This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Comicsgate article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article takes the tone of deconstruction and opposition. For example, for each view ascribed to Comicsgate, there is an attempt to invalidate that view. In addition, some comments cite references to editorials expressing negative opinions of Comicsgate as if they were citing factual evidence. For instance, in regards to the sentence "It is part of the alt-right movement,[6][7][8][9] and has been described by commentators as a harassment campaign", the references indicated ascribe alt-right as a label of contempt; they do not serve as sources of factual evidence that Comicsgate is inherently linked to the alt-right would. Let's consider that a more neutral tone would state that "It is described by commentators as part of the al-right movement and as a harassment campaign". 2601:C0:8100:16:3422:F8B7:F4A0:A11 ( talk) 01:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
This entire article brings up talking points which are misleading or completely fabricated in order to tarnish the reputation of a movement for the sole purpose of catering to a far left-wing ideological bias of it.
It brings up all the negative aspects, and none of the pro or good aspects like the crowd funding and indie startup projects that have been made possible by it.
It also ignores the fact there are minority artists and creators within comicsgate to include: blacks, women, LGBTQ and other marginalized peoples. They actively support and contribute to the movement.
The movement is also not 'alt-right' or 'bigoted' in nature, it was always about apolitical concepts against the radical progressivism that has been degrading the quality of comics.
Many of the arguments about women or sexuality in comics were subjective bias based on the unrealistic standard given for both men and women in comics. These arguments had many anti-sexualization advocates body shaming other women or telling them they to be ashamed of their bodies and even attacked female artists who liked to draw provocative women, it was an affront to artistic autonomy and creativity.
No one in the movement who actually supports it, has racist ideologies or supports hate speech whatsoever, the misconception comes when you have comic companies retcon and make radically extreme changes to characters for nothing short of a diversity push, they often even make stereotypical depictions of minorities in order to prove how they are being 'supportive,' this flies in the face of the concept of diversity, when they remove diversity of thought and make their comics about Left-wing talking points or political issues, dedicating entire pages of a comic to bring up some inane concept, using language that offends minority communities; in example the promotion of the term 'latinx' or making a comic which features a well-known black character acting as a walking stereotype (What if... Miles Morales was Thor; recently).
They take straight characters with no history of LGBTQ establishment and then just flip switches on them ignoring their history or autonomy vs attempting to make real efforts to establish new characters or make productive story lines; often making characters who are walking gay stereotypes, self inserts or just so horrifically bad, that they come of as parodies (examples include Marvels attempt at Safe-Space and Snowflake; creating a character like Kamala Khan who is a lesbian and a muslim; retconning Halo as a non-binary, muslim, pansexual corpse; Starfire's Daughter in I am not Starfire; Jean literally mind-reading Bobby(Ice Man) into homosexuality; making Tim Drake bi-sexual; completely mutilating characters like Aqualad).
There is a point where fans who love these characters and grew up on them, feel they need to step in and their voices are being ignored. They are being given labels like: bigot, homophobe, sexist or racist; this is utter nonsense. A strategy being used to conflate valid criticism with social agendism. Activism; blaming them(fans) for not liking the work vs assuming responsibility for their(the company's) poor quality products.
Comicsgate was created to give artists, writers, fans and new audiences an alternative option.
The current state of mainstream comics is less than satisfactory, readers are switching over to alternative media in droves (manga gaining much greater following and being the greatest factor in the slump in the market) there is also a point where the 2 major companies aren't even focusing on comics and have instead become 'media' companies.
There's so much animosity in the industry, that you have people (probably the same ones who moderated this page) defending these companies, to the extent they spread misinformation and propaganda about anything that isn't embracing them.
It is a hateful ideology as much as any other.
So to put it bluntly, this article is not being written in an apolitical objective manner, it is being written to cater to left-wing talking points. It is biased. Which means Wikipedia is biased for allowing someone to write it in such a fashion. Muttemor ( talk) 18:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Comics gate isn't against any thing there not racist or sexist or anti LGBT and they are far from alt right they just want for story's not agenda driving narrative and garbage lazy writing and art — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.72.96.158 ( talk) 06:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
From https://www.comicsbeat.com/distribution-round-up-dstlry-icbca/ "UPDATE ... We regret to inform you that ICBCA is ComicsGate-affiliated. A number of people on Twitter this morning, in response to ICv2’s story, have noted that ICBCA co-founder Phil Avelli has as recently as last week been releasing his comics through Vox Day‘s publisher Arkhaven: ..." 207.81.183.250 ( talk) 17:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I have had my edit reverted without a good reason (in my opinion) now twice, so let me elaborate my reasoning for my edit:
Currently the article states "Alt-right activist Vox Day wrote and published the series Alt-Hero".
Calling Vox Day an "alt-right activist" in this manner is a statement of fact. The actual article on Vox Day states that "he has been described" as such (which I am not arguing against).
People can read all about Vox Day in the respective article and make up their minds. This particular article is about Comicsgate. Pulling the "alt-right" opinion out of the Vox Day article and turning it into a fact in the process is inappropriate, reductive, and will always be two steps behind the parent article.
The lowest common denominator (as per the Vox Day article) seems to be that he "is an American activist and writer." (statement of fact).
As for the source ( https://boingboing.net/2018/09/04/alt-right-publisher-founds-com.html), it is from a group blog ( Wikipedia:BLOGS) and clearly an opinion piece. A single source of this nature is insufficient to make a factual claim about a person which is dedicated to a different topic.
Please comment @ Grandpallama and @ Acroterion
Arcadia Darell ( talk) 13:10, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Avoid stating facts as opinions. Uncontested and uncontroversial factual assertions made by reliable sources should normally be directly stated in Wikipedia's voice...We can't just decide ourselves that certain sources are mere descriptions rather than fact. That said, we could certainly use more or better sources here. [1], from a peer-reviewed academic journal, describes him as
fascist Theodore Beale (who goes by the pseudonym Vox Day). -- Aquillion ( talk) 15:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Comicsgate article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article takes the tone of deconstruction and opposition. For example, for each view ascribed to Comicsgate, there is an attempt to invalidate that view. In addition, some comments cite references to editorials expressing negative opinions of Comicsgate as if they were citing factual evidence. For instance, in regards to the sentence "It is part of the alt-right movement,[6][7][8][9] and has been described by commentators as a harassment campaign", the references indicated ascribe alt-right as a label of contempt; they do not serve as sources of factual evidence that Comicsgate is inherently linked to the alt-right would. Let's consider that a more neutral tone would state that "It is described by commentators as part of the al-right movement and as a harassment campaign". 2601:C0:8100:16:3422:F8B7:F4A0:A11 ( talk) 01:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
This entire article brings up talking points which are misleading or completely fabricated in order to tarnish the reputation of a movement for the sole purpose of catering to a far left-wing ideological bias of it.
It brings up all the negative aspects, and none of the pro or good aspects like the crowd funding and indie startup projects that have been made possible by it.
It also ignores the fact there are minority artists and creators within comicsgate to include: blacks, women, LGBTQ and other marginalized peoples. They actively support and contribute to the movement.
The movement is also not 'alt-right' or 'bigoted' in nature, it was always about apolitical concepts against the radical progressivism that has been degrading the quality of comics.
Many of the arguments about women or sexuality in comics were subjective bias based on the unrealistic standard given for both men and women in comics. These arguments had many anti-sexualization advocates body shaming other women or telling them they to be ashamed of their bodies and even attacked female artists who liked to draw provocative women, it was an affront to artistic autonomy and creativity.
No one in the movement who actually supports it, has racist ideologies or supports hate speech whatsoever, the misconception comes when you have comic companies retcon and make radically extreme changes to characters for nothing short of a diversity push, they often even make stereotypical depictions of minorities in order to prove how they are being 'supportive,' this flies in the face of the concept of diversity, when they remove diversity of thought and make their comics about Left-wing talking points or political issues, dedicating entire pages of a comic to bring up some inane concept, using language that offends minority communities; in example the promotion of the term 'latinx' or making a comic which features a well-known black character acting as a walking stereotype (What if... Miles Morales was Thor; recently).
They take straight characters with no history of LGBTQ establishment and then just flip switches on them ignoring their history or autonomy vs attempting to make real efforts to establish new characters or make productive story lines; often making characters who are walking gay stereotypes, self inserts or just so horrifically bad, that they come of as parodies (examples include Marvels attempt at Safe-Space and Snowflake; creating a character like Kamala Khan who is a lesbian and a muslim; retconning Halo as a non-binary, muslim, pansexual corpse; Starfire's Daughter in I am not Starfire; Jean literally mind-reading Bobby(Ice Man) into homosexuality; making Tim Drake bi-sexual; completely mutilating characters like Aqualad).
There is a point where fans who love these characters and grew up on them, feel they need to step in and their voices are being ignored. They are being given labels like: bigot, homophobe, sexist or racist; this is utter nonsense. A strategy being used to conflate valid criticism with social agendism. Activism; blaming them(fans) for not liking the work vs assuming responsibility for their(the company's) poor quality products.
Comicsgate was created to give artists, writers, fans and new audiences an alternative option.
The current state of mainstream comics is less than satisfactory, readers are switching over to alternative media in droves (manga gaining much greater following and being the greatest factor in the slump in the market) there is also a point where the 2 major companies aren't even focusing on comics and have instead become 'media' companies.
There's so much animosity in the industry, that you have people (probably the same ones who moderated this page) defending these companies, to the extent they spread misinformation and propaganda about anything that isn't embracing them.
It is a hateful ideology as much as any other.
So to put it bluntly, this article is not being written in an apolitical objective manner, it is being written to cater to left-wing talking points. It is biased. Which means Wikipedia is biased for allowing someone to write it in such a fashion. Muttemor ( talk) 18:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Comics gate isn't against any thing there not racist or sexist or anti LGBT and they are far from alt right they just want for story's not agenda driving narrative and garbage lazy writing and art — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.72.96.158 ( talk) 06:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
From https://www.comicsbeat.com/distribution-round-up-dstlry-icbca/ "UPDATE ... We regret to inform you that ICBCA is ComicsGate-affiliated. A number of people on Twitter this morning, in response to ICv2’s story, have noted that ICBCA co-founder Phil Avelli has as recently as last week been releasing his comics through Vox Day‘s publisher Arkhaven: ..." 207.81.183.250 ( talk) 17:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I have had my edit reverted without a good reason (in my opinion) now twice, so let me elaborate my reasoning for my edit:
Currently the article states "Alt-right activist Vox Day wrote and published the series Alt-Hero".
Calling Vox Day an "alt-right activist" in this manner is a statement of fact. The actual article on Vox Day states that "he has been described" as such (which I am not arguing against).
People can read all about Vox Day in the respective article and make up their minds. This particular article is about Comicsgate. Pulling the "alt-right" opinion out of the Vox Day article and turning it into a fact in the process is inappropriate, reductive, and will always be two steps behind the parent article.
The lowest common denominator (as per the Vox Day article) seems to be that he "is an American activist and writer." (statement of fact).
As for the source ( https://boingboing.net/2018/09/04/alt-right-publisher-founds-com.html), it is from a group blog ( Wikipedia:BLOGS) and clearly an opinion piece. A single source of this nature is insufficient to make a factual claim about a person which is dedicated to a different topic.
Please comment @ Grandpallama and @ Acroterion
Arcadia Darell ( talk) 13:10, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Avoid stating facts as opinions. Uncontested and uncontroversial factual assertions made by reliable sources should normally be directly stated in Wikipedia's voice...We can't just decide ourselves that certain sources are mere descriptions rather than fact. That said, we could certainly use more or better sources here. [1], from a peer-reviewed academic journal, describes him as
fascist Theodore Beale (who goes by the pseudonym Vox Day). -- Aquillion ( talk) 15:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)