Talk:Snow White

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2020 and 5 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): VEmily1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

is there a x-rated version of the Snow White?

Yeah, but not official... =P

Re LOWER GERMANY. Puzzled by the remarks in the article about the dialects of Lower Germany, I decided last Friday to take a tour through the province to check the facts myself. In Bonna, our first stop, all the Ubii that I asked called Snow White Schneewittchen. This was all the more surprising as our tour guide, Dr von Reclam, had insisted all the time, that the Brothers Grimm had called the girl not Schneewittchen but Sneewittchen. But Schneewittchen is what it is now called also by the Cugerni, which we found out when we came to Vetera. There we also tried to interview some of the guest workers from Illyricum, Galatia and Cappadocia that are now flooding the province to the dismay of many of the locals, but none of them had any idea what we were talking about. Things got even more complicated when we passed Noviomagus and met up with the Batavi. Divided as always, half of the Batavi call Snow White Blanche-Neige while the other half would not speak in the language of the Gauls if their life depended on it. But this was nothing compared to the difficulties that we had in the northern part of the province. The Frisii in Fectio and Traiectum are very nice people but, unfortunately, their speech is practically unintelligible. As far as I could make out, Snow White is called "Bloncke-" something but, unfortunately, everything else that the Frisii were saying also sounded like this, so I can't be sure.
Well, all in all I learned a lot and I can recommend the tour and the tour guide to anyone, especially to the author of the article. As we say in Switzerland: Reisen bildet. --BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 09:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

There is an age old myth that Snow White is a Disney-based story. <Unknown>

Some other facts about "Snow White" are that Icelandic waitress Kristín Sölvadóttir inspired cartoonist Charlie Thorson to create the famous Disney character. For more on Charlie Thorson, please see: Gene Walz, Cartoon Charlie: The Life and Art of Animation Pioneer Charles Thorson (Winnipeg: Great Plains Publications, 1998)

Fairy Tales Exposed: Facts Behind the Fiction.I saw this excellent doco whereit explains that Margarethe von Waldeck a daughter of a German Count (and Princess) was the true inspiration despite being blonde.The Brothers Grimm recognised this, and there have been misinterpretations. It is apparently a true story to some degree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.214.163.150 (talk) 12:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

There is claim in the article that there is some basis of truth in an actual girl who lived in The Kingdom of Gent ca. 768, but for a long time circa 768, Gent was merely a small fiefdom within the kingdom of Francia (see Pepin The Short, and Charlemagne). There may have been a girl who lived in Gent ca. 768, but she didn't live in The Kingdom of Gent. ChrisJBenson (talk) 05:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

It may be appropriate to move a major part of the Other versions section to a section titled Impact on popular culture and then mention the non-standard variations of 20th century and the several spoofs. It is worth mentioning BUNCH as well. --Gurubrahma 13:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

An anonymous user posted this note at the top of the article:

((( IT SHOULD BE MENTIONED THAT SNOW WHITES EARLIER NAME AS IN MOST EARLY PRINTINGS OF THE STORY, IS :"SNOWDROP")))

Can this be verified before it's part of the article? Ldnew 15:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Wise. I've found a reference. Goldfritha 02:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Is a spoiler warning really necessary? Does anybody likely to be reading wikipedia not know the ending? --Christofurio 00:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Very likely. Do you know the ending of Peach Boy?

Very famous Japanese fairy tale -- that is, famous to the Japanese. Goldfritha 01:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm not editing the Japanese wikipedia. It would be a more relevant question if I were. Adults fluent in English don't need a spoiler warning for this one, so far as I can tell. But, hey, it isn't worth troubling over. --Christofurio 00:04, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Why would the prince take the dead body of a pretty girl he didn't even know. And why would he kiss her!!! It sounds to me like he was going to do something with that body. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by VicAndPhill (talk • contribs) 19:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC).Reply

The question then is: was it in the original story (whatever that means), what did that story mean by that scene? Maybe it is a referrence to awakening from death. (On a sidenote; know any creatures from fantasy that come back after death? Vampires, anyone? - Redmess 10:42, 23 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

That's an error in the "Story" section. In the original tale, Schneewittchen isn't awakened by the prince's kiss. Instead his servants stumble on some bushes while carrying here. The piece of apple is dislodged from her throat and she starts breathing again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.184.101.193 (talk) 10:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Any citation for these claims? Animation historian Michael Barrier puts the Hitler-Snow White connection on the level of rumor at most.

But Hitler preferred blond hairFelann96 (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

what kind of story is an Aarne-Thompson 709? Most fairy tales explain the number type —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurian Legend (talk • contribs) 03:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

In the synopsis of the fairy tale, we should add how the dwarfs saved snow white when she collapsed from using the poisoned comb. --AKR619 11:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dana played Snow White in panto in 1983 in Hull and continued to star in the same production to great success for 14 years, including a West End run that broke box-office records. The writers of the show, Dennis and Basil Critchley, asked Dana to play the starring role. The Snow White book, written by their father for Ruby Murray, had not been staged for over 30 years. The theatre in Hull was not too keen, preferring to stage the popular Aladdin, but let Dana have the final choice.

Can anyone verify whether or not "Schneewittchen" is more correct in German VS "Sneewittchen"?

I must admit that I've always thought it was "Sneewittchen," but this article uses "Schneewittchen" throughout. In the German copy of the story I have it says exactly "Sneewittchen (Schneewittchen)," which is rather unhelpful in determining which one should be used.

If anyone could find a copy of the original Grimm story online (or a reprinting of an early edition), perhaps we could find out. I've tried searching, but both names seem to be used.

Matt (talk) 05:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

I AM German and the word Snee is unknown in modern German and the tale is known troughout Germany as Schneewittchen. No one says Sneewittchen, perhaps thats a misunderstanding because many English-speaking people don't pronounce our Sch correct and instead say just S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.98.149 (talk) 06:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

The term "wittchen" isn't used in the High German language, as well. Schneewittchen is an illogical, but widespread mixture of High German and Low German. The proper High German translation would be "Schneeweißchen", but this is the name of a main character in another fairytale. Okay, "Sneewittchen" might already have been a mixture because it uses the High German diminutive, pure Low German would probably be "Sneewittke(n)" 2A0A:A540:DDF6:0:3143:B6EF:8242:3DC1 (talk) 21:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

The original name of the story is Sneewittchen, but in modern editions of the Grimm´s fairy tales it is called Schneewittchen and, as my previous speaker said, it is called so througout Germany (I know it, because I am from Germany, too). I think both versions should be mentioned. --Lai-Lai (talk) 16:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Has anybody besides me noticed the parallels in the story to certain aspects of the Old and New Testaments. Snow White is given an apple by an evil person in disguise. Eden anyone? She subsequently dies and comes back to life. Jesus comes to mind. Furthermore on an insignificant but interesting note there are Seven Dwarves. Seven is a number with many religious and supernatural connotations. 777 also known as the Number of the Angel is considered the benign antithesis to 666, the Number of the Beast. Also God is said to have created the world in Seven Days. Do you think these parallels were intentional or am I just reading too deeply into it? --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 21:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, it doesn't matter what you read into it - unless you can find some references from reviewers / childrens story analysers that confirm what you think then it doesn't really have a place on a WP article. 82.27.234.112 (talk) 19:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Should the names fo the 7 dwarves be mentioned somewhere? Are they even constant when presented in English? I understand that Wikipedia is not a colection of trivia, but the 7 names commonly known to English speakers (eg Doc, Grumpy etc) might be worth at least addressing. 1dragon (talk) 03:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937 film) should address the names Disney invented. Does this article need to tell readers the names are Disney's? Apparently so.--Wetman (talk) 04:41, 27 July 2008 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.186.130.81 (talk) 22:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Doc, Grumpy, Happy, Sleepy, Bashful, Sneezy and Dopey = Disney names? Not original names? :( Böri (talk) 14:45, 19 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

The dwarves are unnamed in the story as originally published by the bros. Grimm. The names listed above are a Disney creation. prtwhitley (talk) 17:27, 11 January 2011

Is Snow White really only seven when her step-mother first tries to kill her? The fairy tale merely says that at that age she was more beautiful than the queen. It's not clear how much time passes after that. Here's an excerpt of the English translation of the story found on http://www.grimmstories.com:

"Now, Snow-white was growing prettier and prettier, and when she was seven years old she was as beautiful as day, far more so than the queen herself. So one day when the queen went to her mirror and said,

“Looking-glass upon the wall, Who is fairest of us all?”

It answered,

“Queen, you are full fair, 'tis true, But Snow-white fairer is than you.”

This gave the queen a great shock, and she became yellow and green with envy, and from that hour her heart turned against Snow-white, and she hated her. And envy and pride like ill weeds grew in her heart higher every day, until she had no peace day or night. At last she sent for a huntsman, and said, “Take the child out into the woods, so that I may set eyes on her no more. You must put her to death, and bring me her heart for a token.”" (213.10.46.8 (talk) 22:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC))Reply

I had concerns about that, too. Thanks for clearing it up with a reference from the story. Now, of course, I am concerned that the huntsman had fallen in love with a 7-year-old! Jnmwiki (talk) 20:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure we can be clear that Snow was still seven at that point. Time-lapse is unclear in the story. All we know for certain is that by seven, Snow was more beautiful than the queen. We do not know, however:

• How old Snow was when the queen finds out she's second-best ("one day when" is vague, we do not know how often the queen actually checked the glass, could've been years later)
• How old Snow was when the queen finally lost it and hired the huntsman ("became yellow", "from that hour", "like ill weeds grew", "every day, until", "at last") this process of embitterment could have also taken years.

The only indication that she is still young at all here is the queen saying "Take the child" and the Huntsman saying "you poor child" and the narrator confirming "the poor child". It is unclear when childhood was thought to end at those times but it could have been older than 7 when all this culminated. 184.146.6.191 (talk) 19:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

In the Snow White and Rose Red section of this article, you can now read the following two sentences:

"In 2009 Snow White was performed on Åbo Unga Teater in Finland. In Swedish Snow White is called Snövit."

I do not think they belong in this section. Please consider the possibility of moving them to another section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.152.240.246 (talk) 11:20, 15 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for pointing this out. I've moved it to the "Theatre" section. -- Timberframe (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sounds pretty implausible to me, and there are no citations...67.169.181.142 (talk) 22:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

I cannot locate to what you are referring in the article. ???? Prtwhitley (talk) 02:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I just read the beginning of this article and Albania is mentioned extensively, which seemed a little weird to me (maybe some albanian guy felt the need to include these details?) It definitely doesnt seem very professional. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.89.209.115 (talk) 17:44, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I agree, the information about the Albanian version does not belong in the introduction. I have moved it to the "Other Versions" section of the article, under a new subsection "Variations from Other European Traditions". However, this information remains problematic as it is not properly cited. Since we now have this subsection, it would be made better by the inclusion of other traditions besides the one from Albania. Is anyone aware of other traditional variations on the story? Prtwhitley (talk) 02:52, 12 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The plural of dwarf is dwarves and yet it is spelled as dwarfs throughout the article.

Actually, there are TWO correct plural forms of "dwarf". BOTH "dwarfs" AND "dwarves" are correct. See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dwarf -- prtwhitley 17:39, 11 January 2011

The plural of the word has historically been "dwarfs". "Dwarves" is a recent attempt to create a plural on the model of other English plurals such as "leaf"-"leaves". However, the Middle English word from which "dwarf" descends did not end in "f", but rather in the velar fricative (written "h" or "gh") -- hence the "dwarves" plural is an anachronism. A closer analogy to "dwarf" would be "cough" or "laugh" -- and if its spelling had followed more regular trends in English orthography then it would be written something like "dwargh". This Google NGram gives you some idea of these trends, although it cannot differentiate between "dwarfs" (the plural of "dwarf") and "dwarfs" (the third-person singular form of the verb "to dwarf"). It does make it clear that "dwarves" didn't catch on to any extent until the 1970s, and it is still far less common than the older "dwarfs".Grover cleveland (talk) 05:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

"Dwarves" was invented by Tolkein, and is therefore appropriate for his creations and those derived from them, i.e. pretty much all the dwarves in modern fantasy, but not for the those of earlier works such as this one. In Tolkein's own words: "In English, the only correct plural of 'dwarf' is 'dwarfs' and the adjective is 'dwarfish'. In this story 'dwarves' and 'dwarvish' are used, but only when speaking of the ancient people to whom Thorin Oakenshield and his companions belonged." -- 76.15.128.206 (talk) 16:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

The section that talks about snow white being similar to Margarete von Waldeck doesn't seem exactly right. Margarete had a step mother, but the original Snow White story referred to her mother. The reference (number 8) pointed to http://hartforth.com/SnowWhite.aspx . This website looks like a personal website and doesn't seem like a basis for any unbiased information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matth23 (talk • contribs) 00:11, 9 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Has anybody besides me noticed that the story says that the prince falls in love with a perceived dead female? --63.3.2.130 (talk) 02:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

You may want to refer to some of this most recent information in the existing 'Trademark' section

• Open letter to Disney http://thetruesnowwhite.wordpress.com/open-letter-to-disney

• Disney does not own Snow White http://thetruesnowwhite.com/MORE/trademarks/Disney%20DOES%20NOT%20own%20Snow%20White.pdf

• Disney kills the public domain and the whole world keeps watching http://www.likelihoodofconfusion.com/the-fairest-one-of-all Disney's strategy: Morphing public domain through copyright into trademark, perfected by relentless trademark bullying.

• Tarsem Singh of Relativity Media's new production starring Julia Roberts: Snow White isn't owned by anybody http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/06/21/julia-roberts-snow-white-turn-as-the-evil-queen "Everybody just always thought this was not public domain, but now everyone is coming to the correct conclusion that it's not owned by anybody. And that's kind of the hammer that dropped on everybody's head together."

Sevendwarves (talk) 20:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Trademarks are entirely irrelevant in this article. It is German culture and thus can be used by anyone. 188.118.173.54 (talk) 18:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

The claim would seem to weaken Disney's other trade mark claims, by being so totally out of order.David R. Ingham (talk) 04:53, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Country: Yugoslavia??? I know that a lot of fairytales have slightly different sources from other countrys, but I think this is completely wrong. there isn't even another mention of yugoslavia in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neubsen (talk • contribs) 11:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Neubsen. I just corrected the country into Germany. But I think, that also the related information in the infobox

''[[Bella Venezia]]'' <br/> ''[[Myrsina]]'' <br/> ''[[Nourie Hadig]]'' <br/> ''[[The Young Slave]]'' <br/> ''[[Gold-Tree and Silver-Tree]]''<br />and "The Jealous Sisters"

could be wrong here. What do you think? Greetings --Tlustulimu (talk) 20:57, 11 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

What the hell does this paragraph mean?

Snow White's triple seeming-death and resurrection, beyond an amusement or wish-fulfilling temporary escape, fulfills the initiatory process of life, as Mircea Eliade described it: "What is called 'initiation' coexists with the human condition, reaffirms the ultimate religious significance of life and the real possibility of a 'happy ending.'"

The link to the initiation page doesn't seem to apply to this usage, and the citation seems to be a book all about this "initiation" thing. It probably has its own definition for the word. Either way I'm not going to buy/read that book to understand this sentence, whoever added it should explain further, or someone should delete it.

In fact this "Comments" section doesn't seem appropriate. The first paragraph talks about other editions of the grimm version, which could go under the "other versions" section. And this paragraph I quoted, aside from being unclear, seems to be a very in-depth analysis that doesn't fit wikipedia's style IMO. Also literary analysis tends to be subjective. But I'm not a wikipedia expert.. maybe subjective things are allowed as long as they are properly cited? --186.109.197.121 (talk) 07:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

The current article contains this (unsourced) information about a supposed original "blonde Snow White":

“In Grims Tales she has blonde (gold) hair. It says: ‘Güldenes Haar, Lippen so rot wie Blut, Haut so weiß wie Schnee und Augen so schwarz wie Ebenholz’ -> ‘Golden hair, lips as red as blood, skin as white like snow and eyes as black as ebony.’ At this time it was fashionable for women to have large black eyes. After Disney made it black hair, the image of Snow-White changed.”

I cannot find the source that mentions Snow White's hair as blonde or golden, but it is certainly not from any of the Grimm's original versions, as far as I am aware. Indeed, the idea that Walt Disney changed the image of Snow White by making her dark-haired is patently FALSE, as Grimm's second Auflage (edition) from 1819 clearly states: "Bald darauf bekam sie ein Töchterlein, das war so weiß wie Schnee, so roth wie Blut, und so schwarzhaarig wie Ebenholz und wurde darum das Sneewittchen (Schneeweißchen) genannt."

The bolded part says very clearly that she was "as black-haired as ebony." I will therefore delete the references to Snow White being blonde. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Versailles1798 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Good call. Rklawton (talk) 20:50, 10 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I HAVE AN EARLY 20TH CENTURY LITHOGRAPHED BLOCK PUZZLE OF SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARVES AND SNOW WHITE HAS BLONDE HAIR ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:1828:AE00:6076:319C:9A34:3D3C (talk) 19:17, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

In the original version of the tale, would the dwarfs have been small humans or dweorg? 62.172.108.23 (talk) 12:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately, the Grimm´s fairy tales never give an explicite description, they are simply called "dwarfs". The only hint can be found in the tale of Schneeweißchen und Rosenrot (engl. Snow-white and Rose Red), where a dwarf is descripted as being unutterably old, bedighted with magical powers and living as a mine worker, merchant and treasure hunter. Therefore it's most likely that the "dwarfs" of the Grimm-tales are the mythical dweorgs. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 13:00, 21 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Some dimwitts keep editing allegedly mentioned bodyparts of Snow White into the story plot. To everybody now: The original story only mentions her "ebony black hair", but NO OTHER bodypart!!!! Read the original as given in the website-reference! Thank you! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 21:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hey guys, I 've added quite a lot to the article Queen (Snow White), so you might checked if you got everything covered in the main article, then add if needed. --Niemti (talk) 21:34, 7 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I feel there is too much unnecessary detail for an outline. There are hundreds of variations of the story such as the Disney movie Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs which has it's own Wikipedia article.Felann96 (talk) 12:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Nonsense. The original version of Snow White IS that long. That is fact. And I see no plausible reason to shorten it. It is always essential to give all details, BECAUSE there are so many later versions. Maybe it gonna help if we mention at the start of te story plot that the following text presents the final version. But reducing? As if. --Nephiliskos (talk) 15:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

1. What do you think about this article now?
2. If you want to more or less fork any sort of content from it into the main article, feel free.

--Niemti (talk) 15:28, 15 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Why isn't she mentioned at all?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 07:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

There is a version of this movie from the late 1980's under the Kids Classics (logo is present on this VHS). There seems to be no online record, especially on Wikipedia about this version of Snow White. The seven dwarfs are the seven days of the week, and there is some similarity to the film mentioned on the 1987 page but the story and dwarfs names are different. Is the lack of video evidence of its existence the reason why it isn't mentioned anywhere, or is there another reason? Gaylen50 (talk) 06:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind, I found the answer I was looking for. Gaylen50 (talk) 07:10, 19 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

I have removed (for the second time, so I thought it might be prudent to discuss it), the text "Snow White's evil stepmother" that was repeated for every relevant entry in the Modern uses and adaptations section. The text always followed "wicked queen" or "evil queen", and so it seems entirely unnecessary - the character is perfectly clear from the context. If there is disagreement, please discuss here. --Fru1tbat (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

I completely agree with you. The same IP has made similar edits on the page Mother Gothel. And you're not the only one reverting the edits here; I've done the same. I suggest that if they don't desist bringing this to an admin's attention. Luthien22 (talk) 22:22, 15 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

I removed this very large and questionable detail which has been in the article for far too long because it is run through a blog. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:41, 16 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

I clipped it from this page as well in this edit. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 07:48, 5 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Well, I do feel strong for it, Fru1tbat , yes. You could tell me how many images that is managed on your screen in a strait line, remove the rest and those ones - and only those - put them in a decent gallery, not this old fashioned one, that is surpassed by better ones. Hafspajen (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

This for example would be a better gallery. Hafspajen (talk) 15:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

•  
  5. The Queen visits Snow White
•  
  6. The Queen has poisoned Snow White
•  
  7. The Prince awakes Snow White
•  
  8. The Queen arrives at the wedding

Text or no text

This makes images look small.

•  
  5. The Queen visits Snow White
•  
  6. The Queen has poisoned Snow White
•  
  7. The Prince awakes Snow White
•  
  8. The Queen arrives at the wedding

Hafspajen (talk) 15:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

(edit conflict) I tried making the images a bit larger, but I don't think there's any viable way to locate them on one side or the other of the plot section. It simply does not seem possible to do so and maintain portability at the same time. If they're aligned down both sides, the text is crunched between them, and if they're all aligned down only one side, they could very easily extend far beyond the plot section as they do for me (my screen is fairly average, so I would expect many users to have the same problem). The only real solution that I can see for more than a couple images that are intended to be located within one single section is a gallery. Putting half down one side and half in a gallery seems a little awkward to me as well. While they might look small to you there, at least they're located in the right place. The size can easily be adjusted. --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Your "better" gallery looks extremely large on my screen. I would suggest maybe that your screen may not be typical, and I think we should wait for others to weigh in before making any further changes. --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I tried looking at your larger gallery on another monitor, and it fits a little better. If you want to make that change, I guess I'm ok with it, but I'd still like to hear what others think. --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

What I meant let's say 4 images at right side and 4 in gallery .. ? I can try to make it. Then revert. Hafspajen (talk) 15:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Or this? 3 -5 . Hafspajen (talk) 15:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

I don't know. It's a neat idea, but I'd personally prefer they be in the same place, though I don't feel strongly enough to change it. The order needs to be fixed, by the way. --Fru1tbat (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Snow White. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://religionandsnowwhite.webs.com/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://religionandsnowwhite.webs.com/religioussymbols.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:26, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Someone “corrected” the two instances of “sneaked” to “snuck,” insisting that it was the correct form and that “sneaked” went out of common use two hundred years ago. This is false.

According to Wiktionary:

The past and past participle snuck is primarily found in North American English, where it originated in the late 19th century [emphasis added] as a dialectal form. It is still regarded as informal by some, but its use appears to be increasing in frequency and acceptability. It is occasionally found in British and Australian/Hiberno-English, too, though regarded as an American form. (See Oxford Dictionaries, The Cambridge Guide to English Usage, Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Webster's New World College Dictionary.)

I have no objection to “snuck” being regarded as A correct form, but not THE correct form. “Sneaked” is certainly not incorrect. What I do object to is that this editor is attempting to destroy the alternative!

We can live with two past forms for “sneak,” just as we have long lived with both “dreamed” and “dreamt” as the past for “dream.” Kostaki mou (talk) 21:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Kostaki mou: Contrary to what you seem to be assuming, I am not in any way trying to eradicate the form "sneaked." I was merely maintaining the status quo; "snuck" was the form that was already used in the article. (The supposed "correction" you are referring to was actually a revert of someone else who changed it from "snuck" to "sneaked.") I do not really feel that strongly about which form we use here; I was merely suggesting that, since "snuck" is the more common form, we should keep it in the article and not change it to another, less common form of the verb. If you feel so madly passionate that it absolutely has to say "sneaked," I will not oppose you. --Katolophyromai (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I don't say that it absolutely has to. (Notice that I did not change it back again.) It seemed to me that you were the one being passionate. (You did say that it was the correct form. I'm not so sure that it is the more common form, at least outside of North America. "Sneaked" is indeed still used in North America (by me, for example).) 'Nuff said on both sides, I think. Kostaki mou (talk) 00:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate that it took @Carnival Honey: a lot of effort to make these edits to the adaptations sections, but I think the sentence fragment style reads significantly worse than the previous full sentences. Note that WP:IPC and MOS:POPCULT specifically recommend against bulleted lists, by the way. I think full sentences in a list is much closer to the ideal format than the current fragments. I was tempted to revert, but I thought maybe discussing first would be better... --Fru1tbat (talk) 12:49, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Having the title and the year first is usually the proper way to format lists, and makes it much easier to see and absorb the titles at a glance. For some of these entries, the titles were even missing, along with actors, directors, and years. The entries used to read as anecdotes and not as proper lists, and the formatting for each entry was different. You would never see this (inconsistent formatting) in a real encyclopedia. Carnival Honey (talk) 18:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

BTW, it's not a "sentence fragment style" and it doesn't read "worse." What I did was include all of the relevant information, including title, year, director or author, etc., in a consistent format, as an actual encyclopedia would. Carnival Honey (talk) 18:37, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

When I said "sentence fragment style", I was referring to this:

• Winter (2015), a novel by Marissa Meyer loosely based on the story of Snow White.

That's a sentence fragment, not a complete sentence, as opposed to the previous version, which read like this:

• The 2015 novel Winter by Marissa Meyer is loosely based on the story of Snow White.

And I do believe the fragment version reads worse. You obviously believe otherwise, which is fine. I would also argue that bulleted lists are not more encyclopedic, consistently formatted or not. Wikipedia generally leans toward prose, not lists, when possible. I'd like to hear what a few other editors think, though.

Fru1tbat (talk) 23:54, 19 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I think sentence fragments are awkward English in general, OK for "term", "short definition of term" type lists but there is usually little reason to not include a verb in the middle and make it a complete sentence that reads like real prose for stuff that is more complex. Also sentence fragments don't get periods at the end, only real sentences get that honor (see MOS:PERIOD). Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:03, 20 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Spare me this mockery of justice is from transformers the movie 1986 not Snow White the book. 2001:5B0:45C7:1938:21A3:AC76:52AF:8520 (talk) 02:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Is this subsection related to the European folklore? If not, sounds weird to include it in.

It is not European folklore. As already mentioned in the article, variations of the tale have been recorded in multiple continents: "This tale type is widespread in Europe, in America, in Africa and "in some Turkic traditions". The tale is also said to be found in the Middle East, in China, in India and in the Americas" "Dimadick (talk) 08:37, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Suggested rewording of such passages as “Le Cunto de li Cunti” being described as a “masterpiece” which is not neutral.

“This is one of the first inspirations for that character, that character who will later be called Snow White in other stories…”

• strange tenses and excessive repeating of the word “character”.

“Where there was precisely a woman from Venice with the characteristics required by the noble man and which correspond to the characteristics of that character…”

“she is discovered by the dwarfs after cleaning the house, not vandalizing it.” (*no previous mention of vandalism).

“This fairy tale tells of a King, a noble title used to facilitate understanding for children and to make them understand that he is someone who commands…” (*very unusual additional info on kings)

“he does not want nothing more than a white-skinned, red-cheeked bride…” (*unusual English)

“The surname Corvi means "Ravens" maybe took because…” (*took?)

“This fairy tale tells of a noble man (with a name mistaken for real life)” (*not sure what this means)

etc, etc Jeremyzia (talk) 23:08, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Are there any sources to support this section at all? I can only find Wikipedia and mirror sites. Tying these historical figures to Basile's fairy tale, and from there to Snow White, seems like speculation and is not at all supported by the cited sources. The only source that mentions Snow White is the Independent article by Jessie Grimond about an Italian professor theorizing an origin in Italy, with no mention of the Zazzera/Corvi family. Sgallison (talk) 23:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sgallison, whoever added these paragraphs, I took a middle-of-the-road approach and suggested they should be moved to the "Origin of Snow White" article. However, if nothing concrete/reliable shows up in the next months, I'm not opposed to deleting them, for, as of now, they are nothing short of historical speculation. KHR FolkMyth (talk) 12:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

I just saw that the major character's page, Huntsman (Snow White), had been merged here with just a few participants. Please merge almost everything on that page, as the major character is well-known, well represented in film, and is recognized by anyone who knows the Snow White story. Too bad it was "merged" (read "deleted" for "merge" in most cases), this article page should have been notified of the attempt and, since this has occurred, the merge should be full and comprehensive. Randy Kryn (talk) 08:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Snow White is the first Disney Princess and the first fictional female character with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Given the title the "Fairest One of All", she has continued to inspire similar traits in future Disney heroines, such as singing and communicating with animals.

Her stepmother gave her an apple poisoned and Snow White ate it.

In the original story, Snow White sleeps in the glass coffin for many years, growing up into a young woman that whole time. In the film, she does so for about one year. In the original fairy tale, Snow White actually wasn't awakened by "love's first kiss". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.60.131.150 (talk) 01:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937 film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

The ethnicity of the persons who wrote Grimm's collected fairy tales is mostly unknown. Can the "german" be removed from this article. 50.103.237.13 (talk) 18:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

The persons who wrote Grimm's collected fairy tales were Jacob and his brother Wilhelm Grimm. They were German(s). 91.13.156.46 (talk) 19:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply