Talk:Franklin (Peanuts)

Arrested Development

Should it be included the Job's black hand-puppet Franklin, from the show Arrested Development, is more than likely an allusion to this Franklin? D Haggerty 02:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

No, because it's more likely he's an allusion to Roosevelt Franklin --Nat Gertler (talk) 04:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Franklinintro.gif

Image:Franklinintro.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The inspiration for Franklin

I cover the correspondence that inspired Schulz to create Franklin in both The Peanuts Collection (pages 48-49) and in the just-coming-out-now issue of Hogan's Alley. I'm not going to add that material myself now, for WP:COI reasons, but others should consider adding the appropriate material on Harriet Glickman. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Schulz was not so much 'inspired' to create Franklin as he was 'required' to create him. In 1968 television standards were revised so that a black character was required. Thereby Franklin was the Token Black. --66.41.154.0 (talk) 01:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

That is simply false. Franklin was created for a comic strip, which not only was not under such a requirement, but a realm where Schulz took a little heat for introducing him. The character didn't appear in the TV specials until 1973. --Nat Gertler (talk) 01:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

"Franklin Armstrong"

I see someone has added in "Armstrong" as Franklin's last name. This was never established in the strip; it's a name taken from the TV specials, which Schulz did not view as continuity. I would suggest it be deleted. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:30, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Franklin Day

As it is getting some real media coverage, today's celebration of Franklin Day may be worth adding to the article. --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:47, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Possible source

http://kotaku.com/franklin-broke-peanuts-color-barrier-in-the-least-inter-1793843085 Gamaliel (talk) 14:29, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Last appearance

The intro paragraph states Franklin was last featured in 1999, but I just saw him in 2003's I Want a Dog for Christmas, Charlie Brown and he's listed in those credits. Also, on this very page they list the voice artists who spoke for Franklin in 2015 & 2016. Clearly the statement needs removed or else clarified (such as if this means he hasn't appeared in the news paper comic strip, which I also tend to doubt to be true). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raszoo (talk • contribs) 02:01, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

His last original appearance in the newspaper comic strip was indeed in 1999; the strips that have run since early 2000 have all been reruns. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Not the only African-American character

An editor has recently edited the article to switch the claim that Franklin was the "first" African American in the strip to the claim that he was the "only" one. This is inaccurate; the character Milo, introduced in 1977, is by all appearances African American as well. I am trying to avoid editing this page due to a Peanuts conflict of interest, but I encourage other editors to verify what I say and make the appropriate correction. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:08, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

After days with no response from anyone, I've changed it myself. While I have some conflicts of interest in regards to Peanuts, this edit does not serve me in any way that I can figure (except for my desire for accuracy on Wikipedia.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

And I have removed the claim again. See this strip for the introduction of another African American character. Here is a source noting that Milo is indeed a later Black character. --Nat Gertler (talk)

Source credit

The article currently uses the Hogan's Alley article "Crossing The Color Line in Black and White" as a reference. This reference should be corrected in two ways:

1. Update the source location to this, the update site for the magazine
2. Correct the listed author. "Tom Heintjes" was listed because that is the name that was in control of the blog software on the previous site, but he is editor of Hogan's Alley, not the author of the piece being referenced. As the first paragraph of the piece shows, the author of the actual article being cited is... me.

I will not make the change myself, as I have an obvious WP:COI. --Nat Gertler (talk) 03:54, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Franklin is now white...sometimes

This is certainly ironic. Today newspapers can print comic strips in 2 ways: color or black and white. The black and white version is essentially the color version with all the color removed, although a few newspapers print the color version in black and white, resulting in a very unattracitve collection of gray tones.

Now when Schulz originally drew Franklin, he represented his dark skin with vertical lines. Today, Franklin's skin is simply colored a medium brown, without the vertical lines. When this color is removed for the black and white version, Franklin appears as white as any of the other characters, as can be seen for example April 8 2023. In fact, unless he is addressed by name, you might not realize that it's him. 2600:4040:5D30:4800:391D:45CA:A0C5:E597 (talk) 15:37, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Just for quick reference, the strip that ran on April 8, 2023, was this strip originally published A[ril 4, 1976. However, this is not the first way that Franklin has been lightened. However, I'm not sure that any of this is anything that needs to be reflected in the article, failing third party coverage of it. --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:13, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I had seen that shading technique before. As to the significance of Franklin’s skin color, or lack thereof, it’s self-evident. As the article you referenced points out, the question of how to represent black skin in a monochrome strip is complicated. To have a black character in a strip of this stature appear white, however unintentionally, is certainly noteworthy. And I am sure.

BTW, here’s another illustration of a white Franklin. https://paperwalker.blogspot.com/2015/02/franklin-peanuts-back-story.html 2600:4040:5D30:4800:391D:45CA:A0C5:E597 (talk) 21:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC)::

If it's noteworthy, then a reliable source will note it and we can report on it. (And if you're talking about the image toward the top of that blogspot page -- where I am extensively quoted, by the way -- that appears to be not something designed for publication, but a drawing guide for animators or other artists, where the finished work will have color.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:19, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 13 February 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Skynxnex (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

---

Franklin (Peanuts) → Franklin Armstrong – As the main page explains, Franklin's surname of Armstrong was never mentioned in the strip but only in one special. Since Robb Armstrong says that Schulz picked the name based on him, and since the forthcoming special uses the same surname, is this evidence enough that "Armstrong" is canonically Franklin's last name? A similar example would be the canonicity of "Tiberius" as James T. Kirk's middle name, which was only mentioned in Star Trek: The Animated Series, or "Lathrop" as Emmett L. Brown's, which is only mentioned in Back to the Future: The Animated Series. Does this apply to last names too? One example I can think of is Benson from Soap, who was only given the surname DuBois in his spin-off. How prominent does a supplementary source have to be to be canonical? Specialsam110 (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

• Strong oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. "Franklin (Peanuts)" is instantly recognizable; "Franklin Armstrong" is a stranger that nobody would recognize. Toughpigs (talk) 19:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. 162 etc. (talk) 20:05, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Canonical isn't important; WP:COMMONNAME is. Superman is at that address rather that Kal-El because that's what the public knows him as, even if it's not his "real" name. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose move. This surname is simply too obscure to be title-worthy. O.N.R. ^(talk) 04:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Even though Franklin Armstrong is his "real" name, he's best known as just Franklin. Just like User:NatGertler said, we don't have Superman at "Clark Kent" or "Kal-El" either. JIP | Talk 12:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

  Wait... Superman is Clark Kent? Where'd you get that silly idea? Clark wears glasses! -- Nat Gertler (talk) 14:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

• oppose the proposed title is not recognizable to readers. Also wp:or about cannon is senseless here—blindlynx 15:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.