N.R. (talk) 05:42, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
@力, Roman Spinner, Rotideypoc41352, Gonnym, 162 etc., and Old Naval Rooftops: I have edited this request to make the 1939 film primary. Interstellarity (talk) 13:05, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- Still oppose and think the dab should be the target. Gonnym (talk) 13:08, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)