>>149499936
>The work
What in the work? You see the screenshot there, no?
>>149499936
>from someone who worked on the show
Let's consult what Dana Terrace herself said on the matter. From reference 8 above:
https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-personal-story-behind-owl-houses-magical-new-disney-1839128407
>Creator Dana Terrace said she named the character after her real-life roommate, Luz, who agreed to it on one condition.
>“She said, ‘Yes, but you have to make her Dominican,’” Terrace told io9.
So Dana Terrace, on explaining how Luz Noceda was based on Luz Batista, said that Luz Noceda had the first name and Dominican background. Not that she was "Afro" Dominican.
>>149499952
>she physically nods in agreement
While having previously explicitly said something similar but not containing the point of contention. As the anon specifically said that "the creator" had said it
>>149498506, that specific argument is wrong from the evidence presented.
>From Luz Batista a head story artist
She is credited as A story artist. A story artist is a writer whose work does not constitute worthiness to be credited for the story or screenplay, but whom the organization wants to credit in a minor way.
>and a consultant
That is, someone with no authority over the show.
>She's also the real friend/ roommate of Dana Terrace
Yes, who is non-controversially the basis for some aspects of Luz Noceda the character. But not all aspects. Specifically, Dana Terrace has never said that Luz is an "Afro" Dominican like Luz Batista describes herself. So again, how did you actually reach this conclusion? Can you be explicit about the steps involved? Like, for example, if Dana Terrace says that she based a character on someone she knows, with insistence that the character has a particular trait of that person, it means that the character has that particular trait. If you want to make the case that the character has another trait of the person, you need support for that specific trait being there.
