Your abusive and idiotic conduct has been reported to staff. Really, claiming harassment when contacted to explain an illogical block? Lol. I thought Tupka was dumb, but you take the cake, Robin. You can close this thread, but that doesn't prevent me from making a new one. As for my wall on CC, you lied about that. I just tried posting there and my thread did not go through. You're going to regret abusing your rights, one way or another.
Hi. It seems you have abused your admin rights on Community Central to block me for three days for "intimidating behavior", when that's obviously untrue. I will give you a chance to fix this gross abuse immediately, or I will contact Staff and ask for your demotion. Also, it's kind of embarrassing to be a lapdog for that loser Tupka, don't you think? Even you can aspire to more, surely?
Think. If I intentionally left you a resource open to use, then obviously I'll be watching for it to be used. Besides, I read ALL of the Central feed streams like WikiActivity and RecentChanges. Plus a couple tools not available to just anyone.
So what you're doing now is making excuses *not* to follow instructions. If you get blocked here on Disney, do NOT reach out to me on any other wiki about this, even if you're already an established contributor there. I'll consider it cross-wiki harassment.
I left you your Central message wall to use. Use it.
I'll defend him enough to say that he is *not* a troll. Just someone who doesn't understand that no matter how much he wants to, if others don't want him to contact them, he is not supposed to contact them. It's a disability. Not an excuse.
This is Mister Dude 13 I was blocked from Villains Wiki, I made a promise not to edit on the Wiki again, I promise not to add Loaf and Lisa on the wiki again, can you please unblock me, I will do anything you say, even if you want me to be quiet so please unblock me from the Villains wiki and i will do your request.
You are an the economy of a rude person, I was striking against rainbowbubbles3 for harassing my good friend, Robert Mcneary and then you come along and ruin my time! I can’t believe it. You are both SJWs. I’m just gonna make another account with a VPN anyway so bye!
The Kim Possible movie is seen as a reboot rather than a continuation, but the LAM Nana has the same traits of the original Nana. The producers have changed the character, most specifically the family relation. On Disney Wiki we keep original characters and alternate counterparts on one page, which we've done before many times. On the Maleficent's page, for example, we have information relating to the character in OUAT, the 2014 movie, and Descendants, but all background information is strictly on the original character only.
With that said, the LAM Nana can still be noted on the Nana Possible page as long as you don't mix the original background information with the LAM counterpart.
UPDATE: I have just gone through all the Nana scenes more than twice, and I can find no confirmation that she is Kim's maternal grandmother. There wasn't a single scene where Ann called Nana "Mother". I don't know where you got that idea from but it's wrong. I have kept up to date with all the news and posts since I discovered this movie. They all credited her as "Nana Possible". The only difference I will settle for is she's less older than the animated counterpart and Ron and Rufus' first meeting is out of canon.
Check the squeezing forcefield scene. Ann clearly says "Are you okay. Mom?"
In addition, being a redhead, the clear intentiion is to tie all the generations of the females of the family together: Kim, Ann, Nana… Daughter, Mother, Grandmother… and why they join Kim on the last mission.
I know all the advanced sources and news said "Nana Possible", but the actual on-screen dialog and actions (Show, don't Tell) changed that. And yes, she may share traits with animated Nana Possible, but being Ann's mother also explains the "blackbelt brain surgeon" which is another slight diff from animated Ann (although fits my personal headcanon of Ann as a former action girl). Ann's mom is the reason why Ann is a blackbelt, and why Kim is martial too; a maternal trait/interest/connection.
That's not good enough. That could be script/dialogue error. Sadie Stanley was probably meant to say that line instead of Alyson Hannigan. Films and shows are not always 100% perfect and there can be many other possibilities to consider. Even if she was maternal she will still be noted on the Nana possible page based on what I've already said.
What you are saying is speculation, which is forbidden on the Disney Wiki. You can tell me its not but it is. You can do that on the Kim Possible Wiki if you want to but not here. We do our best to maintain a reliable source.
Fair enough. The KP Wiki *will* be treating them as the separate characters they are.
BTW, the film also only credits "Connie Ray" without stating her role, and end credits only mention a "Nana Stunt double" (no last name). So "Nana Possible" is NOT supported by the on-screen evidence, which actually makes "Nana Possible" the speculation.
Nana Possible is clearly stated as James' mother, while redheaded LA Nana is clearly meant to be of Kim's maternal lineage. That's not "speculation", that is what the narrative shows us. Plus the dialog makes it the live-action's canon.