Talk:Daisy Duck

Journal entry

There is no journal entry in BBS about her? Sum2k3 13:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I think it's because she was only seen briefly during BBS. She didn't even had lines and was only seen at the end alongside Minnie when presenting the winner of the festival.--NinjaSheik 20:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I know, but I don't know why the PAL-version has a journal entry and NTSC doesn't. :/ (the winnie of the million dreams trophie got the entry). Sum2k3 21:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

If the PAL game has a journal entry for her, can someone add it?"We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 10:28, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I've got a journal entry for her, and I have North American version. Are you guys sure you don't have one? --Neumannz, The Dark Falcon 18:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

If you have one, Neum-senpai, then you post it! Problem solved! :)--NinjaSheik 21:06, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Shard already did post it, it's in the infobox now. --Neumannz, The Dark Falcon 23:10, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay, cool!--NinjaSheik 23:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Origin cartoon

I agree that if the game is going to list real-world data and has it wrong, we should list the correct data and point out the error. However, in this case, there is no concrete source from Disney saying that Donna (the duck in "Don Donald") and Daisy are or aren't the same. Per Wikipedia, there seems to be more evidence that Disney considers them one and the same, and Donna was just an early name for Daisy like Dippy Dawg was for Goofy. In particular, again per Wikipedia, Disney listed Daisy's origin in 1999 as being "Don Donald" on a collector's pin. As it stands, it would appear that the Kingdom Hearts series is the closest we can get to a current official determination as to where Daisy originates. KeybladeSpyMaster 21:12, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

I would like to add that KH, being owned by Disney, would also count as statements made in Disney's own voice."We're werewolves, not swearwolves." (KrytenKoro) 21:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Since there's no concrete proof the two are the same, we should be transparent. It's a mystery if the two are the same. Just because there may be evidence skewed a certain way, as wiki editors, our duty is to not take sides. Even if there seems to be 99 percent evidence of favor of something and 1 percent against, a professional wiki will still be considerate of the 1 percent and not claim the "99 percent side" as factual. There was even a comic strip where the two are shown to be different, so why should a collector's pin of all things be the ultimate verdict? KH1 also says she originally appeared as Daisy in Mr. Duck Steps Out and does not seem mention Don Donald at all almost as if she is irrelevant. I don't see why KH2/BBS's journal entries should be taken into higher account than KH1, when KH2 also claims Goofy's debut is Two Weeks Vacation (his 41st short of all things), while KH1 more accurately lists it as Mickey's Revue, showing that the KH1 team did far more proper research, and shows the KH1 devs aren't include to mention a past incarnation of a character as their origin (KH1 considers Dippy Dawg to be Goofy), again adding to Donna's irrelevancy. Even the journals conflict each other between games. KH1 says Minnie debuted in Steamboat Willie, KH2 says Plane Crazy, and BBS says Mickey's Surprise Party.

I also disagree with the notion that a journal entry in a Disney spin-off game, primarily developed by Square Enix, is somehow the verbatim official word of Disney. We have no idea who was responsible for writing these journal entries, and if the writers got official information from Disney or not, or were forced to do Internet research online.

As for the infobox, I find it a shame we can only list one parameter for the origin, since I wish we could list more in cases like this (I'd prefer it to say "Don Donald or Mr. Duck Steps Out"). Since we can't, I don't have a huge issue if it lists Don Donald, even if it's technically unprofessional and murky. However, I feel we could go into this situation more in her Origin section. I'm sorry if it seems like I'm making this issue a huge deal - I'm more concerned about how wikis should operate in this situations like these, and the principle of the matter. Soroxas (talk) 12:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)