145:
I would personally say no to this. This is a wiki, which means it is not really reliable, someone can change it to whatever they want, up to and including swear words, etc. See our guidelines on reliable sources. However not all is lost, check the wiki for what sources it is referencing. At most use
56:
article? I can see how it provides background (which is why you should keep some of it), but this article is about the 12 principles, not the book. The section about the 9 old men is particularly out of place and could be cut down. I suppose a link above the section, something like
108:
The first sentence on Solid
Drawing is bad; I'm not sure what "really means" is describing (after the comma). Is it describing the principle of solid drawing, or good drawing, or something else entirely.
120:
hmmm refs from
Blender... hmmm... it's a wiki, so I'm not sure if that's good enough. I'll do some research, but you might want to see if you can find a source that's totally reliable to subsitute.
117:
The note is confusing. It's not really helpful where it is, and it doesn't explain what was shortened. I'm not sure if it's relevant in this page, but I could be wrong about that.
150:
So, I'm going to remove this from the list of GA nominees until you clear up all of the problems and find new refs. Sorry. Feel free to renominate it when you feel it is ready.
102:
The end of the 2nd paragraph in "Illusion of Life": Disney exploitaion is a bit biased, plus it is not really relevant to the article that they did try to make money.
105:
I really would like images for all or at least half of the principles, especially staging and arcs (the two sections that are kind of unclear), if it's possible. :)
146:
this as an additional source, for clarifying information, but perhaps not for verifying large chunks of information. —— nixeagle 17:22, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
17:
60:
53:
114:
In appeal, you end by saying there are several techniques, but you only name two. This could use a pic too, if there is one.
49:
I fixed some of the grammar, you should make sure to go over the article a few times, saying it aloud or in your head.
155:
132:
36:
159:
136:
95:
40:
151:
128:
32:
141:
Hi again. I asked at the help desk about the
Blender thing, and I recieved this response:
88:
68:
127:
Hope that helps. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!
75:
45:
Well, there are a few issues that need addressing, so I'm putting this nom on hold.
52:
Question: I'm no expert, but shouldn't the
Illusion of Life section go under the
80:
111:
How can computer animators benefit from using solid drawing? Elaborate.
123:
what makes ref #50 reliable (the frank&ollie one)?
74:Actually, red=useful, most of the time. Read
8:
31:I'm gonna review this. Looks interesting!
18:Talk:Twelve basic principles of animation
71:in the first section is red. Red=bad.
61:Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life
54:Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life
7:
24:
1:
64:would work... just a comment.
175:
160:00:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
96:07:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
137:17:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
41:16:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
148:
143:
93:
166:
94:
91:
87:
85:
174:
173:
169:
168:
167:
165:
164:
163:
89:
81:
79:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
172:
170:
152:Intothewoods29
129:Intothewoods29
125:
124:
121:
118:
115:
112:
109:
106:
103:
100:
99:
98:
69:Hamilton Luske
65:
59:Main Article:
50:
33:Intothewoods29
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
171:
162:
161:
157:
153:
147:
142:
139:
138:
134:
130:
122:
119:
116:
113:
110:
107:
104:
101:
97:
92:
86:
84:
77:
73:
72:
70:
66:
63:
62:
55:
51:
48:
47:
46:
43:
42:
38:
34:
26:
19:
149:
144:
140:
126:
82:
58:
44:
30:
67:The link
27:GA Review
76:WP:RED
83:97198
16:<
156:talk
133:talk
90:talk
37:talk
78:. —
158:)
135:)
39:)
154:(
131:(
35:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.