Talk:Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century (film)

Disney Low‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies 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.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

DVD

Why is this not out on DVD yet?

Such a great question, both for Wikipedia and in general; I was under the assumption that this was one of the more successful DCOMs for -quite- some time, and yet there have been many other less-successful DCOMs to be released on DVD (Proud Family movie for one great example, which seems to be universally hated) . I don't think it's worth putting in the article of course until something concrete comes up, but it's certainly worthy of noting here in case someone with information comes along. 75.8.89.168 01:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xenon?

the bit about her being named after the element xenon doesn't seem to be relevant. The source doesn't even mention her and is just about the element. the fact that it means stranger does make sense if i remember the movie right, but it also seems just as likely that the writer heard the word somewhere and thought "hey, that sounds cool and futuristic, i should call my character that." unless someone can come up with a better source, it should probably be removed from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.196.3 (talk) 00:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]