Post by Rrr on Sept 9, 2023 9:53:28 GMT
Sept 8, 2023 16:56:52 GMT mkr said:
I checked the stories on the Uncategorized list. Here is some more information about it:I TL 2477-4: will be added with the next update.
ZD 60-07-17: will be added with the next update.
I TL 2916-1E: a difficult one to add to the tree, as he is an ancestor, though living in 1959, so he cannot really be an ancestor. Maybe I can just add him as a distant cousin somewhere, mabye as a descendant of the Italian branch?
Fore-feathers: not yet added, because no definitive conclusion about it was reached here.
Relatives Bogey: I don't think the correspondence mentioned in the blog counts as canon.
Painterman: I don't know what story this is about.
S 71021: will be added with the next update.
Brother of Ratchet: I don't know about this. Should this Eureka Pitagorico be added to the tree? My idea would be not, as we have only that letter, and nothing else as a source.
D 97384. I can later check the German version for this relative of Gyro.
S 72267: will be added with the next update.
I TL 2154-3: will be added with the next update.
D 9798: an aunt mentioned in the Dutch version. She can maybe be added, but the best would be a verification in another language (it could easily be a translation error).
I TL 2208-6: we didn't have any proof that Morgan McDuck was a relative, but we have now thanks to those articles, nevertheless he could best be merged with Blackbeak I think (and his relatives from this story will be added with the next update).
D 2022-056: Duncan is already on the tree.
H 93089: Abel is already on the tree.
S 82050. A grandfather in the Brazilian version and a great-grandfather in the Italian one. So I don't know where to add to the tree. Maybe it can be added to the missing stories list to confirm in another language. Though it would probably be hard to obtain the Egyptian or Yugoslavian versions...
UPDATE: Scans of Gyro's Medieval ancestor Dankwart Dampf from D 97384.
For I TL 2916-1E, that one will be arriving along with my other orders at the end of the month. I'm good to put the relevant characters in Descendants, but I'll double-check it before going ahead if that's good
For the Bogey relatives, I personally tend to operate on a 'canon tiering' system somewhat like Star Wars or other properties that have a 'main canon'.
Basically, for things like interviews such as the one in question, I'd consider them as canon until there's relevant material that supersedes it.
So, in this case, it would have been valid canon, until D 2022-103 came along - that takes precedence, so the interview can be discarded because we have published comics that contradict it.
I don't know how much sense I'm making or how relevant of a point this is, but either way, I'm happy to keep them off the tree - will still keep them in the index for posterity, though. Or maybe it would be better to have an 'officially rejected' section? I know I'd personally put Mamie and Exeter as mentioned in Mad Magazine on there, too, if we went that route.
The painterman story is an odd one - it doesn't align with what we have currently, but it could be a misinterpretation or misremembered. I'll keep it there in case anything crops up, but unless a source is found, it can be disregarded.
For Eureka Gearloose, I agree that the question is not enough to warrant inclusion.
The reason I put that one in is because, in my head, it's not something that would have come from nowhere - I highly doubt that Eureka was made up on the spot (I recognize the irony of that sentence ), which leads me to think that there may be a Eureka out there somewhere.
Obviously, he wasn't a Barks created character, so he was misattributed - and yes, it's entirely possible that he was just a different character misunderstood somehow. That being said, I'd at least keep him in the index in case we find where either Eureka or the idea of him came from - not at all advocating for putting him on the tree, though.
For D 9798, it might be worth tracking down a UK issue, seeing as it would be printed in English?
I can't make any promises, but I'll see what I can find, at least.
S 82050 is a toughie. I've contacted someone regarding an Egyptian printing, but there's no guarantee of them getting back to me - I'll update if they do!
If they don't, I'd personally lean to the Italian version, but that's purely a personal bias - I'm open to hearing how people think this should be handled in the event that the person with the Egyptian book doesn't respond.
And finally, the Fore-Feathers.
So, Disney never got back to me - I've sent another email, as they never got back to me last time, but I don't have high hopes regarding it. As with the other case, though, I'll update if I get a response.
At any rate, I still advocate for their inclusion in the tree; I can understand that, as things are, we don't have a clear answer as to how the characters were conceived or who actually created them. However, in all honesty, I still don't quite get why they're considered any less valid as inclusions.
The mural is displayed in a Shanghai Disney Resort - it's absolutely official material.
The connections are a little vague, but I think the intent is relatively clear - they all connect through the winding tree branch. So, as an example, Donaldus Anas meets Octavia the Younger. The two have their child(ren), and that bloodline leads to Petronus Paperino, who meets Theodora Eirenikes. They have their child(ren), and that bloodline leads to Marco Paperino, who meets Lucretia Meducki - and so on.
I know it's something of an odd source, but as mentioned, it's displayed in an actual Disney Resort, so it's definitely recognized in some capacity. Personally, I think it's as valid as any other source, especially given some of the inclusions we have on there.
One extra side-note - there's one connection I'm wondering about.
Klara, Anya and Corvus Von Drake. They have Ludwig listed as their father, all well and good - but as far as I can see, it doesn't actually make much sense for Matilda to be their mother.
It's not impossible, but outside of the general 'Ludwig marrying Matilda' concept, nothing links them to her at all.
Scrooge doesn't recognize them as family - despite the very liberal definition of family that Ducktales '17 uses - and there's never any link made between Ludwig and Matilda, to my memory (I could be mistaken on that)
Angones said this regarding Von Drake's connection, but to my understanding, nothing was actually said in-universe. It feels a bit odd that Scrooge never once mentioned "Yeah, this guy married my sister" or, when meeting with Matilda, never mentioned the husband, even in passing.
Not necessarily saying it's not the case, but it definitely warrants examination - I know the connection was there before Matilda actually appeared in the show, but the fact that no connection was made (Unless I've forgotten something) makes me wonder if we should actually consider this to be the case.
Beyond that, excellent finds! And looking forward to the next iteration of the tree!
For “Spooks and Saddles”, i do actually have the egyptian version, i will check later maybe. I will also have to check the danish version of D 9798, along with “l’odissea nello strazio” and “é arrivato mio cugino”