Talk:Pah-Peh-Rheo

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles

Fictional characters

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

i'm glad someone made this biography. quite a daffy subject, however. Badanedwa 01:01, May 1, 2004 (UTC)

I think it's quite silly to include the page to a real person, it could be written into the main biography, though...

The Burning Unasked Question[edit]

So this fellow is an uncle to Cleopatra III of Egypt, a human, and thus, is likely a human himself, albeit with a "Ducky" name. By the time of Eider McDuck, 700 years later, I'm guessing the McDucks were ducks of the anthropomorphic Donald Duck variety, if only because most of the puns in the names of Clan McDuck are more or less dependent on feathers. :)

Raising the obvious problem... the Egyptian royals were known to practice philadephic love, and were known to venerate animals. At some point, did philadelphic love become phila-duck-ic love? :) (When one thinks of the available jokes, I think I'm being quite tasteful here!) I mean, Donald can walk and talk, and he does wear clothes... ;) Have Barks or Rosa ever, ahem, commented on this?

See also Humanzee. Xoloz 14:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually several historical figures have been depicted as ducks in their stories. Including Francis Drake for obvious reasons. User:Dimadick

History[edit]

It is unnecessary and off-topic to explain the actual circumstances of the fall of Egypt, since they are available elsewhere on Wikipedia; and the fictional history of Pah-Peh-Rheo is different anyway. Lengthy off-topic sections are deprecated. This article is marginal anyway, as discussing unauthorized (although amusing) filk; please don't push it. Septentrionalis 16:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The story depicts the fall of Ptolemaic Egypt and the characters are connected to the Ptolemaic dynasty itself. Caesar Augustus plays a prominent part. I think comparing and contrasting the fictional depiction and the actual historical events are excactly what the article should be about. Similar to the article about Prince Edmund (Blackadder) which I also worked on and took time to compare and contrast its references to the actual historical events and persons involved.

Would you mind explaining what you mean by the term "unauthorized" here? The story was notable at the time and has been reprinted in special edition in my country (Greece) as recently as 2004. User:Dimadick

In this context, authorized = approved or licensed by Disney, and therefore part of the standard mythos. Nothing wrong or illegal with pure fanac, but it does argue against notability. Septentrionalis 18:46, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is no standard mythos for any of the characters. They appear in hundreds of stories every year. Fanac? User:Dimadick

fannish activity. I'm surprised that's a redlink, but I suppose it may be a dicdef. Septentrionalis 22:38, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Afd survival[edit]

This article previously survived a deletion attempt archived here, as consensus was not reached.--Scimitar ^parley 18:55, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nephews[edit]

Given the other character-equivilents mentioned, I take it it Pah-Peh-Rheo's eldest nephew resembled Donald, and the three younger ones were Huey, Louie and Dewey? Daibhid C 00:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]