Talk:Kristoff (Frozen)

user:FU doesn't know how to use Wikipedia

This piece of trash from a "buffalo" degrades WP quality, and so is hatted.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
First off, there is absolutely no rule in Wikipedia that you don't have to source a character profile. Where does the last name come from? Your second mistake was violating WPAGF! Call me a vandal again and see how fast you get slapped.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:32, 11 July 2014 (UTC) Accusing me of "not knowing how to use Wikipedia" is an outright violation of WP:NPA, and I've apologised for unknowingly calling a good faith editor a vandal (which means, I did not find any explanation for the tag, of course "rv unexplained tag" would have been better though) stated why I thought the tag was vandalism(here) Meanwhile, your choice of calling anyone as "user:FU" has implicit links to foul languages, which doubles the violation of WP:NPA. I can't believe that such acts are from a senior editor, and I don't think jp.wiki works like that.Forbidden User (talk) 15:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC) Just keep digging that hole... If you would like to talk about personal attacks, weak milquetoast "apologies" aside, let's start with you calling a proper tag vandalism. You chose your username, I didn't. I could come up with some strange crackpot theory that you chose it to render a racy initialism, but I won't. I abbreviated for speed. Grow up.You are refering to your little ego? Your third mistake-nobody has an obligation to keep your message on their talkpage-do you keep every recorded message on your answering machine? If someone doesn't want your message, especially after you called them a vandal, it's best to back off. Your fourth mistake-making minor (and incorrect) edits so you can troll in the comments is also against Wikipedia policy. I saw you contacted an admin-and admitted that you were continuing to skate on thin ice-likely she will tell you that you are on icy ground here and should Let It Go.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:15, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Off topic enough-you have called me "troll" here, without checking what I did in the minor edits (they are typos, template errors, sometimes several are needed) (anyone can check it), which triples on WP:NPA. For your abbreviation, I'd wonder if there are prople who believe in you.

I thought it was vandalism, and I know it's a mistake after your explanation. However, you did not give the reason at the start-how could you blame the mistake entirely on me? "Grow up" - so you think I'm not grown up? This violates both WP:NPA and WP:Harassment, which overrides WP:AGF - the only thing you've cited so far.

For the talk page - fine, I did not revert your removal, right?

If you think the apology is weak, look at the edit summaries. I expected that you'd like to unleash anger on me, so I've repeated the apology - the apology alone - to you. It is you that chooses to go on fighting. No one will ignore such heavy personal attacks.

P.S.You have no rights to talk about how another user (will) reply. That's left to her, not you.Forbidden User (talk) 15:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Of course, the "vandalism" claim was a mistake, and I apologise a fourth time here. The choice of getting us blocked or ending the dispute peacefully is in your hand.Forbidden User (talk) 15:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

3rd Party - Last name.

I've tried to research where Bjorgman came from and the Disney Wiki (http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Kristoff) indicates that it comes from Frozen: The Essential Guide. (http://www.amazon.com/dp/1465414045). There are a few Disney related articles that do mention an Essential Guide List_of_locations_in_Pirates_of_the_Caribbean, but all of them are done in text rather than as a reference such as

According to the "Monsters University Essential Guide," all of the members of Python Nu Kappa want to work at a crematorium and have eyes that all glow in the dark (although one of them possesses what appears to be heat-ray vision).

So I think something similar would be the best, I'm just not sure what section it would belong with.

According to "Frozen: The Essential Guide" Kristoff's last name is Bjorgman."

Does that work?Naraht (talk) 16:21, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Of course it does, but I don't have the book and so I personally cannot give the page number. Anyway, the surname should appear in the context only.Forbidden User (talk) 16:33, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Obviously this is an old thread, but I wanted to raise it again. Currently the first sentence of the article says that his name is Kristoff Bjorgman with a reference to the Frozen: The Essential Guide (which is a third party publication). It gives undue weight to a surname that as far as I am aware has never been used in the films. The WP:COMMONNAME is simply Kristoff, so this is what should be stated in bold, followed by the explanation above. Fieryninja (talk) 18:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Wife?

Why does the infobox state that Anna is Kristoff's wife? It doesn't matter what happened on Once, first and foremost this article is about the character from the animated films, (Hence, the photo), and in the context of the animated films, Kristoff and Anna are not married. So I feel that the "wife" and Elsa "sister in-law" notes should be removed from the infobox, because it is misleading. Wikicontributor12 (talk) 01:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

There are separate infoboxes for the two separate projects using this character. Each reflects what was shown in the respective project. This should not be a problem if the Once Upon a Time stuff doesn't leak into and contaminate the Frozen sections. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:18, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. It seems that I made a mistake; I saw the bottom of the Once infobox and thought it was the one at the top of the page. Sorry about that. Wikicontributor12 (talk) 01:30, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Elsa (Disney) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:01, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2020

He is actual 8 billion years old 2601:1C1:C280:6A0:117:BC87:CF8C:1F04 (talk) 18:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Pupsterlove02 talk • contribs 18:35, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kristoff (Frozen)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Fieryninja (talk · contribs) 18:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 06:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello! It's always nice seeing fictional characters get more in-depth coverage. I'll look over the article in the next few days. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Thebiguglyalien Unfortunately I won't be able to respond to this review until beginning of September. Please feel free to make any comments and I will respond then. Thanks Fieryninja (talk) 07:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Fieryninja, after looking over the article, there are some significant issues with the sourcing that need to be addressed, particularly in regard to close paraphrasing and use of quotations. Large sections are likely going to need broad rewrites before this is eligible for GA, so I'm going to close the review for now so it can be renominated after this is done. I've also left a few other surface level notes for things that might be worth considering. I do hope to see this back at GAN in the future! Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

• There are a lot of quotes in both Development and Reception. Quotes should be used sparingly, when it's the only way to convey an idea. Overuse is essentially copying from the sources.
• There isn't much use of transitions in the prose, making it feel like a disjointed set of facts combined into a paragraph (to be fair, this is something I often struggle with).
• The Appearances section should be reorganized. Lone paragraphs generally don't need their own subheadings. After covering the two main films, a brief summary of his other appearances could all be presented at once.
• There's very little information about his role in Frozen II relative to Frozen.
• A lot of the content under Appearances doesn't have much to do with Kristoff. If he doesn't play a significant role in something, then a generic plot summary doesn't need to be included.

References:

• Broadway World is generally unreliable.
• ComingSoon.net doesn't have any information about its editorial process, so it probably shouldn't be used.
• Besides these two, the sources seem generally reliable. They're mostly webpage sources, which generally aren't going to have much of the deeper analysis that really makes an article shine, but a Google Scholar search didn't turn up any must-have academic sources about Frozen. Either way, the current sources are sufficient for GA besides the two I mentioned.

Spot checks:

• Foundas (2013) – This doesn't support anything from the second time it's used.
• Hibberd (2017) – Close paraphrasing:
  • Compare the article Frozen's story was originally very different from the final plot and went through many iterations versus the source Frozen went through many different iterations
  • Initially Elsa was conceived as the villain, similar to the character in the Hans Christian Andersen story versus she was a villain and pure evil—much more like the Hans Christian Andersen tale
  • Anna was a pure-hearted heroine versus Anna, our pure-hearted heroine
  • In the final act, Elsa created an army of snow monsters versus Fast-forward to the final act: Elsa creates an army of snow monsters
  • struggled to stage it versus how do you stage that
  • by revealing him in the storm moments before Anna and Elsa versus reveal Kristoff just moments before we reveal Elsa to Anna
• McHenry (2019) – Good.
• Radish (2013) – Good.
• Snetiker (2017) – Good, although this doesn't seem relevant to Kristoff specifically.
• Solomon (2013) – Close paraphrasing throughout most of what isn't quotation, too many to list individually.
• Wybrew (2013) – Some of the same wording here paraphrases the source very closely.