Talk:My Little Pony: Equestria Girls (film)

Question

Should children film be add to the categories184.20.209.241 (talk) 23:40, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Good idea! --Yellow1996 (talk) 23:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Early leaks

I see that an anon at /mlp/ has leaked phone cam shots of the film. I'm sure there will be others before June 15 but I will remind everyone that we cannot use these to fill out the plot of the film until the film has been shown publicly (June 15) without violating WP:V. --MASEM (t) 13:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh those darn rules about Vrfblty... killing things that you know in your heart to be true. *sigh* Oh well. You're right, it wouldn't fit in with Wikipedia anyway. But someone ought to get to uploading images from the trailer to the FiM wiki. dogman15 (talk) 23:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. Then we'll have lots more content to add to the article. --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:17, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Why "Little"

In the books and cartoons these ponies seem to be normal size. Why are the called "Little Ponies"? Cappy Jenkins (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

It's just a brand name. But, there never really is anything for size comparison, is there? ;) (In the future, these types of questions should be posted at the Reference Desk) --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Because it's named after "My Little Pony" plastic dolls, which were "Little" because they fit in a child's hand. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 23:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Attention!

I any one of you are going to the festival. Please memorize the movie when it's being shown so you can put the plot into wikipedia. Thnks 98.114.20.64 (talk) 10:45, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, as soon as the movie comes out, the in-depth plot and other details will pretty much be instantaniously published online; so there is no need to worry! --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

"Possible" source

[1] . I'm not sure how much of it is sensationalism reporting and how much is legit, and might be better to see how the reception develops before adding. --MASEM (t) 13:31, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, it gets better. Again, not sure if I can use it but... [2]. --MASEM (t) 18:55, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Lol! :) First one is just sensationalism IMHO; (love the comment about "hooker boots".) And for the second, I honestly don't think Hasbro is trying to make money off clop fans; it's not like this movie is rated R (or PG-13, for that matter.) Add them to the article if you want but they're pretty much nonsense! --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

O boi, that Slate article is awful. I know it counts as a reliable source for Wikipedia, but it's pretty much exactly the opposite of true. I haven't seen an adult fan who thinks EG is a good idea. Cloppers or otherwise. --86.185.51.160 (talk) 17:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, yes, which is why I worded the addition as an opinion, not fact. --MASEM (t) 17:14, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah; on the contrary most cloppers agree that humanized stuff is a bad idea... ;) --Yellow1996 (talk) 19:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi

What about the part where Luna gives Shimmer a Masonry Trowel. DDreth 12:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The article isn't locked; you can add it. --Yellow1996 (talk) 19:22, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I know but we need a concensus to add more detail to this plot to prevent a possible edit war. DDreth 21:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Er, I've added a bit about Luna making Sunset fix the school, but we don't need more detail than that. --MASEM (t) 21:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

"Starring" actors

The opening credits of the film only list actors from Tara Strong to Rebecca Shoichet. As per the guildlines shown in the "Template:Infobox film" page, I propose we limit the list of actors in the infobox to that, and leave the rest of the actors to the "Cast" section below, especially since some of the actors listed in the infobox aren't mentioned in the ending credits. That, or we instead link to the section within the infobox. User:Immblueversion (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah the infobox is a little crowded. I agree with the removal but we should wait for a few more opinions before going through with it. --Yellow1996 (talk) 20:12, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Acknowledged; reverting changes to cast lists (kinda jumped the gun). User:Immblueversion (talk) 21:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem; if anyone had objected they could have just reverted and brought it up here. But more users will probably add their thoughts soon enough. :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 22:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's been a day. I don't think anyone else will mind... User:Immblueversion (talk) 03:32, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. Looks a lot better this way; good call. :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Songs

Okay, so are we spelling it "Main 6" or "Mane 6"? And should "6" be spelled out as "six"? I don't want to accidentally create another annoying MOS by bringing this up, but I'm just wondering. Helicopter Llama 16:02, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

We should be calling them by their character names, not a title otherwise not used in the film (though how it's informally we called them). --MASEM (t) 16:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Just for completion's sake I'll add that it's usually Mane 6 (mane as in mane (horse) - very punny! :) ) and with the decimal 6. Sometimes the number is written out but I see that form a lot less. --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:23, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I know that, I mean my Ponyhoof Facebook News Feed is loaded with posts from those kinds of pages, all spelled like that (and don't even get me started on Tumblr), but what to do with the article itself? I spotted some instances in other articles, so I wanna know (CAN YOU SHOW ME, SOMETHING'S FAMILIAR BOUT THE STRANGERS LIKE ME) Helicopter Llama 16:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Where are these other instances? Because if they are refering to "Mane 6" then it should be spelled the most common way (I think there's a policy for that; might actually only apply to article titles though) - Mane 6. --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

It's actually rather difficult (though not impossible) to reliably source "Mane 6", even though as fans we all know that. It's a term used only within the context of the fandom, and not to anyone else, and should be avoided. --MASEM (t) 17:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you know of any reliable sources which discuss the term? If we can't find one, what should we replace it with? --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:14, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I've replaced it already: the names of the characters directly. --MASEM (t) 01:17, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, sorry - I should look before I post! ;) Thanks! --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:20, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Box office?

Is it a flop or a success? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.249.8.163 (talk • contribs)

It's unlikely we can ever classify a film with such limited screenings as such (the rapid -to-video signals that Hasbro was banking on home media and toy sales , not tickets). That said, given that the Clearvision group added more screenings suggests it did better than they originally anticipated. --MASEM (t) 18:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to be any offical numbers on box office performance, either. --Yellow1996 (talk) 20:40, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Did it flop? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.219.5.23 (talk) 13:06, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Again, as above, we are likely never going to get official numbers on this due to how limited the run is, but the fact they have added additional screenings suggests its anything but a flop. --MASEM (t) 13:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

the box office can be seen here http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/intl/?page=&country=PE&wk=2013W40&id=_fMYLITTLEPONYEQUE01

This only gives four nations, not the worldwide box office. Gial Ackbar (talk) 20:05, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

so who says it has to be worldwide? was the film even released in every country? either way it is the only box office that can be found also I want to point out it was in limited release that's a normal amount for a limited release film. Dman41689 (talk) 22:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The info is misleading. A reader who sees the "box office" would assume that this is the total box office, not just the box office of Peru, Chile, Columbia an UK added. For example, the box office of the limited run in the US is not included, therefor we know that this is incomplete and the total box office is higher, but a reader who only reads the article and dose not check the source dose not. Gial Ackbar (talk) 22:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

so it still shows a box office. a limited release means its limited meaning not every country has shown it or that it was in theaters for one week. the film probably didn't produce a box office in the US since none of the sites have shown it that's why we show the box office for the other countries it was shown in. Dman41689 (talk) 18:39, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

The documentation for the Film Infobox template states that "If worldwide gross is not available, then indicate which region has grossed that amount". I reinserted the information on the grounds that some information is better than no information, especially on such a noteworthy parameter for judging movies. ~Helicopter Llama~ 20:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Megan & Sundance

When I was overseas serving this country, we got a shipment of my little pony movies. There was for a time (1980s I believe) that there was a little girl and a pony in this series named "Megan & Sundance" These two were so cut. They got their own action figures. I haven't seen them in any subsequent films or cartoons. Does anyone know what happened to those little guys? My daughter loved them and so did I Chip Roodle (talk) 20:34, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Here's a YouTube of them; more info at MyLittleWiki. Just for future reference, these types of questions belong at the Refdesk, not article talk pages. Thanks! :) --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:09, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

EQG film's status and other questions

1. I think (should I say I believe?) the EQG film is essentially a direct-to-whatever material which is having limited screenings in USA and Canada. (Recent big OVAs in Japan is having similar distribution strategy if I remember right.) I don't think there is any doubt about this. (or is there?) Hope this article reflects it well.
   1. I also hope this article clarifies in the lead section that the EQG film is a part of EQG spin-off franchise very well.
2. I noticed that there is no data for EQG in any of box office websites. Has it something to do with how EQG is distributed and/or the lack of MPAA rating?
3. What about Canadian box office results?

JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 17:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

1. It's kind of in between, so I think the lead section summarizes this well (mentions it has limited screenings and will soon have a worldwide home media release.) It isn't direct-to-dvd because it has limited screenings before it is released for home media.
2. Probably due to the fact that it has limited screenings.
3. There isn't any Canadian box office results because there aren't any official box office results available. --Yellow1996 (talk) 18:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I see. So, did Hasbro knew it can't beat Monsters University and Despicable Me 2 anyway and went with limited release, leaving no box office record? (In other words, aren't limited releases counted in box office results?) JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 17:43, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, limited releases are sometimes used as a guage for how well a movie will do; if a movie does well in limited release, then it may gain a wide release soon after. Whether the earnings and other information are publicly disclosed is - in this case, Hasbro's choice. The strange thing about Equestria Girls is that they are waiting a long time to release it to home media; which is usually the opposite for limited releases. Moreover, it doesn't seem like the movie is going to get a wide release. I don't really know what Hasbro's reasoning behind this is, and we'll likely never know. --Yellow1996 (talk) 19:10, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Maybe Hasbro wants to gain attentions by releasing it in cinemas anyway before actually making home media releases? I wonder what will Hasbro do with Transformers Prime Beast Hunters Super Duper Movie Yay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JSH-alive (talk • contribs) 07:17, 28 July 2013‎

You've got a good point there - maybe it was supposed to be a direct-to-dvd release, but they then decided to give it a limited theatrical release to add to the hype; funny because you'd think they wouldn't need that with such a dedicated fanbase behind them. And, it still doesn't explain the long delay for the dvd release. --Yellow1996 (talk) 17:40, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Long delay in home media release… EQG wanted to gain the (honorary?) title of 'the film that was screened for same period as MU and DspMe2?

Well, I think EQG overall should not have happened after all. Girls usually find MLP for cute ponies to tidy and groom (and collectors collect them for the toy's own charm), not for a form of teenage life (like, say Monster High) on another side of the world.

I still don't know why Hasbro gave what is essentially a direct-to-yadayada film with such story that wouldn't compete (compared to major children's films) the limited theatrical screenings before releasing it in stores. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 11:36, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

FWIW I thoroughly enjoyed the film; though I'm pretty much what you'd call a level 100 fanboy or what-have-you so yeah... I doubt I'm alone on that though. As I mentioned before, Hasbro probably gave it a limited release to see how well it would do, though I don't understand the long delay. --Yellow1996 (talk) 17:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

German release

Is it really ok to source this via Equestria Daily? I mean, I've been citing EqD myself quite a few times, but this one's pretty weak—hardly more than a screenshot with very little referencing. -- / Kàmina / 20:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I think it's okay to cite EQD (though I'm the one that sourced that in the first place!) - it's done on many articles. I believe in this case all we need is confirmation of the release date, which the page does quite nicely. --Yellow1996 (talk) 00:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

That's basically from Nickelodeon Germany's press release. We should cite this one instead: http://api.mtvnn.com/v2/airings/program_plan.pdf?channel_id=17&language_code=de&country_code=DE&preview_program_week_in_x_weeks=1 JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 02:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I would suggest so, no need to filter it through EqD.-- / Kàmina / 08:07, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree; but that link hangs for me, so could someone else (who can confirm its usefulness) replace the ref? --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Alright. If you are fluent in German, find it yourself on http://presse.nick.de/news JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 22:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Which I'm not... and 10 minutes of stumbling around that site didn't prove helpful. I'm going to leave the EQD ref. If anyone wants to change it, the please feel free. --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The link works for me, what's stated in the EQD article is true.  █ EMARSEE 01:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Must just be something on my end, then; though I tried switching browsers and it still hung. --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The link works for me (it takes a while to load, though), and yes, I can confirm what stated by EqD as well. My concern was EqD merely providing a minimal screenshot; this would be ok, IMHO, if Calpain also provided a link to the full press release, which he doesn't. If I'm concerned over nothing, though, let's leave it like this for now (I guess we'll be able to find better sourcing once the film is actually released). -- / Kàmina / 09:39, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good. Let's wait until the movie is released in Germany and then find a better source. --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Aha! I'm just not very patient I guess... waited about 3 minutes and it finally loaded! Lo and behold, there it is at the top of the page:

Samstag, 3. August 2013 - 17:00 Uhr

My Little Pony - Equestria Girls

Just thought I'd note that here. ;) --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

So... I've been away these days, any news about the German release? It should have premiered by now. I think I'll change the tense in that sentence and keep the EqD source until (if?) we find better sourcing, after all. -- / Kàmina / 12:41, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Doesn't look like it! There should at least be something in the next few days, though (I hope!) --Yellow1996 (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Will Anderson?

I've noticed that this edit back from June 27 caused Will Anderson's comment about score production to be removed, without providing an explanation in the edit summary. I think the sentence might be reintegrated in the "Songs" paragraph (possibly after renaming it into "Music" or something). -- / Kàmina / 11:48, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Go for it! :) I agree completely. The section could probably just stay "Songs" but "Music" would work, too. --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 16:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I did the job. Section's title stays "Songs" for now, but it stands to be changed. :) -- / Kàmina / 17:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Awesome - looks great! :) --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 18:29, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

They Lied

Well, they did say they would air EQG in Malaysia on July 28th but apparently, they did not. They replaced it with Winx Club. [3]. Rodimus Rhyme (talk) 05:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I honestly have zero idea how we should behave in such a situation where sourcing is so problematic. We should probably notify it in the article, though. (I'm personally gonna be away till Sat 17th starting today, so someone else will have to take up the issue I guess :D). -- / Kàmina / 06:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Already  Done by Rodimus Rhyme and 175.139.26.16. Well that certainly seems to be the theme here for refs on EQG! --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 17:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

It might be that either they just realised at last minute they didn't even air seasons 2 and 3, or they finally listened to some portion of Malaysian bronies who against the whole EQG thing. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 06:07, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Theme Song

please chose one of these 3 Theme Songs

1. My Little Pony FIM Theme Song (remix)
2. My Little Pony FIM Theme Song (dubstep remix)
3. Merrie Melodies Fanfare From Daffy Duck in Hollywood (1938)

I Chose My Little Pony FIM Theme Song (dubstep remix) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.210.163 (talk) 14:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Article talk pages are not for conducting surveys of the editors; please use a forum instead. If this is about inclusion in the article, I seriously doubt dubstep remixes are official and if they are, someone kindly correct me. --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 16:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Italian release

I've found a reliable piece of evidence concerning the film release in Italy. As suspected, it won't hit theaters, but rather premiere on our digital terrestrial channel Cartoonito. No fixed date is available as of now, but premiere is apparently due to this autumn, according to this document (check out page 14). Enough to make the article? -- / Kàmina / 15:43, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. Just put it as "Autumn" for now and then add a more specific date when it's available. --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 16:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I was actually provided with even better sourcing: this article sets the premiere date on September 22nd, 2013. I'm proceeding with the insertion. -- / Kàmina / 15:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Looks great! Thanks for finding that! :) --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 15:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

No problem. ;) -- / Kàmina / 12:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Invalid source

I checked the source for the Australian release after an IP made this edit to check if said source did actually mention New Zealand, and I found that in fact it doesn't even hold for the Australian release to begin with! It's just a link to the website where the original announcement appeared, but as of now you can't find evidence that the movie was ever featured in the website (typing "Equestria Girls" in the search bar will yield no result, and the subpage with the movie info now redirects back to a generic /movies page). Best I could find were an EqD article, this one from this BAU website (both linking the aforementioned "null" page) and some YouTube evidence proving that the source used to be valid, but not anymore. The New Zealand release may be sourced via this webpage, but like the Australian one, it's bound to eventually disappear. I doubt we can provide reliable and durable sourcing with so little information, but since we know this info must be legitimate, we could rely on EqD for the time being. Problem is, EqD doesn't seem to have any posts about the New Zealand release. What to do? -- / Kàmina / 13:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I say we keep the Australian release, sourced by EQD. We could leave the NZ release, and if so put a {{cn}} on it. Or, we could just omit it for now and the add it back in once a usable source presents itself. I'm leaning towards the first one (keep with citation needed tag.) --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 15:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Let's apply this solution for the time being. :) New opinions are welcome as well. -- / Kàmina / 10:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

EDIT: Done, and I also switched the 'publisher' label for EqD into 'work' (which is an alias for 'website' according to the man page), as I think it's more fitting. I'm not 100% sure though, and I'm looking for some feedback. -- / Kàmina / 10:46, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Looks fine to me! Great work! :) --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 02:00, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Article structure

I'd like to give this article a structure like G.I. Joe Extreme because it would be vague to create a main separate article for entire EQG franchise or give the toy line a separate article. Here's my idea:

• Development and characteristics
  • Franchise overall
  • Animated film
• Feature-length film
  • Story
  • Releases and marketing (for film)
    • Theatrical
    • Television: Respecting WP:MOS-TV, list broadcasts in USA and other Anglophone countries only. For non-English editions of Wikipedia, instruct them to list broadcasts in USA and in [article's relevant language] only.
    • Home media, streaming and (legal) digital downloads: Same rule as above.
  • Box office and gross revenue (if available/necessary)
• Toy line
  • Characteristic of toys
• Merchandises and other tie-ins
• Criticism and reception (controversies if necessary)
  • On the toy line
  • On the film
  • On the overall franchise

JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 08:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Eh, I think it's far to early to call it like that (we have no idea if this will be long-running or not). Considering the GI Joe Extreme example you do have a separate article for the show - in the list of episodes, and at least in this case, most of the sources speak of the movie and the toys in separate voices. We also lack a really good reason why Hasbro went this way (the closest thing is a offhand statement Katie Cook made at Bronycon, that Hasbro was inspired by the humanizations of the ponies to go that route themselves, but I'd dare say this was a reasonably reliable source). --MASEM (t) 14:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I still think that was a weaselly answer, and that it had everything (or mostly everything) to do with Mattel and Monster High. And then they just used fan art of humanizations to justify it. dogman15 (talk) 17:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I concur with the above... basically it's too early to see how far they're going to go with this; so a structure like this isn't justified, yet. --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 03:21, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I feel the same. Wouldn't go so far as calling EqG a "new franchise" just yet. As of now, we have an FiM spinoff, the dolls and possibly the comic (if I'm not missing out on something), but as Masem pointed out, there isn't much evidence that EqG will in fact be a long-running, standalone franchise in the future. -- / Kàmina / 17:23, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

But it would be misleading to say 'EQG toys are based on EQG movie'. Honestly, I don't think it's right to say, for example, toy C is based on the TV series C when they are actually part of franchise C created by big corporation named A. I'd like to use "associated with", "linked to" or "tie-in to" in that case. That's a different situation from Ang Lee's film adaptation of Brokeback Mountain where the author of original short novel didn't expect to earn much money when writing that novel. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 18:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think it is misleading to say the EQG toys are based on the movie; but, saying they are "associated" doesn't really change the meaning too much so if you want to change it then I won't object. --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 19:04, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Another idea. What about having a section named "Franchise overview" right after lead section, just like Ruby Gloom TV series article? JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 12:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

If there's sufficient products available based off of EQG (I haven't looked into this very thoroughly myself) then I would definitely be for a Franchise Overview section. Nice throwback for me btw, I had forgotten about that show. :) --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 23:02, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, doing so (referred to JSH's idea) would equate to 'promote' this article from one about the film to one about the whole sub-franchise; I personally think it's a little early for such a step. Personally, if I were to include mention about the merchandise---which is legitimate---I would add a final section, after discussing all the aspects of the film (which would thus stay the main focus of the article); at this stage, I think the EqG merchandise can be classified as a sequitur of the movie, rather than a subfranchise per se. Of course, if we can RS enough notability for the EqG brand, we should consider rearranging the whole page. But if it's just "a bunch of dolls" (and the comic), I say mention it in a final section.-- / Kàmina / 07:13, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Good point, Kamina. I guess we could put it in a final section, then when the RSes deem EQG worth being a subfranchise we can move it to the proposed design. --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 02:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Minimax

(I'm thinking that I'd remove non-English TV broadcasts per WP:MOS-TV#Broadcast (theatrical releases outside U.S. and Canada? I'm thinking about it), but anyway) Minimax is technically a pan-Central-European channel with multiple audio tracks (while also having number of feeds for regional ads), so they may première EQG in Serbian, Czech and Romanian at the same time as Hungarian. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 15:14, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd oppose a removal; MOS-TV applies to lists of channels etc. for broadcasts in other contries, and specifically mentions to instead present them in prose, as they already are on this article. Also for the Minimax broadcast: good to know. Let's wait and see if they do before adding the other countries. --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 01:05, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Italian release... again?

I'm officially confused. According to this article, EqG is going to have a theatrical release in Italy on October 6th 2013, after its TV premiere on Cartoonito (which I can confirm has happened). The source is definitely valid, though, so I guess we should add the info to the article. -- / Kàmina / 15:58, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Weird... but that sure seems to be the trend here! (Yes I agree - let's add it!) --.Yellow1996.^(ЬMИED¡) 03:41, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

By the way my dear Kamina, try to use "New section" tab next time. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 11:32, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Will do, sorry about that. -- / Kàmina / 13:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Lauren and American Girls

This edit had me thinking quite a little. Sure enough, the removed paragraph was supported by a source; I'm reporting here for clarity's sake the three sentences we should focus on:

• primary source (Faust's twit): Even "American Girls" was once radically positive for girls before it was homogenized for money.
• secondary source (the Daily Dot's article): On her Twitter, Faust herself may have obliquely commented on the brouhaha by tacitly comparing it to the watering-down of Mattel's famed "American Girls" line over time.
• tertiary source (our own article): Lauren Faust, the former executive producer for the 'Friendship Is Magic' show and characters, indirectly compared the movie to the watered-down transformation of the 'American Girl' doll line through the years from its original ideals towards a commercial property.

What perplexes me is that neither the primary nor the secondary sources seem to establish the (albeit indirect) comparison we're making out; taken out of context, Faust's twit has no value to this end, and the Daily Dot's article merely assesses a possible "oblique comparison". I for one would be okay to leave out the sentence, that is, to not rollback the IP's edit. Sourcing just doesn't look strong enough to do otherwise. -- / Kàmina / 19:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Key to remember it was being made in response to this article in the Atlantic in MAy 2013, before the film's wide release. DD's use of "may have obliquely commented" is exactly right, but it would have been much more helpful if we had a better statement from Faust....hmmm, now if we add this article [4] which has Craig speaking for her eg: "“I don’t think [Lauren]’s the biggest fan of that,” McCracken deadpans. “That’s one of those things would have made her leave anyway. If they had told her you have to turn them into human beings now and they have to go high school, she would have said, ‘No, that’s exactly what I didn’t want to do with this show.’... ", that would help justify using the DD article as well. --MASEM (t) 19:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The McCracken quote seems very helpful to me, although once again, we have someone talking about Faust's alleged opinion rather than her speaking for herself. I suppose we could work the sentence back into the article if we manage to convey that Faust never expressly stated her opinion about EG (even though I'm convinced Mr. McCracken's right about it). -- / Kàmina / 09:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

True, but this is her husband, and they've worked together on animation since well-before MLP - as long as we state that he said it, that's a completely fair statement to express Faust' opinion on the show. --MASEM (t) 14:25, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, that's for sure: we can source his statement and make it clear that it's coming from Faust's husband (so the reader himself can conclude that it is what Faust likely thinks of the film). -- / Kàmina / 15:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Let me add that in then, since that's a fair assessment. --MASEM (t) 15:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Perfect, IMHO. Also, I had a good laugh at "McKraken". :D -- / Kàmina / 09:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

A FEW THINGS

THE FILM WILL BE DUBED INTO JAPANISE AND THE SEQULE WILL BE CALLED MY LITTLE PONY RAINBOW ROCKS AND WILL PERMERA SEPTEMBER 13TH 2014 ON LITTLE PONY TV — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.99.197 (talk) 17:35, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Source please? JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 13:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Sequel shorts?

The section on these shorts seems rather WP:CRYSTAL-line to me. I've gone to some official YouTube channels ([5] and [6]), and I can't find any indication of eight. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 06:12, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

This is Jim Miller's twitter, right after Music to my Ears came out: [7]. --MASEM (t) 06:18, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Cited. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 21:15, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Time to split? 222.233.145.130 (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Nowhere close. We have near zero info on the production and release of the sequel. At some point we will, but not now. --MASEM (t) 15:54, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

"My Little Pony Friends" Song

The "My Little Pony Friends" song is a special song, but not actually a deleted song mainly because Hasbro Studios Shorts uploaded it to YouTube since August 14th, 2014. As in a credits, it was passed over in favor of "A Friend For Life" song. --Allen ^{(talk to me! / ctrb / E-mail me)} 01:24, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Time for the main Equestria Girls article?

The third (film in the series/line in the franchise), Friendship Games, is coming. So, wouldn't there be a need to create a separate article about the franchise itself, covering every-neccesary-thing EQG including the toy line and other tie-in media? We could rename this article (about film) to My Little Pony: Equestria Girls (film).

P.S. How to say what everyone believes 'Hasbro wanted to jump into Monster High bandwagon so they created a cheap-looking MH rip-off called EQG, lazily relying on MLP brand' in Wikipedia style? (Yeah, we need proof, though.) JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 14:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

• Possibly, but I think there's not that much info on the EQG series not directly related to FiM to really expand much. --MASEM (t) 15:04, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, we could at least go with article structure like this:

• Lead, TOC
• Background/Development
• Toy release history (EQG1, R Rocks, F Games)
• Tie-in media and other merchandises
  • Films (incl. R Rocks shorts)
  • Literatures (chapter books, that is) and IDW comics
  • Other media and merchandises (incl. licensing deals)
• Criticism and reception
• Refs, see alsoes and ext links

JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 13:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:My Little Pony: Equestria Girls (franchise) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:01, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on My Little Pony: Equestria Girls (film). 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.dailymarkets.com/stock/2013/07/01/exhibitors-adding-showings-of-my-little-pony-equestria-girls-due-to-consumer-demand/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141013055020/http://www.toonzone.net/2013/08/review-little-pony-equestria-girls-blu-ray-slow-canter-not-galloping-success/ to http://www.toonzone.net/2013/08/review-little-pony-equestria-girls-blu-ray-slow-canter-not-galloping-success

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) 20:21, 9 February 2018 (UTC)