Talk:Where's Wally? (comic strip)

Latest comment: 2 years ago by FOARP in topic Merger proposal

Ban edit

Umm.... Wasn't the original where's waldo book banned because there was a nude sunbather in the beach scene?


Some libraries pulled the original 1987 "Where's Waldo" due to a topless sunbather in the beach scene. The small visual gag in the busy spread showed a woman laying face down on a towel sunning herself with the back of her top undone (like many women in the picture and real life, to prevent tan lines). However two pranking boys have dropped their ice cream cone flat on her back causing her to rear up and scream. And naturally the other people around (including the two boys) stare, laugh and gawk at the exposed woman. The back 3/4 profile of the woman without her top, arching back at the sudden shock of cold ice cream on her back, is visible in the book - the nipples are obscured and nothing is really shown to the reader (no more is visible on her to the reader than is able to be seen on the other bikini-wearing women in the scene). However some got upset at the thought it was implying - exposing a woman on the beach. In the 1997 special edition her top was digitally put on, making the reactions of people around her a little misplaced. So, yes it is true that a small hand-full of libraries pulled the book due to the "topless sunbather" (however most of the librarians who pulled the book, never actually found or saw the nudity (or lack of nudity) in question). -- WaldoWatcher 22:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC) (Waldo Wiki)Reply

My god man! You are a Waldo freak.

Student film edit

has anyone seen the student film about wheres waldo? its by 4 guys...its awesome

Merger proposal edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was Merge.

@WaldoWatcher and Alfiboy: I propose merging this into the main Where's Wally? article. No sources here since 2006, and it doesn't seem relevant enough to warrant its own article. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

  • Support - Per WP:ATD. This is an AFD case if it isn't a merge. FOARP (talk) 10:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply
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.