Talk:Hanna-Barbera
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hanna-Barbera article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ISBN 9786132999993 . |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
"The General Motors of animation" / Two Thirds line
Completely new at this, but I caught this and figured I would let more experienced wiki editors decide on how to handle it.
The "Referred to as "The General Motors of animation", Hanna-Barbera eventually went even further by producing nearly two-thirds of all Saturday-morning cartoons in a single year." line under the Mysteries, spinoffs, and more (1969–1979) caught my eye, just because that's a lot and it wasn't all that specific and didn't have a source. After a google search, I found it's from Joe's book My Life in ’Toons, p.55, which is on the Internet archive. I don't know about copying text wholesale from the book, but what's actually written is closer to "...and at one point we were responsible for something like 70 percent of all the cartoons on TV in a year". From what I can tell, one person just paraphrased from the book and other websites have copied it as being correct and this has wound up on Wikipedia. 96.46.10.2 (talk) 03:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
"Is" or "Was"
Im doing some copyediting on the lede, and was wondering if "is an American animation studio..." is appropriate? From reading the article, the company (and studio) seem to no longer functionally exist, with only the name persisting in use by Warner Bros as a sort of brand. Should it be changed to "was"? gompk 10:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)