This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Reference ideas for Chick tract The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
There is a lot of redundancy and incoherence in the article, in large part because these two sections are independent of each other and have a great big 'in this and that' in between them. I have no time to merge them tonight. ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 03:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Mruanova, along with removing the maintenance tags you have removed every instance of a chick.com reference. We were using those! They are the primary sources referenced in telling the themes and plots of the comics themselves. It seems inadvisable to remove them when they were serving a purpose. Primary sources are better than no sources at all. Elizium23 ( talk) 22:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Mruanova: Regarding recent edits, primary sources are OK for statements that are either attribution or facts that are not controversial in nature and are essentially attributed statements about themselves. That appears to be the case here, and although I don't necessarily agree with using a citation to a primary source to identify that it simply exists, the solution isn't to ham-handedly remove them all and put them as ELs (which is actually probably worse that what we already have). Perhaps a list of publications or something would be more appropriate? I'm not certain the exact solution as I don't like everything about what is here now, but I'm less OK with the most recent edit of the ELs. ButlerBlog ( talk) 19:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Seeing
" Chick Publications produces and markets the Chick tracts, along with other comic books, books, and posters. "
should there be new wiki pages for the Chick Publications, separate from /info/en/?search=Chick_tract
page?
That way the Chick_tract wiki page can focus on the tracks, the Chick_Publications wiki page can focus on that company, and more pages if needed can also be made for the comic books, videos, posters, audio books, art prints and any other products of this company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Other Cody ( talk • contribs) 21:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
The National Football League has the page /info/en/?search=Nfl for information listing some information about the National Football League and a separate page for it's controversies. /info/en/?search=National_Football_League_controversies Should Chick Publications also have 2 pages to separate the information about the tracts and any controversies like the National Football League has? Maybe this can help keep the article well sorted.
Sorry about my indentation, I do not yet know how to use these talk pages very well. Other Cody ( talk) 16:07, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Reference ideas for Chick tract The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
There is a lot of redundancy and incoherence in the article, in large part because these two sections are independent of each other and have a great big 'in this and that' in between them. I have no time to merge them tonight. ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 03:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Mruanova, along with removing the maintenance tags you have removed every instance of a chick.com reference. We were using those! They are the primary sources referenced in telling the themes and plots of the comics themselves. It seems inadvisable to remove them when they were serving a purpose. Primary sources are better than no sources at all. Elizium23 ( talk) 22:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Mruanova: Regarding recent edits, primary sources are OK for statements that are either attribution or facts that are not controversial in nature and are essentially attributed statements about themselves. That appears to be the case here, and although I don't necessarily agree with using a citation to a primary source to identify that it simply exists, the solution isn't to ham-handedly remove them all and put them as ELs (which is actually probably worse that what we already have). Perhaps a list of publications or something would be more appropriate? I'm not certain the exact solution as I don't like everything about what is here now, but I'm less OK with the most recent edit of the ELs. ButlerBlog ( talk) 19:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Seeing
" Chick Publications produces and markets the Chick tracts, along with other comic books, books, and posters. "
should there be new wiki pages for the Chick Publications, separate from /info/en/?search=Chick_tract
page?
That way the Chick_tract wiki page can focus on the tracks, the Chick_Publications wiki page can focus on that company, and more pages if needed can also be made for the comic books, videos, posters, audio books, art prints and any other products of this company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Other Cody ( talk • contribs) 21:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
The National Football League has the page /info/en/?search=Nfl for information listing some information about the National Football League and a separate page for it's controversies. /info/en/?search=National_Football_League_controversies Should Chick Publications also have 2 pages to separate the information about the tracts and any controversies like the National Football League has? Maybe this can help keep the article well sorted.
Sorry about my indentation, I do not yet know how to use these talk pages very well. Other Cody ( talk) 16:07, 10 November 2023 (UTC)