![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 35 | ← | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | → | Archive 45 |
Is Dominic Deegan: Oracle for Hire notable? Almost all the sources are primary, and I've been unable to find any reliable secondary sources for it, but given my terrible Google-fu I could use a little more help. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 05:47, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Can I get a second set of eyes on this?
In July, not long after Dave Elliott started legal proceedings against the parent company, an anon IP removed his name from the founders despite it being well sourced and this was quickly reverted [1]. A month later the IP returned and did the same edits and I restored the information today when this was pointed out (as it is getting quite a bit of attention). Then it gets interesting, the original creator of the article (who dropped in a giant slab of corporate speak [2] that had to be gutted) turned up and reverted my edit which I restored (as this is bordering on vandalism) and the IP and user have been heavily editing again removing the information. As an involved editor I don't want to protect the article or restore the information any further to avoid possible finger pointing and I throw it open to the Project to look over. ( Emperor ( talk) 22:55, 2 December 2009 (UTC))
I put some work into Jeff Butler. I've been expanding RPG designer/artist stubs, and his happened to come up, although the source I'm using talked about his comics work about as much as his RPG work. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 06:00, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Could we have some thoughts on this?
It looks like the editor did a straight cut-n-paste of the raw search results from the "reference" - Comic Book DB. (ATM I'm unable to access CBDB).
I've got a few problems with this
- J Greb ( talk) 23:30, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
What do people think about converting the banner to the meta template?
Personally, I think we'll lose functionality and freedom, and since I also believe the assessment process is meant to be bottom up rather than top down, I'm against doing it. I'm unsure the template will, when converted, be able to do all that it offers us now. I'm also unsure that we'd be able to maintain the template in-house or be able to adapt it to suit our purposes. I'm concerned given the tone of the conversation at Further problems with {{Astronomy}}. Currently we use the template to feed a lot of maintenance categories, which I was hoping to extend further once we get all the articles assessed. I've mentioned it to User:MSGJ in an attempt to sound out the issue, but MSGJ feels the conversation should be widened out. So, thoughts? Hiding T 09:30, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
In the current template, when used in the bannershell, it shows both the class and the importance. Thius is functionlaity which was introduced (AFAIK) by this project and has since been implemented by a number of other projects as well. As far as I can tell (from e.g. the sandbox test cases), this is not supported by the meta template. I would prefer to keep this functionality though, it is very easy (see e.g. Talk:Hergé for an example of this). It helps editors to easily find the main project(s) for a certain article, if that article is "claimed" by different projects. Fram ( talk) 13:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This article does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|creators=yes
and |image=yes
then the article will be in
Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of comics creators. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk)
14:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to update you all on this. We have been discussing a few changes to the meta template to allow custom importance scales to be displayed in the nested version. I anticipate that this will be completed soon though. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 18:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Anyone else think of anything we've forgotten to convert? Hiding T 15:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Seems that on Dec 2 the bot providing "Quality by importance" wiped the table on the stats page - [6] Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/BotStatistics/Grading#Quality by importance.
Is this related to the new banner markup or another glitch?
- J Greb ( talk) 12:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Not sure if the title does it justice but there are some characters who fist appeared in Kingdom Come (comics) who have had an version introduced into the main DC Universe. KC is an alternate future and is now officially Earth-22, so these aren't just the same character on different parts of their timeline (so Superman won't become Superman (Kingdom Come), although writers might pick up some of the thumbs, but they might not - after all the KC story has been told so they aren't going to go down the same road again). This has come up a couple of times and both need some input to resolve:
It strikes me that resolving the Magog article will also help point the way to fixing the Kid Flash (Iris West) question. My gut, as I explain, is to have the two DCU characters as alternative versions for now, with an eye to possibly splitting them off (to articles like Impulse (Iris West)) if they stick around and in essence become the main character (as flipping it around so the KC character becomes the alternate version would be confusing).
Anyway I thought it best to raise here so we can try and get a unified answer, rather than possibly arriving at two different consensuses which will only cause a headache in the future. Soooooo thoughts? ( Emperor ( talk) 03:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC))
Well, not quite... :) But it is something we've been badly needing! Witness: [7], [8], and [9]. BOZ ( talk) 03:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
It's definitely a start, and an important one at that. Most of these character articles still have a long way to go to even get up to GA, but I say it's better to have one reliable secondary source than none. :) BOZ ( talk) 18:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree that it's a good step in the right direction (really great job), but I also agree that the formatting needs some improvement. It looks like a jumbled mess at present. Luminum ( talk) 14:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
If anyone wants to take a look, there's been edit warring at Scarlet Witch in the "Alternate versions" section for at least a week if not more. Luminum ( talk) 14:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Comments on replacing the redirect with an mini-article would be appreciated at Talk:Robin (Earth-Two)#reverted.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
This editor doesn't seem to understand that what he is posting is original research. A little help, here? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 05:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Y'know, it's getting to be that time of year again, when we look for Christmas related DYK entries. I think the subject of the Batman Christmas stories is probably notable and significant enough to have at least a short article, and I think it would definitely be less expected than a lot of other Christmas articles. Anyway, it is an article I would like to see. John Carter ( talk) 15:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Alright since someone created WP:Books/DC Comics, which is a Wikipedia-Book (aka a collection of articles which you can download or order in print, see Help:Books for the details on how to create or download or order books). I took the liberty of updating you project banner to handle the book-class (see the Signpost article), since the members of WikiProject Comics have a lot more clue than we have over at WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, and thus will be able to give better feedback on content, deletion discussions, etc... when Comics-related books are concerned. This is probably a bit brutal/out of the blue for most of you, so I would really recommend to go through Help:Books and Help:Books/for experts to see what this is all about.
Right now I found two comics-related books WP:Books/DC Comics and WP:Books/Superman (you can view the PDFs here and here). Needless to say a lot more books could be made (spiderman, x-men, batman, daredevil, brainiac, ...), so if you want to give it a try, you have lots of room. It really doesn't take long to create books (at least compared to writing new articles) since all you have to do is find existing articles and arrange them into something that makes sense. And if you create a book, don't forget to place {{ Wikipedia-Books}} on pages that should link to the books, otherwise no one will know these exist.
If you have questions, just ask and I'll answer as best I can. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 20:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Just thought I'd flag this in case anyone wishes to comment: Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#Tenebrae. ( Emperor ( talk) 00:52, 17 December 2009 (UTC))
I've requested a peer review for Bizenghast here. Please come share your thoughts. Kaguya-chan ( talk) 20:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to flag up the fact that someone has started superhero comics - I previously mentioned this a few times [10] [11] - in that first one suggesting we essentially split out the superhero comics section from superhero to a new article and this is it. What do people think? Is this doable? Or should we slowly expand that article and then work on tightening up the mentions in superhero? ( Emperor ( talk) 20:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC))
As one editor - Dave - insists in reinserting in Dormammu information from the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe and making speculative judgements re: the material [12] I think it is time to settle this once and for all. The Guidelines state [13] that such a source is discouraged as it compiles fictional facts.
Further, the OHOTMU can't be used as it is constantly proven wrong by the comics. Strength is a classic example, with characters performing feats well in excess of their supposed power range. The same applies to other traits. It can't be a case of taking what we like and discarding the rest. It also opens the door to a litanty of subjective judgements about Powers and abilities by editors about fictional matter. Articles should be (where possible) encyclopedia standard. Thoughts?
Asgardian ( talk) 03:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Couple of short thoughts:
With Dormammu... I think the salient point are:
There is room in that to a whether or not the character produces the magical effect inherently, through vestment as ruler of his dimension, or through spells and to add refs as to where the specific aspects are first shown or revealed in-story.
- J Greb ( talk) 00:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated V for Vendetta (film) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 20:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I had stalled on this for a long time because I didn't want to put the work in, but since I had the free time today I decided to get moving on things. ;) What I need most are diffs displaying the disputed behavior. I have some already here, but could use some more. I mean just a list of diffs to put in the first five or so categories I listed there, as I already have more than enough illustrative examples. Anything that you think is edit warring (mutiple similar edits to the same article in the span of a few days), incivility, inaccurate edit summaries, or other similar behavioral problems. List them here, or on the RFCU talk page - just the diffs is all I need, because I want people to draw their own conclusions.
Also, I have come up with a desired outcome and a description of the case based on the comments that have been gathered, and I would appreciate any responses to that on the talk page.
Thanks! BOZ ( talk) 17:34, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Whole lot of articles may need to be watched for the next week or so.
This issue was shipped this week, but with a Dec 30 release date. Right now there are torrents floating around of the issue as well as panels, pages, and spoilers cropping up blogs, forums, and review sites. CBR has noted that DC has asked those sites to remove at least the images. [14]
Right now I've reverted edits from 5 articles - Blackest Night, Mera (comics), Star Sapphire (comics), Wonder Woman, Publication history of Wonder Woman - and noted in those edit summaries that re-adding the info before 12/30/2009, the articles would be locked.
Given the scope of the story line, there's likely more than just these 5.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:11, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I've done a shakedown of Category:Comics templates and was wondering... Do we want to round up the various userboxes into a category?
- J Greb ( talk) 01:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm new to the project, and just thought I would introduce myself. Sean ( talk || contribs) 14:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Do you folks realize that "car", much less "cartoonist", doesn't even appear on that project page? What makes? I didn't search for caricature, but I'm pretty sure if "car" is not there, I'll be very disappointed! Unfree ( talk) 23:03, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Cartoonists and caricature. How's that? Good proposals, hey? Unfree ( talk) 23:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi there,
I'm just letting you know that the Asgardian RFC/U has begun.
Any user except for Asgardian or anyone certifying the basis for the RFC may post an "Outside view" below Asgardian's response section, detailing their own feelings on the matter. Likewise, any user may endorse the main statement, Asgardian's response, or any other view posted on the page.
Thank you for your participation. BOZ ( talk) 06:21, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Which image do you think should be used for the SHB box, the image from Flash v2 #149 or the image from Crisis on Infinite Earths #12? DrBat ( talk) 02:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
These characters need to merged I wish to here opinions
Ninjor (Masters of the Universe), Icer and Scare Glow need to be merged to List of Masters of the Universe characters
Blade (Masters of the Universe) and
Gwildor need to be merged
Masters of the Universe (film)
Snake Face needs to be merged to
Snake Men (Masters of the Universe)
Heroes
Clamp Champ need to be merged to List of Masters of the Universe characters
Zoar (He-Man) to
Sorceress of Castle Grayskull
List of She-Ra: Princess of Power characters needs reorganising
Dwanyewest ( talk) 02:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
FYI. Discussion is here. postdlf ( talk) 05:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I was just noticing the other day how many Good Articles we accumulated this year! That's some "Good" work, all! :)
BOZ ( talk) 01:49, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Based on {{ Legion of Doom (Super Friends)}} we've got 6 LoD titled articles:
And each one, aside from the first, seems to exist to just have an article.
Right now, I think this may be a case of 5 AfDs being needed (I believe a PROD, which would be reasonable for 2 of the articles, has a snowball's chance of sticking). Anyone see any other options?
- J Greb ( talk) 18:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
After a short discussion at WT:ANIME, which concluded that Firefox News is a WP:SPS and should not be used as a source, I have started a general discussion about the reliability of Firefox News at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Firefox.org/news/. I'm placing this notice here as a number of comics articles also reference Firefox News for information. — Farix ( t | c) 14:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Eternal edit war BOZ ( talk) 15:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Seems Barry Blair, of Aircel Comics, has passed away. [15] [16]. There was an article but it got deleted for neutrality problems but there were clearly sourcing issues too. If his passing generates some obits we can use, I am not sure if we want to make the original article return and then hack it into shape or start afresh. Nothing yet [17] but it is early days. ( Emperor ( talk) 03:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC))
Need your help to improve and reorganise W.I.T.C.H. and its related articles, as well as their structures. Discuss more at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disney#W.I.T.C.H.. -- JSH-alive talk • cont • mail 11:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Please participate in this discussion. postdlf ( talk) 16:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
[19] Yay or nay? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 06:47, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
I am massively trying to clean up Masters of the Universe I tried to nominate the following articles for deletion something has gone wrong. Slime Pit, Attak Trak, Battle Ram, Battle Ram, Talon Fighter, Wind Raider can anyone help? Dwanyewest ( talk) 23:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Asgardian continues to censor references from this page as he sees fit, no matter the Talk discussion. Could someone intervene please. Thank you.
Btw: The complaints page continues to fill out. Dave ( talk) 09:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi... I'm a board member/editor over at the Grand Comics Database. We just changed our name (in late December) via a charter vote from the Grand Comic-Book Database to the Grand Comics Database. I'd like to update the info here at Wikipedia, but am a little afraid of it being a COI. Also, technically, right now Grand Comics Database is a re-direct to Grand Comic-Book Database, so I'm not sure how to reverse the two (so that comic-book re-directs to comics). The website will be updated soon to reflect the change, the document website already has been updated.
The other thing is that there are two templates that refer to the name Template:gcd and Template:gcdb. It looks like the first one is rarely used. Where it is used, should it be switched over to the other. The gcdb one was updated when we updated our site, the gcd one still points at our old urls (which re-direct to our new ones anyways).
Thanks for any help! Bookcats ( talk) 19:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Building upon the above, I feel that the handbook justifications recurrently go overboard. In the Doctor Strange Talk Asgbardian has even stated that his opinon regarding what's in continuity or not is superior to Marvel editorial's stance stated through it. It should be a good idea to clarify the definition of how it can be used, to avoid a "nothing whatsoever" all-covering justification in a weapon-like manner that it much stronger than I have understood the regulation as intended.
Technically Asgardian already brought this matter here, and I adjusted the column according to what was said in response, but the discussion appears to have started again over at the Dormammu Talk regarding this, so renewed participation with input and clarifications is appreciated.
Another request for comment has been placed elsewhere by BOZ. Dave ( talk) 14:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
The new comics articles too is highlighting a lot of articles which are either separate articles on comics characters in certain animated series or lists of characters in such series, all from one user [20]. Looking at their talk page it seems a lot are being speedied or AfDed (some for including copyright violating material). I don't really know the relevant animations and wouldn't mind someone casting an eye over them because if they are all rocky then it is simply wasting everyone's time and it'd be best to try and get the editor to pause and consider each articles merits where, at the moment, they seem to be hammering them out. ( Emperor ( talk) 18:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC))
Opinions on this? 204.153.84.10 ( talk) 18:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Reverted Wikipedia does not endorse unnecessary censorship of profanity.-- Marcus Brute ( talk) 21:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 03:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Can I get some help over at B.C. (comic strip)? Someone with ties to the strip is editing it. She came in completely whitewashing any negative content, but I pointed her to WP:COI. I believe she has good intentions and is requesting my help in improving the article, but its not really my realm. A lot of the citations for press regarding religious themed strips have gone dead, instead of removing the content, I was hoping someone could find other supporting references and otherwise clean up MOS issues. Thanks. ccwaters ( talk) 20:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I have recently created the article List of comic book characters that have returned from the dead which I am currently expanding as much as I can. I would appreciate any help or additions that anyone is willing to give.-- Marcus Brute ( talk) 21:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
An anon editor has been asserting that the character died in the first X-Men film. Several editors have reverted him, per the old adage "no body, no death". The anon stated once and then again that he is more than willing to continue edit warring over this minor detail "for months" if needed. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 19:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I am attempting to create an article for Aphrodite (Marvel Comcis) who was retconed to be a seperate character from Venus (Marvel Comics). So my question is does a part of Venus's fictional history now become Aphrodite's? Also does she share the same first appearance as Venus or is it her first appearance as a stand alone character that counts? Samge goes for the character's creators. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 15:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Venus's early history shows that she was the daughter of Zeus and regularly interacted with the rest of Greco-Roman pantheon. The retcon made her into a siren seperate from the actuall goddess but mirrors her in name and appearance, which is source of their animosity. Although no attempt has been made to retrofit Venus's early history into Aphrodite's in the comic, one could easily assume that those stories actually belong to Aphrodite since now the comic claims Venus never was a goddess nor an Olympian though that could be easily cross over into WP:OR.
As far as the names are concerned a dialouge in X-Men vs. The Agents of Atlas #2 between the two characters states Aphrodite did go by both names at some point but chooses only to be refered by her Greek name now.
Also I see your point about the notablity of the Aphrodite article, once the sandbox is complete I may try to merge it into the Venus article in a similar fashion to this one on Enchantress (Marvel Comics) about two characters named Enchantress. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I've been thinking about this one for a while. Part of the problem you have, in separating the bios of the two characters, is that Aphrodite-Venus has appeared in Olympus with the other Olympians before, so clearly that was meant to be the goddess (wouldn't want some silly water fairy traipsing around with the very gods themselves!). In some cases, who was who may not be entirely clear. I'd say any time you have Venus working directly with the other Olympians, you're looking at the goddess, and any time it's dealing with the 1940s character's storyline it's clearly the naiad, but any other time it's kind of up in the air. BOZ ( talk) 05:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the help I merged the sandbox into Venus (Marvel Comics) however the article could still use more clean-up and sorting. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 20:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Help! We have a relatively new (well, been around for a year but has only worked on Medusa (comics) thus far) editor who has been adding some plot summary that seems to have a bunch of NPOV and OR violations, etc. We'd rather not chase new people off, so what's the best way to approach this? Latest edits are here, today. Tell you the truth, that section was a bit of a mess in the first place so now that I have a second thought it may not really be their fault. BOZ ( talk) 05:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here
If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip
If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip
Ikip 02:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.
The two opposing positions which have the most support is:
Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.
Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.
Jacques Martin (comics) has sadly passed away. I imagine there will be quite a few obits and if anyone knows of a good image we can use that'd be handy. ( Emperor ( talk) 23:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC))
Steve Purcell has been nominated for GA and seems to have missed out once before so anything that can be done to help would be good. ( Emperor ( talk) 00:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC))
Some has started Silver Surfer, volume 3 and we already had Iron Man (vol. 4). now I've raised this topic before [26] [27] and there has been some concern about this kind of thing (and at least one has been merged back to the main page - Batgirl (comic book)). Now I can see the case for limited numbers of these where the character has a long history as we have to split a lot out (e.g. Superman (comic book), Batman (comic book), Wolverine (comic book), Green Lantern (comic book)) but this seems to go one further and is starting an article on one specific series out of many others. I can, perhaps see an argument made for Iron Man (comic book) but surely this should be started and expanded before we even think about splitting it again? Thoughts? ( Emperor ( talk) 20:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC))
the korean Manhwa article for "magical JXR" is currently being made. i started it here User:Bread Ninja/Magical JXR. I dont have a lot of time to work on it due to other articles, but it will be great if someone added refs plot, and/or reception. Bread Ninja ( talk) 15:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
This discussion seems to have attracted little notice. 204.153.84.10 ( talk) 20:27, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
The article discribes this as a storyline but from what I've gathered this is more a new era in Marvel Comics or a new direction the comic company is taking as far as content and storytelling. It might encompass several storylines or crossover events of there own. Am I or the article incorrect or is just too soon to tell as details are still vague? - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Recently, Toonopedia came up as a source for some page content and I browsed around and had some questions about it. As far as I can tell, the writer, Donald Markstein is just writing whatever he wants and his content doesn't appear to be published. It's trademarked, which is where the fuzziness comes in, but it doesn't appear that the material itself is legitimately published, just that the content is covered by an umbrella copyright. Is it a reliable source? If so, it'd be a nice resource to use, though would it then fall into the problem we have using other encyclopedias' contents? If anyone has any experience with it, I'd love some clarification. Luminum ( talk) 06:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I wrote in my user space a start article on Baru (Hervé Barulea) and i would like the inputs from the Comics project to see what have still to be done before moving it into mainspace.
Thanks. -- KrebMarkt 08:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
While looking for something else, I discovered today that there is a Category:Dark Horse Comics titles as well as a Category:Dark Horse titles each with its own subdirectories. What I could not find was any sort of rhyme or reason behind the division nor any explanation other than an accident of creation as some editors omitted the 'Comics' part of the category name either directly or in the infobox. Nominally, since Category:Dark Horse Comics is the parent category, all the sub-cats should follow that pattern. I don't mind making the required updates to articles but I didn't want to step on any toes or cause any issues. - Dravecky ( talk) 17:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Now at Wikipedia:DRV#Electric Retard. Pcap ping 17:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Which is his true comics origin? [31] 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 18:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
why is it that Superman: World of New Krypton has sumary of 4 comics but says 12 out of 12 in infobox. also since those articles are small can;t they just be merged into superman storylines or publications articles.? most of the storyline articles i see have a small publications history and then rest of the page filled with just plot. Gman124 talk 15:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
So, it looks like a bunch of articles are about to come up for deletion - for better or worse. There are mucho blessings behind this movement, so it looks like it is moving forward with gusto. Currently there are two such comics-related articles up for PROD, Joshua Quagmire and Shamik Dasgupta, for example, as well as Thomas F. Gibson up for AFD. I wonder if there is a way to have a bot generate a list or something of unsourced BLPs with the comics project tag, so that we have an idea of just what we are dealing with here. I have the distinct feeling that undersourced BLP articles will be next on the chopping block, but it would be a good idea to now have a look at those with no citations at all. BOZ ( talk) 02:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You guys rock. I'll try and do some soon. Could someone start a dialog at the anime project to make sure they know what's going on, and post a link to it here? Thanks. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 04:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Down to 296 now, but of course most easy ones are gone already, leaving the hard and/or not really notable ones. Fram ( talk) 15:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I have gone through the list one by one and removed anything which had at least one citation by switching the template to {{ refimprove BLP}} (the issue of inadequate sourcing is one that will likely be addressed before much longer - at this time the focus is on nonexistant sourcing). There are still some 270+ articles on the list. If it helps, the list generated appears to be in order by article creation - thus, the first one on the list, John Dallas (comics), is currently an unsourced BLP from 2003! By contrast, Akira Akatsuki is at the bottom and was created a month ago. Might as well start at the top and work down. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 00:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
List done down to (and including): Christopher Reid
For those that don't fall in our purview:
Thanks, Emperor. Maybe looking at a few at a time will help us evaluate them easier. BOZ ( talk) 18:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
This in not the fellow up from the unsourced BLP RFC but a brand new spin-out one on unsourced content in BLP article.
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people/Content
Cordially -- KrebMarkt 07:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Apparently due to objections/concerns about having a section called "Fictional character biography" we now have two compromises: Thor (Marvel Comics) has "Character biography" and Hercules (Marvel Comics) has "Fictional biography". This seems a mess, that is bound to lead to confusion further down the road and more importantly is against WP:CMC/EG and WP:CMC/X, where the wording for this was arrived at after lengthy discussion (and based on broader guidelines like WP:WAF), so you'd need a similar consensus to overturn it. It has taken a while to get the various articles into a solid general structure that is pretty uniform across the project and it'd be a pity if we went back on this and just let anyone come along and make up the name for a section that is one of the biggest parts of a characters article (even if it shouldn't be, but that is another discussion).
Thoughts?
Personally, I think it is a bit clunky but seems the best solution to the idea that we do have to flag they are fictional characters and that angle would need overturning before we can really start rolling this one back. Ultimately, I don't care about the name (this side of it being horrible) as long as it is consistent (at least for articles at this level - as in-universe is rewritten or removed as an article matures and grows towards a GA there will be the need for other headers discussing the characters origin or the depiction of the personality but these can be decided on as the article evolves and I'm taking about the Bs and under here). ( Emperor ( talk) 01:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC))
Simply do away with sections describing a character's in-story history. By their nature that favor simply decribing what occurs in primary sources. Any details covered by secondary sources can be tackled in a "Characterization" section. WesleyDodds ( talk) 09:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
More edit warring there again today... 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 12:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
02:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I've added three things in the refs for Dormammu
Just looking for general thoughts on this. - J Greb ( talk) 17:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I have started a revision project to update and standardise all the non-Archie character MLJ/Archie/Red Circle titles during the next few months - ie those titles involving superhero and adventure characters. Impact and the new DC titles with MLJ/Archie characters will also be included. This is a corner of Wikipedia comics that isn't particularly well served; key titles such as Top-Notch Comics and a number of middle-importance characters are not referenced for example, and the Pep Comics page is high on irrelevant incidentals, low on references and citations and many links are bad. Many of the character pages are fairly garbled or inaccurate and irrelevant.
I realise this is a big task, but have the time, resources and inclination, so am quite happy to get on with the bulk of the work and let others clean up and adjust. Tenebrae ( talk) has already made some extremely useful changes and additions to the first page - Blue Ribbon Comics and made very helpful suggestions and comments to help me fine-tune the format and increase my knowledge of the editing conventions. Anyone else is more than welcome to do so, it can only produce a better body of work. Up so far, Blue Ribbon Comics, Top-Notch Comics, coming by Thursday Pep Comics revision.
Series titles will be dealt with first, characters after. I plan to deal with issues like the ongoing 'Black Hood/Black Hood Comics' amalgamations ( see: Talk:The_Black_Hood#Merger_proposal ) as they arise. Finally there'll be a tidy up sweep. Each relevant talk page will have a notification posted just before I start work on it, with an expected date of completion. You might find it worth a few hours wait after upping the revision/new page, despite endlessly going over the edit on-screen and on paper before publishing something always slips through and there's usually a few minor updates in the following couple of hours.
Any suggestions or comments appreciated here, at my talk page or on the relevant subject talk page. You'll find an ongoing list on how things are proceeding and what's planned on my home page User:Archiveangel, and individual talk pages will also have details. Again, feel free to comment.
One problem I will have is the 'Archie family' characters in any titles I deal with. I have no knowledge at all in the field, nor the time to deal with it. Anything anyone can do there would be muchly appreciated. I'm not looking for ownership of a bit of Wikipedia, just feel that the entries could be a lot better, and there's not a great amount of available external resource on the subject.
Thanks in advance for all input. Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 12:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Since many of these characters made their appearances in comics before television I felt this is forum was most relevant. I feel that Horde Trooper and Horde Prime should be merged into Evil Horde.
Tung Lashor,
Snake Face,
Sssqueeze into
Snake Men (Masters of the Universe) and
Double Trouble (She-Ra) and a few others into
List of She-Ra: Princess of Power characters does anyone have any opinions?
Dwanyewest ( talk) 01:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I haven't tried to merge them yet I asking people's opinion before I get my head bitten off again because some people will complain its notable.
Although there was a debate a few months ago about merging some He-man episodes but nothing became of it. Talk:List of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe episodes Dwanyewest ( talk) 03:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I created a new infobox at Template:Infobox comics character and publication by combining Template:Infobox comics character and Template:Infobox comics set and title. It works good for characters who have their own self titled series. An example is currently being used at Thor (Marvel Comics). - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 16:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Are we in consensus to go ahead and implement its use in articles as needed? - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Ummm... huh? 204.153.84.10 ( talk) 18:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
More on that. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 06:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Also appears here, probably where it best belongs. Maybe should be moved there from the Captain America article? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 05:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Just got an email from this guy (comic book artist) promoting himself on a tour of comic shops. Did a google search and founf his article. The article had few non-robot contributors, and reads like a press release.-- Drvanthorp ( talk) 18:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Do we have one that I can use on that article? - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 08:18, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Asgardian's case has now been accepted. If anyone is interested in contributing, please post a response here. Dave ( talk) 10:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
I was asked to take a look at what is going on with the article, but I need some editors with access to one or more the following comics to take a look at Talk:Sunturion#Contentious section. There is a link to the "before" and " after" in that section.
The list of issues is:
Thanks,
- J Greb ( talk) 00:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Right now there is a discussion here - Template talk:Avengers#Adding Cap's Kooky Quartet to make a dynamic alteration to the Avengers navbox.
On a smaller scale, something similar has already been tried out with the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants entry on {{ X-Men}}. It seems to work there to allow a little more inclusion of articles, as well as some clarity, while still limiting the 'box size on most articles.
Input at the Avengers template on this would be welcome. Especially since this may be an answer to "inclusion vs size" issues for other 'boxes.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Theres a discussion going on over at Talk:List of Avengers members#Heroic Age Team and would like additional input on wether we should allow a cover image to be used as source. Thank you. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Aren't these supposed to be kept separate? [44] 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 00:41, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
On the following Template:Dark Horse Comics films template, it has Alien v Predator listed. So, i wanted to as if those two movies qualify as being based on Dark Horse comics. aren;t the movies based on the the franchises? Gman124 talk 05:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC) also isnl;t the comic based on the alien and predator movies? Gman124 talk 05:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Just flagging the fact the plagiarism issue involving Nick Simmons and Incarnate (comics) has got a few people hot under the collar and it is spilling over to the relevant pages (and Radical Comics but I trimmed that right back). It is fairly much under control and will burn itself out (unless the mainstream media run with it tomorrow) but does need watching and might require protecting. Tidying everything up might have to wait a bit until this blows over. Discussion here: Talk:Nick Simmons#Regarding sources on the plagiarism claims. ( Emperor ( talk) 21:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC))
I think added input is required here. The "cosmic" sections always seem to be points of contention, as there is some grey and ultimately some things come down to opinion. David A has one view and I have another. Input would be appreciated here [45] in the "Anomalies" section, although the "Galactus inflating" section is also worth a read as some of the philosophy is thrashed out.
Asgardian ( talk) 04:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Please see here Thanks. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 04:30, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Boys' Ranch has been nominated for GA again. It came close last time and things like the image sue has been tightened up, but see what you can do to help (worth looking through the long GA assessment last time to check that the problems raised have all been addressed). There are some external links that look like they could be brought up into footnotes to firm things up a bit. ( Emperor ( talk) 23:26, 12 March 2010 (UTC))
This has been haunting me for a while. I've got slightly ahead with the MLJ/Archie project, User_talk:Archiveangel#Revision_of_Archie_.2F_MLJ_.2F_Red_Circle_Superhero_characters and think an occasional break from the task is probably sensible. The Trigan Empire page has been haunting me for a while; and I've just opened a box with most of the original run - in Look and Learn and around 400 pages I ripped out (fool!) to keep years ago; thankfully largely in sequence. Seems like a perfect opportunity to help improve the article - currently the page has 1 citation and gives a very incomplete and inaccurate even starter view; certainly nothing on the scale some lesser subjects from major comics companies get. Although there's not a lot of citeable material available, 95%-ish of the stories are 'net-inaccessible' and original copies hard to collect in a non-random manner, unless you can lay out £660 for the beautiful reprint series; so the information is not easily come by anywhere. However, I think the article can be improved considerably and don't mind getting the ball rolling.
Something is taking form slowly on User:Archiveangel/Trigan_Empire_revision after a first run at the early stuff and a re-shape. It will stay there while I work on it sporadically (and enjoy reliving my short-trousered childhood yet again). Comments on content, how to split (it looks like it will get long), sub-sections and other concerns, thoughts or general whatever are, as always, most welcome. Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 14:15, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
A major interim re-edit version is available now and needing criticism in order to produce a good article. I would appreciate any thoughts User:Archiveangel/Trigan_Empire_revision —Preceding undated comment added 00:52, 16 March 2010 (UTC).
I removed the text from Adolf Hitler (Marvel Comics) [49] as it came from the equivalent Marvel Database Project.
Now the Terms of Use say we can use material from other CC-BY-SA licensed sites, which they are flagged as being under.
I still don't feel attribution was clear enough to give credit to the authors (I've seen articles based on the 1911 Encyclopaedia which very clearly flag this and there was no mention on the page or in the edit summary) but as I read the ToU it could be added back in with a clearer attribution. However, I can't think I've seen this done within our remit (but it may be we usually have more editors and more solidly sourced material so we don't need to), so I'd like to clear it up (I also looked over at Talk:Wikia but found no similar issues raised).
So my question is: Is this desirable? Something we want to avoid? Or should we judge it on a case-by-case basis? If we do permit it what form of words would be best to flag this? ( Emperor ( talk) 05:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC))
It looks like wikia is CC-BY-SA 3.0, which I believe is compatible with our licensing. [52] I think including the URL to the wikia article, or maybe the article's history in the edit summary should cover it. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 02:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure an article on Adolf Hitler is necessary if there is already an article on the Hate Monger which is one and the same except for one being an clone and all. If this article doesn't get any larger than I would think there should be an merge for this article to be moved to Hate Monger. Jhenderson777 ( talk) 20:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
FYI. Proposal to rename Category:Wildstorm Comics to Category:Wildstorm. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 March 12#Wildstorm_Comics, where your contributions would be welcome. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm doing some shuffling around of pages so they're more accurate - Jackpot (Archie Comics) has been moved to Jackpot Comics for example, as it was an MLJ Publication imprint, therefore prior to the Archie Comics imprint. Some text moving will mean Black Hood will from after this weekend finally be for character details, while Black Hood Comics will be for the publication, tidying up a long-running problem. A new, short, page Hangman Comics will do the same in conjunction with a new Hangman (MLJ Comics) (incidentally clearing up an odd loop in the links), while next week a new page for MLJ Publications will mop up the smaller titles under the imprint and mean adjusting the Archie Comics page slightly.
However, there are a few anomalies which will need addressing soon, so I'm flagging them here before making any changes; to check consensus, and in the case of the second suggestion at least, because it may be contentious:
Any suggestions that will reduce my menacingly looming headache appreciated Archiveangel ( talk) 15:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
There is an RfC here about a proposed merge of certain individual character articles into List of The Adventures of Tintin characters. Any constructive comments would be appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 13:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Should articles on characters such as Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, and Venom describe them as Spider-Man's archenemy? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 04:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Not really. A hero can only have one archenemy, and the term should only be used if a 3rd party source can be referenced. If Stan Lee states somewhere that character X is character Y's arch-foe, then fine. Otherwise, just use "...X becomes one of Spider-Man's principal foes" in the Biography, and back it up by citing the appearances. Just don't place it in the lead paragraph at the top as that is an opinion, and that area is reserved for hard factual statements.
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 03:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Green Goblin : "Of all the costumed villains who've plagued Spider-Man over the years, the most flat-out unhinged and terrifying of them all is the Green Goblin."
Doctor Octopus : "Created by Stan Lee and artist Steve Ditko, Doc Ock, as he became known, has become one of the web slinger's most persistent and dangerous foes."
Venom : "What started out as a replacement costume for Spider-Man turned into one of the Marvel web-slinger's greatest nightmares."
This to me is much sexier than the use of the term "archenemy".
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 06:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
So no one would object to me removing the word "archenemy" from those articles then? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 02:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 03:03, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Green Goblin : Conroy, Mike. 500 Comicbook Villains, p.55, Collins & Brown, 2004.
Doctor Octopus: Conroy, Mike. 500 Comicbook Villains, pp.44-45, Collins & Brown, 2004.
Venom : Conroy, Mike. 500 Comicbook Villains, pp.358, Collins & Brown, 2004.
Done! Asgardian ( talk) 03:29, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
A character can indeed have more than one archenemy. Webster defines an archenemy as "a principal enemy."< http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/archenemy> This in no way implies that a character may have only one, it just means that if x is an archenemy of y, then x is one of the main enemies of y. Additionally, if we assume that each character may only have one archenemy, then this still leaves the possibility of an archenemy changing over time, due to an enemy being shown less frequently or dying. Because events in fiction are considered in the present tense when referred to, such as in the correct statement that, "in the comics, Spider-Man is 18, 19, and 20 years old." Because of this aspect of grammar, if the three villains in question were all Spider-Man's archenemy at at least one point in time (a likely case), then they can all be validly referred to as Spider-Man's archenemy. -- Darktower 12345 20:04, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I've been removing the word archenemy because I thought I had previously seen consensus which says we don't use that term without a reliable source. Rather than edit warring with Jhenderson777, I decided to come here and check to see if such consensus was legitimate. As that seems to be the case, I went ahead and removed it once more; I will leave it up to someone else to remove the term if they feel it is appropriate to do so. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 00:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
The definition cleared up that there can be more than one, some people seemed to be confused about that. It doesn't really make sense to need a source to quote a subjective (rather than objective) term, but it sounds easy enough so I personally think that's fine. This has already done in the Venom article, btw. -- Darktower 12345 04:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I've brought this up many times, see here and work back.
One thing I flagged up most recently was articles focusing on specific volumes of the comic book, like Silver Surfer, volume 3 and Iron Man (vol. 4) before we actually have a Silver Surfer (comic book) or an Iron Man (comic book) articles. The sensible approach as far as I'm concerned would be to move those and start refocusing them on the comic book and if any particular volume.
I hoped to do such a fix with Spider-Woman (comic book) but rather than take it to the talk page it was instead moved to Spider-Woman (2009 series) (see Talk:Spider-Woman (2009 series)#Remit).
Now before I start trying to sort this out I thought I'd throw it back open to the project as I only got one reply last time to address specific questions:
Anyway I'll hold off doing anything until/if we can thrash out a consensus as I don't want to be wasting my time (or anyone eles's, of course). ( Emperor ( talk) 04:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC))
Any other comments on this? Resolving this issue (one way or the other) is going to be tricky without wider input. ( Emperor ( talk) 16:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC))
Hello all,
I noticed that an editor has been busy populating Category:Comics by Steve Gerber. It's a sub-category of Category:Comics by author, the purpose of which is "this category should only contain sub-categories for authors who have both written and drawn the material for 'solo' comics or comic books." However, some of the comic book titles in the Steve Gerber category were not solely written and drawn by the late creator. In fact, the whole "Comics by Author" category makes me a bit queasy. I see that it survived a CfD via "no consensus". I'm content to let it stand, but it seems to me that we should not be giving the erroneous impression that one person, however talented, bears the sole responsibility for a comic book when in fact multiple people were involved. Any thoughts?
-- GentlemanGhost ( talk) 22:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
The reason why I removed the message about the purpose of the category was that before I began adding the the category, the category was already full of subcategories of "Comics by..." categories featuring creators responsible for only part of a comic (e.g. Comics by Alan Moore, Comics by Neil Gaiman). Since it seemed from these examples, that the description of the category was inaccurate, I removed it.-- Marcus Brute ( talk) 05:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
For more discussion on this see: Category talk:Comics by author. ( Emperor ( talk) 20:23, 22 March 2010 (UTC))
I have led to believe that characters such as He-man and Hordak don't use the correct character inbox so which one do I use as some of the Masters of the Universe characters. I used the the comic book inbox for the Snake Men (Masters of the Universe) since the began in comics but some characters first appearance was in television which one do I use. Dwanyewest ( talk) 23:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Well according to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television [58] I used the correct character template. Dwanyewest ( talk) 20:58, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Well since neither of us are gonna agree I discussed it here which is neutral
[59]
Dwanyewest (
talk)
21:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
This IP (and possibly others, I can't remember) has been going around posting possibly bogus "real names" for various comics characters and I'm getting tired of reverting them. Can anyone help me keep an eye on that? Thanks. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 12:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I invite you to come participate in a peer review of Portal:Speculative fiction. You can see (and participate in) the discussion here. Thank you for your time. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:28, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I've started a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#ComixTalk about whether ComixTalk should be consider reliable. Any input would be appreciated, regards, Guest9999 ( talk) 16:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Needs alot of work for anybody who has time Primarily the article is overly detail but could use a complete rewrite. -- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 21:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
[[Category:Postmodern superhero comics]] - this is a terrible idea - what is meant here by post-modern? what reliable sources are being used to suggest that a comic is 'post-modern', etc etc. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 08:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
This category seems awfully POV: What exactly constitutes a "postmodern" comic? The term, which originally meant art in the period following modern art, has been expanded to include postmodern literature, but the definitions and examples there don't appear to be particularly applicable to mainstream comic books, certainly. How do we decide what a "postmodern comic book" is? Is there a definition at some reliable source? It seems to me from a quick glance at this list that it contains a smorgasbord of self-referential stories, break-the-fourth-wall stories, and retcon stories. How exactly are these disparate things "postmodern" by the accepted definitions of postmodern literature?
There appears to be no discussion about any of this at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. I don't want to be a stick-in-the-mud, but for the sake of the Project's credibility, I believe these questions merit discussion.
Just noticed this Category:Mythology-based superheroes popping up as well. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 15:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Now we have Category:Paragon superheroes - this guy is a menace. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 21:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Seems they've retired and then popped up as a sock puppet ( Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marcus Brute) pretty much doing the same again. New categories include: Category:Kree, Category:Fictional extraterrestrial-human hybrids and Category:Superhero fiction/ Category:Superhero fiction by medium. Those last two being is a real pain as he has jammed it into the category structure largely based on the article superhero fiction which is a troubling article as most of it is/should be dealt with at superhero, the central article for this genre, and superhero comics - see my comments at Talk: Superhero fiction). Unpicking all that looks to be a headache.
He seems intent on hammering these categories in and not engaging with other editors who have concerns so keep an eye out as it might not be the last of this and it'll be pretty obvious if it starts again. ( Emperor ( talk) 03:06, 22 March 2010 (UTC))
Regarding the above
Please see:
Now... anyone want to tackle pruning the "Comics by... categories to match the parent's limiter?
- J Greb ( talk) 02:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles ( BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.
The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>> Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Archive 41/Unreferenced BLPs<<<
If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.
Thank you.
For instance, Calvin and Hobbes' infobox has |caption= Calvin and Hobbes took many wagon rides over the years. This one showed up on the cover of the first collection of comic strips. but it's not displaying under the image (which I'd prefer) or displayed when hovering over the image. Galatee ( talk) 22:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
An editor has started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Multiple use of commercial links regarding whether the use of multiple commercial links, such as official sites and Amazon.com, to reference air dates, publication dates, and release dates for media works is "spam". Said discussion stems from a second editor claiming it was and stripping all such references out of several FA and FL articles including episode and chapter lists, and attacking another editor as a "spammer" for referencing several more lists in a similar fashion. Additional views would be useful. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 13:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeus_(Marvel_Comics) is a complete transcription from the Official Handbook to the Marvel Universe. I mention it here because I don't have time to rewrite it. P.S. I've been checking old copies against some handbook issues I have, I already found Yondu had been an outright copy as well. I managed to fix that. Lots42 ( talk) 00:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm rewriting this page significantly to include citations and a bibliography - seems appropriate with the Marvel Comics announcement this week that they are publishing his old Marvelman material in June. Problem is the bibliography is around 150 items if all his known strips and editorships are included (I'm using Bails, Gifford, McAlpine and several published articles).
All thoughts welcome, here preferably. Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 21:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC) (who can't get the clock to accept British Summer Time so the sig is an hour out!)
Done and published for anyone to play with. There's a few notes on the relevant talk page. I have a feeling I'll learn quite a bit about how to do web references from this one, but thought it would be easier to learn from nice people correcting my mistakes than get a headache from trying to puzzle it all out from the rules or other pages (an activist, I'm afraid). Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 23:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
We really need to finalize what the biographical section is called. Is it "Character biography" or just "Biography"? "Summary" or "Character history"?
I agree with an earlier assessment that use of the term "Fictional" is clumsy as of course the characters are not real (also stated in the lead) and implies there is in fact a "real" non-fiction version of said Biography available?
Can we settle this one?
Asgardian ( talk) 01:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 35 | ← | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | → | Archive 45 |
Is Dominic Deegan: Oracle for Hire notable? Almost all the sources are primary, and I've been unable to find any reliable secondary sources for it, but given my terrible Google-fu I could use a little more help. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 05:47, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Can I get a second set of eyes on this?
In July, not long after Dave Elliott started legal proceedings against the parent company, an anon IP removed his name from the founders despite it being well sourced and this was quickly reverted [1]. A month later the IP returned and did the same edits and I restored the information today when this was pointed out (as it is getting quite a bit of attention). Then it gets interesting, the original creator of the article (who dropped in a giant slab of corporate speak [2] that had to be gutted) turned up and reverted my edit which I restored (as this is bordering on vandalism) and the IP and user have been heavily editing again removing the information. As an involved editor I don't want to protect the article or restore the information any further to avoid possible finger pointing and I throw it open to the Project to look over. ( Emperor ( talk) 22:55, 2 December 2009 (UTC))
I put some work into Jeff Butler. I've been expanding RPG designer/artist stubs, and his happened to come up, although the source I'm using talked about his comics work about as much as his RPG work. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 06:00, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Could we have some thoughts on this?
It looks like the editor did a straight cut-n-paste of the raw search results from the "reference" - Comic Book DB. (ATM I'm unable to access CBDB).
I've got a few problems with this
- J Greb ( talk) 23:30, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
What do people think about converting the banner to the meta template?
Personally, I think we'll lose functionality and freedom, and since I also believe the assessment process is meant to be bottom up rather than top down, I'm against doing it. I'm unsure the template will, when converted, be able to do all that it offers us now. I'm also unsure that we'd be able to maintain the template in-house or be able to adapt it to suit our purposes. I'm concerned given the tone of the conversation at Further problems with {{Astronomy}}. Currently we use the template to feed a lot of maintenance categories, which I was hoping to extend further once we get all the articles assessed. I've mentioned it to User:MSGJ in an attempt to sound out the issue, but MSGJ feels the conversation should be widened out. So, thoughts? Hiding T 09:30, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
In the current template, when used in the bannershell, it shows both the class and the importance. Thius is functionlaity which was introduced (AFAIK) by this project and has since been implemented by a number of other projects as well. As far as I can tell (from e.g. the sandbox test cases), this is not supported by the meta template. I would prefer to keep this functionality though, it is very easy (see e.g. Talk:Hergé for an example of this). It helps editors to easily find the main project(s) for a certain article, if that article is "claimed" by different projects. Fram ( talk) 13:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This article does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|creators=yes
and |image=yes
then the article will be in
Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of comics creators. — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk)
14:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to update you all on this. We have been discussing a few changes to the meta template to allow custom importance scales to be displayed in the nested version. I anticipate that this will be completed soon though. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 18:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Anyone else think of anything we've forgotten to convert? Hiding T 15:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Seems that on Dec 2 the bot providing "Quality by importance" wiped the table on the stats page - [6] Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/BotStatistics/Grading#Quality by importance.
Is this related to the new banner markup or another glitch?
- J Greb ( talk) 12:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Not sure if the title does it justice but there are some characters who fist appeared in Kingdom Come (comics) who have had an version introduced into the main DC Universe. KC is an alternate future and is now officially Earth-22, so these aren't just the same character on different parts of their timeline (so Superman won't become Superman (Kingdom Come), although writers might pick up some of the thumbs, but they might not - after all the KC story has been told so they aren't going to go down the same road again). This has come up a couple of times and both need some input to resolve:
It strikes me that resolving the Magog article will also help point the way to fixing the Kid Flash (Iris West) question. My gut, as I explain, is to have the two DCU characters as alternative versions for now, with an eye to possibly splitting them off (to articles like Impulse (Iris West)) if they stick around and in essence become the main character (as flipping it around so the KC character becomes the alternate version would be confusing).
Anyway I thought it best to raise here so we can try and get a unified answer, rather than possibly arriving at two different consensuses which will only cause a headache in the future. Soooooo thoughts? ( Emperor ( talk) 03:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC))
Well, not quite... :) But it is something we've been badly needing! Witness: [7], [8], and [9]. BOZ ( talk) 03:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
It's definitely a start, and an important one at that. Most of these character articles still have a long way to go to even get up to GA, but I say it's better to have one reliable secondary source than none. :) BOZ ( talk) 18:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree that it's a good step in the right direction (really great job), but I also agree that the formatting needs some improvement. It looks like a jumbled mess at present. Luminum ( talk) 14:16, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
If anyone wants to take a look, there's been edit warring at Scarlet Witch in the "Alternate versions" section for at least a week if not more. Luminum ( talk) 14:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Comments on replacing the redirect with an mini-article would be appreciated at Talk:Robin (Earth-Two)#reverted.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
This editor doesn't seem to understand that what he is posting is original research. A little help, here? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 05:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Y'know, it's getting to be that time of year again, when we look for Christmas related DYK entries. I think the subject of the Batman Christmas stories is probably notable and significant enough to have at least a short article, and I think it would definitely be less expected than a lot of other Christmas articles. Anyway, it is an article I would like to see. John Carter ( talk) 15:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Alright since someone created WP:Books/DC Comics, which is a Wikipedia-Book (aka a collection of articles which you can download or order in print, see Help:Books for the details on how to create or download or order books). I took the liberty of updating you project banner to handle the book-class (see the Signpost article), since the members of WikiProject Comics have a lot more clue than we have over at WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, and thus will be able to give better feedback on content, deletion discussions, etc... when Comics-related books are concerned. This is probably a bit brutal/out of the blue for most of you, so I would really recommend to go through Help:Books and Help:Books/for experts to see what this is all about.
Right now I found two comics-related books WP:Books/DC Comics and WP:Books/Superman (you can view the PDFs here and here). Needless to say a lot more books could be made (spiderman, x-men, batman, daredevil, brainiac, ...), so if you want to give it a try, you have lots of room. It really doesn't take long to create books (at least compared to writing new articles) since all you have to do is find existing articles and arrange them into something that makes sense. And if you create a book, don't forget to place {{ Wikipedia-Books}} on pages that should link to the books, otherwise no one will know these exist.
If you have questions, just ask and I'll answer as best I can. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 20:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Just thought I'd flag this in case anyone wishes to comment: Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#Tenebrae. ( Emperor ( talk) 00:52, 17 December 2009 (UTC))
I've requested a peer review for Bizenghast here. Please come share your thoughts. Kaguya-chan ( talk) 20:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to flag up the fact that someone has started superhero comics - I previously mentioned this a few times [10] [11] - in that first one suggesting we essentially split out the superhero comics section from superhero to a new article and this is it. What do people think? Is this doable? Or should we slowly expand that article and then work on tightening up the mentions in superhero? ( Emperor ( talk) 20:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC))
As one editor - Dave - insists in reinserting in Dormammu information from the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe and making speculative judgements re: the material [12] I think it is time to settle this once and for all. The Guidelines state [13] that such a source is discouraged as it compiles fictional facts.
Further, the OHOTMU can't be used as it is constantly proven wrong by the comics. Strength is a classic example, with characters performing feats well in excess of their supposed power range. The same applies to other traits. It can't be a case of taking what we like and discarding the rest. It also opens the door to a litanty of subjective judgements about Powers and abilities by editors about fictional matter. Articles should be (where possible) encyclopedia standard. Thoughts?
Asgardian ( talk) 03:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Couple of short thoughts:
With Dormammu... I think the salient point are:
There is room in that to a whether or not the character produces the magical effect inherently, through vestment as ruler of his dimension, or through spells and to add refs as to where the specific aspects are first shown or revealed in-story.
- J Greb ( talk) 00:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated V for Vendetta (film) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 20:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I had stalled on this for a long time because I didn't want to put the work in, but since I had the free time today I decided to get moving on things. ;) What I need most are diffs displaying the disputed behavior. I have some already here, but could use some more. I mean just a list of diffs to put in the first five or so categories I listed there, as I already have more than enough illustrative examples. Anything that you think is edit warring (mutiple similar edits to the same article in the span of a few days), incivility, inaccurate edit summaries, or other similar behavioral problems. List them here, or on the RFCU talk page - just the diffs is all I need, because I want people to draw their own conclusions.
Also, I have come up with a desired outcome and a description of the case based on the comments that have been gathered, and I would appreciate any responses to that on the talk page.
Thanks! BOZ ( talk) 17:34, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Whole lot of articles may need to be watched for the next week or so.
This issue was shipped this week, but with a Dec 30 release date. Right now there are torrents floating around of the issue as well as panels, pages, and spoilers cropping up blogs, forums, and review sites. CBR has noted that DC has asked those sites to remove at least the images. [14]
Right now I've reverted edits from 5 articles - Blackest Night, Mera (comics), Star Sapphire (comics), Wonder Woman, Publication history of Wonder Woman - and noted in those edit summaries that re-adding the info before 12/30/2009, the articles would be locked.
Given the scope of the story line, there's likely more than just these 5.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:11, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I've done a shakedown of Category:Comics templates and was wondering... Do we want to round up the various userboxes into a category?
- J Greb ( talk) 01:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm new to the project, and just thought I would introduce myself. Sean ( talk || contribs) 14:34, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Do you folks realize that "car", much less "cartoonist", doesn't even appear on that project page? What makes? I didn't search for caricature, but I'm pretty sure if "car" is not there, I'll be very disappointed! Unfree ( talk) 23:03, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Cartoonists and caricature. How's that? Good proposals, hey? Unfree ( talk) 23:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi there,
I'm just letting you know that the Asgardian RFC/U has begun.
Any user except for Asgardian or anyone certifying the basis for the RFC may post an "Outside view" below Asgardian's response section, detailing their own feelings on the matter. Likewise, any user may endorse the main statement, Asgardian's response, or any other view posted on the page.
Thank you for your participation. BOZ ( talk) 06:21, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Which image do you think should be used for the SHB box, the image from Flash v2 #149 or the image from Crisis on Infinite Earths #12? DrBat ( talk) 02:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
These characters need to merged I wish to here opinions
Ninjor (Masters of the Universe), Icer and Scare Glow need to be merged to List of Masters of the Universe characters
Blade (Masters of the Universe) and
Gwildor need to be merged
Masters of the Universe (film)
Snake Face needs to be merged to
Snake Men (Masters of the Universe)
Heroes
Clamp Champ need to be merged to List of Masters of the Universe characters
Zoar (He-Man) to
Sorceress of Castle Grayskull
List of She-Ra: Princess of Power characters needs reorganising
Dwanyewest ( talk) 02:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
FYI. Discussion is here. postdlf ( talk) 05:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I was just noticing the other day how many Good Articles we accumulated this year! That's some "Good" work, all! :)
BOZ ( talk) 01:49, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Based on {{ Legion of Doom (Super Friends)}} we've got 6 LoD titled articles:
And each one, aside from the first, seems to exist to just have an article.
Right now, I think this may be a case of 5 AfDs being needed (I believe a PROD, which would be reasonable for 2 of the articles, has a snowball's chance of sticking). Anyone see any other options?
- J Greb ( talk) 18:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
After a short discussion at WT:ANIME, which concluded that Firefox News is a WP:SPS and should not be used as a source, I have started a general discussion about the reliability of Firefox News at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Firefox.org/news/. I'm placing this notice here as a number of comics articles also reference Firefox News for information. — Farix ( t | c) 14:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Eternal edit war BOZ ( talk) 15:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Seems Barry Blair, of Aircel Comics, has passed away. [15] [16]. There was an article but it got deleted for neutrality problems but there were clearly sourcing issues too. If his passing generates some obits we can use, I am not sure if we want to make the original article return and then hack it into shape or start afresh. Nothing yet [17] but it is early days. ( Emperor ( talk) 03:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC))
Need your help to improve and reorganise W.I.T.C.H. and its related articles, as well as their structures. Discuss more at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disney#W.I.T.C.H.. -- JSH-alive talk • cont • mail 11:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Please participate in this discussion. postdlf ( talk) 16:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
[19] Yay or nay? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 06:47, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
I am massively trying to clean up Masters of the Universe I tried to nominate the following articles for deletion something has gone wrong. Slime Pit, Attak Trak, Battle Ram, Battle Ram, Talon Fighter, Wind Raider can anyone help? Dwanyewest ( talk) 23:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Asgardian continues to censor references from this page as he sees fit, no matter the Talk discussion. Could someone intervene please. Thank you.
Btw: The complaints page continues to fill out. Dave ( talk) 09:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi... I'm a board member/editor over at the Grand Comics Database. We just changed our name (in late December) via a charter vote from the Grand Comic-Book Database to the Grand Comics Database. I'd like to update the info here at Wikipedia, but am a little afraid of it being a COI. Also, technically, right now Grand Comics Database is a re-direct to Grand Comic-Book Database, so I'm not sure how to reverse the two (so that comic-book re-directs to comics). The website will be updated soon to reflect the change, the document website already has been updated.
The other thing is that there are two templates that refer to the name Template:gcd and Template:gcdb. It looks like the first one is rarely used. Where it is used, should it be switched over to the other. The gcdb one was updated when we updated our site, the gcd one still points at our old urls (which re-direct to our new ones anyways).
Thanks for any help! Bookcats ( talk) 19:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Building upon the above, I feel that the handbook justifications recurrently go overboard. In the Doctor Strange Talk Asgbardian has even stated that his opinon regarding what's in continuity or not is superior to Marvel editorial's stance stated through it. It should be a good idea to clarify the definition of how it can be used, to avoid a "nothing whatsoever" all-covering justification in a weapon-like manner that it much stronger than I have understood the regulation as intended.
Technically Asgardian already brought this matter here, and I adjusted the column according to what was said in response, but the discussion appears to have started again over at the Dormammu Talk regarding this, so renewed participation with input and clarifications is appreciated.
Another request for comment has been placed elsewhere by BOZ. Dave ( talk) 14:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
The new comics articles too is highlighting a lot of articles which are either separate articles on comics characters in certain animated series or lists of characters in such series, all from one user [20]. Looking at their talk page it seems a lot are being speedied or AfDed (some for including copyright violating material). I don't really know the relevant animations and wouldn't mind someone casting an eye over them because if they are all rocky then it is simply wasting everyone's time and it'd be best to try and get the editor to pause and consider each articles merits where, at the moment, they seem to be hammering them out. ( Emperor ( talk) 18:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC))
Opinions on this? 204.153.84.10 ( talk) 18:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Reverted Wikipedia does not endorse unnecessary censorship of profanity.-- Marcus Brute ( talk) 21:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 03:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Can I get some help over at B.C. (comic strip)? Someone with ties to the strip is editing it. She came in completely whitewashing any negative content, but I pointed her to WP:COI. I believe she has good intentions and is requesting my help in improving the article, but its not really my realm. A lot of the citations for press regarding religious themed strips have gone dead, instead of removing the content, I was hoping someone could find other supporting references and otherwise clean up MOS issues. Thanks. ccwaters ( talk) 20:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I have recently created the article List of comic book characters that have returned from the dead which I am currently expanding as much as I can. I would appreciate any help or additions that anyone is willing to give.-- Marcus Brute ( talk) 21:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
An anon editor has been asserting that the character died in the first X-Men film. Several editors have reverted him, per the old adage "no body, no death". The anon stated once and then again that he is more than willing to continue edit warring over this minor detail "for months" if needed. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 19:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I am attempting to create an article for Aphrodite (Marvel Comcis) who was retconed to be a seperate character from Venus (Marvel Comics). So my question is does a part of Venus's fictional history now become Aphrodite's? Also does she share the same first appearance as Venus or is it her first appearance as a stand alone character that counts? Samge goes for the character's creators. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 15:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Venus's early history shows that she was the daughter of Zeus and regularly interacted with the rest of Greco-Roman pantheon. The retcon made her into a siren seperate from the actuall goddess but mirrors her in name and appearance, which is source of their animosity. Although no attempt has been made to retrofit Venus's early history into Aphrodite's in the comic, one could easily assume that those stories actually belong to Aphrodite since now the comic claims Venus never was a goddess nor an Olympian though that could be easily cross over into WP:OR.
As far as the names are concerned a dialouge in X-Men vs. The Agents of Atlas #2 between the two characters states Aphrodite did go by both names at some point but chooses only to be refered by her Greek name now.
Also I see your point about the notablity of the Aphrodite article, once the sandbox is complete I may try to merge it into the Venus article in a similar fashion to this one on Enchantress (Marvel Comics) about two characters named Enchantress. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I've been thinking about this one for a while. Part of the problem you have, in separating the bios of the two characters, is that Aphrodite-Venus has appeared in Olympus with the other Olympians before, so clearly that was meant to be the goddess (wouldn't want some silly water fairy traipsing around with the very gods themselves!). In some cases, who was who may not be entirely clear. I'd say any time you have Venus working directly with the other Olympians, you're looking at the goddess, and any time it's dealing with the 1940s character's storyline it's clearly the naiad, but any other time it's kind of up in the air. BOZ ( talk) 05:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the help I merged the sandbox into Venus (Marvel Comics) however the article could still use more clean-up and sorting. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 20:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Help! We have a relatively new (well, been around for a year but has only worked on Medusa (comics) thus far) editor who has been adding some plot summary that seems to have a bunch of NPOV and OR violations, etc. We'd rather not chase new people off, so what's the best way to approach this? Latest edits are here, today. Tell you the truth, that section was a bit of a mess in the first place so now that I have a second thought it may not really be their fault. BOZ ( talk) 05:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here
If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip
If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip
Ikip 02:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.
The two opposing positions which have the most support is:
Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.
Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.
Jacques Martin (comics) has sadly passed away. I imagine there will be quite a few obits and if anyone knows of a good image we can use that'd be handy. ( Emperor ( talk) 23:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC))
Steve Purcell has been nominated for GA and seems to have missed out once before so anything that can be done to help would be good. ( Emperor ( talk) 00:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC))
Some has started Silver Surfer, volume 3 and we already had Iron Man (vol. 4). now I've raised this topic before [26] [27] and there has been some concern about this kind of thing (and at least one has been merged back to the main page - Batgirl (comic book)). Now I can see the case for limited numbers of these where the character has a long history as we have to split a lot out (e.g. Superman (comic book), Batman (comic book), Wolverine (comic book), Green Lantern (comic book)) but this seems to go one further and is starting an article on one specific series out of many others. I can, perhaps see an argument made for Iron Man (comic book) but surely this should be started and expanded before we even think about splitting it again? Thoughts? ( Emperor ( talk) 20:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC))
the korean Manhwa article for "magical JXR" is currently being made. i started it here User:Bread Ninja/Magical JXR. I dont have a lot of time to work on it due to other articles, but it will be great if someone added refs plot, and/or reception. Bread Ninja ( talk) 15:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
This discussion seems to have attracted little notice. 204.153.84.10 ( talk) 20:27, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
The article discribes this as a storyline but from what I've gathered this is more a new era in Marvel Comics or a new direction the comic company is taking as far as content and storytelling. It might encompass several storylines or crossover events of there own. Am I or the article incorrect or is just too soon to tell as details are still vague? - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Recently, Toonopedia came up as a source for some page content and I browsed around and had some questions about it. As far as I can tell, the writer, Donald Markstein is just writing whatever he wants and his content doesn't appear to be published. It's trademarked, which is where the fuzziness comes in, but it doesn't appear that the material itself is legitimately published, just that the content is covered by an umbrella copyright. Is it a reliable source? If so, it'd be a nice resource to use, though would it then fall into the problem we have using other encyclopedias' contents? If anyone has any experience with it, I'd love some clarification. Luminum ( talk) 06:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I wrote in my user space a start article on Baru (Hervé Barulea) and i would like the inputs from the Comics project to see what have still to be done before moving it into mainspace.
Thanks. -- KrebMarkt 08:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
While looking for something else, I discovered today that there is a Category:Dark Horse Comics titles as well as a Category:Dark Horse titles each with its own subdirectories. What I could not find was any sort of rhyme or reason behind the division nor any explanation other than an accident of creation as some editors omitted the 'Comics' part of the category name either directly or in the infobox. Nominally, since Category:Dark Horse Comics is the parent category, all the sub-cats should follow that pattern. I don't mind making the required updates to articles but I didn't want to step on any toes or cause any issues. - Dravecky ( talk) 17:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Now at Wikipedia:DRV#Electric Retard. Pcap ping 17:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Which is his true comics origin? [31] 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 18:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
why is it that Superman: World of New Krypton has sumary of 4 comics but says 12 out of 12 in infobox. also since those articles are small can;t they just be merged into superman storylines or publications articles.? most of the storyline articles i see have a small publications history and then rest of the page filled with just plot. Gman124 talk 15:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
So, it looks like a bunch of articles are about to come up for deletion - for better or worse. There are mucho blessings behind this movement, so it looks like it is moving forward with gusto. Currently there are two such comics-related articles up for PROD, Joshua Quagmire and Shamik Dasgupta, for example, as well as Thomas F. Gibson up for AFD. I wonder if there is a way to have a bot generate a list or something of unsourced BLPs with the comics project tag, so that we have an idea of just what we are dealing with here. I have the distinct feeling that undersourced BLP articles will be next on the chopping block, but it would be a good idea to now have a look at those with no citations at all. BOZ ( talk) 02:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You guys rock. I'll try and do some soon. Could someone start a dialog at the anime project to make sure they know what's going on, and post a link to it here? Thanks. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 04:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Down to 296 now, but of course most easy ones are gone already, leaving the hard and/or not really notable ones. Fram ( talk) 15:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I have gone through the list one by one and removed anything which had at least one citation by switching the template to {{ refimprove BLP}} (the issue of inadequate sourcing is one that will likely be addressed before much longer - at this time the focus is on nonexistant sourcing). There are still some 270+ articles on the list. If it helps, the list generated appears to be in order by article creation - thus, the first one on the list, John Dallas (comics), is currently an unsourced BLP from 2003! By contrast, Akira Akatsuki is at the bottom and was created a month ago. Might as well start at the top and work down. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 00:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
List done down to (and including): Christopher Reid
For those that don't fall in our purview:
Thanks, Emperor. Maybe looking at a few at a time will help us evaluate them easier. BOZ ( talk) 18:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
This in not the fellow up from the unsourced BLP RFC but a brand new spin-out one on unsourced content in BLP article.
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people/Content
Cordially -- KrebMarkt 07:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Apparently due to objections/concerns about having a section called "Fictional character biography" we now have two compromises: Thor (Marvel Comics) has "Character biography" and Hercules (Marvel Comics) has "Fictional biography". This seems a mess, that is bound to lead to confusion further down the road and more importantly is against WP:CMC/EG and WP:CMC/X, where the wording for this was arrived at after lengthy discussion (and based on broader guidelines like WP:WAF), so you'd need a similar consensus to overturn it. It has taken a while to get the various articles into a solid general structure that is pretty uniform across the project and it'd be a pity if we went back on this and just let anyone come along and make up the name for a section that is one of the biggest parts of a characters article (even if it shouldn't be, but that is another discussion).
Thoughts?
Personally, I think it is a bit clunky but seems the best solution to the idea that we do have to flag they are fictional characters and that angle would need overturning before we can really start rolling this one back. Ultimately, I don't care about the name (this side of it being horrible) as long as it is consistent (at least for articles at this level - as in-universe is rewritten or removed as an article matures and grows towards a GA there will be the need for other headers discussing the characters origin or the depiction of the personality but these can be decided on as the article evolves and I'm taking about the Bs and under here). ( Emperor ( talk) 01:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC))
Simply do away with sections describing a character's in-story history. By their nature that favor simply decribing what occurs in primary sources. Any details covered by secondary sources can be tackled in a "Characterization" section. WesleyDodds ( talk) 09:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
More edit warring there again today... 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 12:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
02:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I've added three things in the refs for Dormammu
Just looking for general thoughts on this. - J Greb ( talk) 17:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
I have started a revision project to update and standardise all the non-Archie character MLJ/Archie/Red Circle titles during the next few months - ie those titles involving superhero and adventure characters. Impact and the new DC titles with MLJ/Archie characters will also be included. This is a corner of Wikipedia comics that isn't particularly well served; key titles such as Top-Notch Comics and a number of middle-importance characters are not referenced for example, and the Pep Comics page is high on irrelevant incidentals, low on references and citations and many links are bad. Many of the character pages are fairly garbled or inaccurate and irrelevant.
I realise this is a big task, but have the time, resources and inclination, so am quite happy to get on with the bulk of the work and let others clean up and adjust. Tenebrae ( talk) has already made some extremely useful changes and additions to the first page - Blue Ribbon Comics and made very helpful suggestions and comments to help me fine-tune the format and increase my knowledge of the editing conventions. Anyone else is more than welcome to do so, it can only produce a better body of work. Up so far, Blue Ribbon Comics, Top-Notch Comics, coming by Thursday Pep Comics revision.
Series titles will be dealt with first, characters after. I plan to deal with issues like the ongoing 'Black Hood/Black Hood Comics' amalgamations ( see: Talk:The_Black_Hood#Merger_proposal ) as they arise. Finally there'll be a tidy up sweep. Each relevant talk page will have a notification posted just before I start work on it, with an expected date of completion. You might find it worth a few hours wait after upping the revision/new page, despite endlessly going over the edit on-screen and on paper before publishing something always slips through and there's usually a few minor updates in the following couple of hours.
Any suggestions or comments appreciated here, at my talk page or on the relevant subject talk page. You'll find an ongoing list on how things are proceeding and what's planned on my home page User:Archiveangel, and individual talk pages will also have details. Again, feel free to comment.
One problem I will have is the 'Archie family' characters in any titles I deal with. I have no knowledge at all in the field, nor the time to deal with it. Anything anyone can do there would be muchly appreciated. I'm not looking for ownership of a bit of Wikipedia, just feel that the entries could be a lot better, and there's not a great amount of available external resource on the subject.
Thanks in advance for all input. Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 12:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Since many of these characters made their appearances in comics before television I felt this is forum was most relevant. I feel that Horde Trooper and Horde Prime should be merged into Evil Horde.
Tung Lashor,
Snake Face,
Sssqueeze into
Snake Men (Masters of the Universe) and
Double Trouble (She-Ra) and a few others into
List of She-Ra: Princess of Power characters does anyone have any opinions?
Dwanyewest ( talk) 01:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I haven't tried to merge them yet I asking people's opinion before I get my head bitten off again because some people will complain its notable.
Although there was a debate a few months ago about merging some He-man episodes but nothing became of it. Talk:List of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe episodes Dwanyewest ( talk) 03:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I created a new infobox at Template:Infobox comics character and publication by combining Template:Infobox comics character and Template:Infobox comics set and title. It works good for characters who have their own self titled series. An example is currently being used at Thor (Marvel Comics). - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 16:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Are we in consensus to go ahead and implement its use in articles as needed? - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Ummm... huh? 204.153.84.10 ( talk) 18:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
More on that. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 06:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Also appears here, probably where it best belongs. Maybe should be moved there from the Captain America article? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 05:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Just got an email from this guy (comic book artist) promoting himself on a tour of comic shops. Did a google search and founf his article. The article had few non-robot contributors, and reads like a press release.-- Drvanthorp ( talk) 18:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Do we have one that I can use on that article? - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 08:18, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Asgardian's case has now been accepted. If anyone is interested in contributing, please post a response here. Dave ( talk) 10:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
I was asked to take a look at what is going on with the article, but I need some editors with access to one or more the following comics to take a look at Talk:Sunturion#Contentious section. There is a link to the "before" and " after" in that section.
The list of issues is:
Thanks,
- J Greb ( talk) 00:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Right now there is a discussion here - Template talk:Avengers#Adding Cap's Kooky Quartet to make a dynamic alteration to the Avengers navbox.
On a smaller scale, something similar has already been tried out with the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants entry on {{ X-Men}}. It seems to work there to allow a little more inclusion of articles, as well as some clarity, while still limiting the 'box size on most articles.
Input at the Avengers template on this would be welcome. Especially since this may be an answer to "inclusion vs size" issues for other 'boxes.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Theres a discussion going on over at Talk:List of Avengers members#Heroic Age Team and would like additional input on wether we should allow a cover image to be used as source. Thank you. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Aren't these supposed to be kept separate? [44] 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 00:41, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
On the following Template:Dark Horse Comics films template, it has Alien v Predator listed. So, i wanted to as if those two movies qualify as being based on Dark Horse comics. aren;t the movies based on the the franchises? Gman124 talk 05:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC) also isnl;t the comic based on the alien and predator movies? Gman124 talk 05:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Just flagging the fact the plagiarism issue involving Nick Simmons and Incarnate (comics) has got a few people hot under the collar and it is spilling over to the relevant pages (and Radical Comics but I trimmed that right back). It is fairly much under control and will burn itself out (unless the mainstream media run with it tomorrow) but does need watching and might require protecting. Tidying everything up might have to wait a bit until this blows over. Discussion here: Talk:Nick Simmons#Regarding sources on the plagiarism claims. ( Emperor ( talk) 21:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC))
I think added input is required here. The "cosmic" sections always seem to be points of contention, as there is some grey and ultimately some things come down to opinion. David A has one view and I have another. Input would be appreciated here [45] in the "Anomalies" section, although the "Galactus inflating" section is also worth a read as some of the philosophy is thrashed out.
Asgardian ( talk) 04:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Please see here Thanks. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 04:30, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Boys' Ranch has been nominated for GA again. It came close last time and things like the image sue has been tightened up, but see what you can do to help (worth looking through the long GA assessment last time to check that the problems raised have all been addressed). There are some external links that look like they could be brought up into footnotes to firm things up a bit. ( Emperor ( talk) 23:26, 12 March 2010 (UTC))
This has been haunting me for a while. I've got slightly ahead with the MLJ/Archie project, User_talk:Archiveangel#Revision_of_Archie_.2F_MLJ_.2F_Red_Circle_Superhero_characters and think an occasional break from the task is probably sensible. The Trigan Empire page has been haunting me for a while; and I've just opened a box with most of the original run - in Look and Learn and around 400 pages I ripped out (fool!) to keep years ago; thankfully largely in sequence. Seems like a perfect opportunity to help improve the article - currently the page has 1 citation and gives a very incomplete and inaccurate even starter view; certainly nothing on the scale some lesser subjects from major comics companies get. Although there's not a lot of citeable material available, 95%-ish of the stories are 'net-inaccessible' and original copies hard to collect in a non-random manner, unless you can lay out £660 for the beautiful reprint series; so the information is not easily come by anywhere. However, I think the article can be improved considerably and don't mind getting the ball rolling.
Something is taking form slowly on User:Archiveangel/Trigan_Empire_revision after a first run at the early stuff and a re-shape. It will stay there while I work on it sporadically (and enjoy reliving my short-trousered childhood yet again). Comments on content, how to split (it looks like it will get long), sub-sections and other concerns, thoughts or general whatever are, as always, most welcome. Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 14:15, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
A major interim re-edit version is available now and needing criticism in order to produce a good article. I would appreciate any thoughts User:Archiveangel/Trigan_Empire_revision —Preceding undated comment added 00:52, 16 March 2010 (UTC).
I removed the text from Adolf Hitler (Marvel Comics) [49] as it came from the equivalent Marvel Database Project.
Now the Terms of Use say we can use material from other CC-BY-SA licensed sites, which they are flagged as being under.
I still don't feel attribution was clear enough to give credit to the authors (I've seen articles based on the 1911 Encyclopaedia which very clearly flag this and there was no mention on the page or in the edit summary) but as I read the ToU it could be added back in with a clearer attribution. However, I can't think I've seen this done within our remit (but it may be we usually have more editors and more solidly sourced material so we don't need to), so I'd like to clear it up (I also looked over at Talk:Wikia but found no similar issues raised).
So my question is: Is this desirable? Something we want to avoid? Or should we judge it on a case-by-case basis? If we do permit it what form of words would be best to flag this? ( Emperor ( talk) 05:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC))
It looks like wikia is CC-BY-SA 3.0, which I believe is compatible with our licensing. [52] I think including the URL to the wikia article, or maybe the article's history in the edit summary should cover it. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 02:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure an article on Adolf Hitler is necessary if there is already an article on the Hate Monger which is one and the same except for one being an clone and all. If this article doesn't get any larger than I would think there should be an merge for this article to be moved to Hate Monger. Jhenderson777 ( talk) 20:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
FYI. Proposal to rename Category:Wildstorm Comics to Category:Wildstorm. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 March 12#Wildstorm_Comics, where your contributions would be welcome. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm doing some shuffling around of pages so they're more accurate - Jackpot (Archie Comics) has been moved to Jackpot Comics for example, as it was an MLJ Publication imprint, therefore prior to the Archie Comics imprint. Some text moving will mean Black Hood will from after this weekend finally be for character details, while Black Hood Comics will be for the publication, tidying up a long-running problem. A new, short, page Hangman Comics will do the same in conjunction with a new Hangman (MLJ Comics) (incidentally clearing up an odd loop in the links), while next week a new page for MLJ Publications will mop up the smaller titles under the imprint and mean adjusting the Archie Comics page slightly.
However, there are a few anomalies which will need addressing soon, so I'm flagging them here before making any changes; to check consensus, and in the case of the second suggestion at least, because it may be contentious:
Any suggestions that will reduce my menacingly looming headache appreciated Archiveangel ( talk) 15:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
There is an RfC here about a proposed merge of certain individual character articles into List of The Adventures of Tintin characters. Any constructive comments would be appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 13:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Should articles on characters such as Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, and Venom describe them as Spider-Man's archenemy? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 04:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Not really. A hero can only have one archenemy, and the term should only be used if a 3rd party source can be referenced. If Stan Lee states somewhere that character X is character Y's arch-foe, then fine. Otherwise, just use "...X becomes one of Spider-Man's principal foes" in the Biography, and back it up by citing the appearances. Just don't place it in the lead paragraph at the top as that is an opinion, and that area is reserved for hard factual statements.
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 03:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Green Goblin : "Of all the costumed villains who've plagued Spider-Man over the years, the most flat-out unhinged and terrifying of them all is the Green Goblin."
Doctor Octopus : "Created by Stan Lee and artist Steve Ditko, Doc Ock, as he became known, has become one of the web slinger's most persistent and dangerous foes."
Venom : "What started out as a replacement costume for Spider-Man turned into one of the Marvel web-slinger's greatest nightmares."
This to me is much sexier than the use of the term "archenemy".
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 06:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
So no one would object to me removing the word "archenemy" from those articles then? 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 02:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 03:03, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Green Goblin : Conroy, Mike. 500 Comicbook Villains, p.55, Collins & Brown, 2004.
Doctor Octopus: Conroy, Mike. 500 Comicbook Villains, pp.44-45, Collins & Brown, 2004.
Venom : Conroy, Mike. 500 Comicbook Villains, pp.358, Collins & Brown, 2004.
Done! Asgardian ( talk) 03:29, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
A character can indeed have more than one archenemy. Webster defines an archenemy as "a principal enemy."< http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/archenemy> This in no way implies that a character may have only one, it just means that if x is an archenemy of y, then x is one of the main enemies of y. Additionally, if we assume that each character may only have one archenemy, then this still leaves the possibility of an archenemy changing over time, due to an enemy being shown less frequently or dying. Because events in fiction are considered in the present tense when referred to, such as in the correct statement that, "in the comics, Spider-Man is 18, 19, and 20 years old." Because of this aspect of grammar, if the three villains in question were all Spider-Man's archenemy at at least one point in time (a likely case), then they can all be validly referred to as Spider-Man's archenemy. -- Darktower 12345 20:04, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I've been removing the word archenemy because I thought I had previously seen consensus which says we don't use that term without a reliable source. Rather than edit warring with Jhenderson777, I decided to come here and check to see if such consensus was legitimate. As that seems to be the case, I went ahead and removed it once more; I will leave it up to someone else to remove the term if they feel it is appropriate to do so. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 00:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
The definition cleared up that there can be more than one, some people seemed to be confused about that. It doesn't really make sense to need a source to quote a subjective (rather than objective) term, but it sounds easy enough so I personally think that's fine. This has already done in the Venom article, btw. -- Darktower 12345 04:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I've brought this up many times, see here and work back.
One thing I flagged up most recently was articles focusing on specific volumes of the comic book, like Silver Surfer, volume 3 and Iron Man (vol. 4) before we actually have a Silver Surfer (comic book) or an Iron Man (comic book) articles. The sensible approach as far as I'm concerned would be to move those and start refocusing them on the comic book and if any particular volume.
I hoped to do such a fix with Spider-Woman (comic book) but rather than take it to the talk page it was instead moved to Spider-Woman (2009 series) (see Talk:Spider-Woman (2009 series)#Remit).
Now before I start trying to sort this out I thought I'd throw it back open to the project as I only got one reply last time to address specific questions:
Anyway I'll hold off doing anything until/if we can thrash out a consensus as I don't want to be wasting my time (or anyone eles's, of course). ( Emperor ( talk) 04:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC))
Any other comments on this? Resolving this issue (one way or the other) is going to be tricky without wider input. ( Emperor ( talk) 16:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC))
Hello all,
I noticed that an editor has been busy populating Category:Comics by Steve Gerber. It's a sub-category of Category:Comics by author, the purpose of which is "this category should only contain sub-categories for authors who have both written and drawn the material for 'solo' comics or comic books." However, some of the comic book titles in the Steve Gerber category were not solely written and drawn by the late creator. In fact, the whole "Comics by Author" category makes me a bit queasy. I see that it survived a CfD via "no consensus". I'm content to let it stand, but it seems to me that we should not be giving the erroneous impression that one person, however talented, bears the sole responsibility for a comic book when in fact multiple people were involved. Any thoughts?
-- GentlemanGhost ( talk) 22:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
The reason why I removed the message about the purpose of the category was that before I began adding the the category, the category was already full of subcategories of "Comics by..." categories featuring creators responsible for only part of a comic (e.g. Comics by Alan Moore, Comics by Neil Gaiman). Since it seemed from these examples, that the description of the category was inaccurate, I removed it.-- Marcus Brute ( talk) 05:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
For more discussion on this see: Category talk:Comics by author. ( Emperor ( talk) 20:23, 22 March 2010 (UTC))
I have led to believe that characters such as He-man and Hordak don't use the correct character inbox so which one do I use as some of the Masters of the Universe characters. I used the the comic book inbox for the Snake Men (Masters of the Universe) since the began in comics but some characters first appearance was in television which one do I use. Dwanyewest ( talk) 23:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Well according to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television [58] I used the correct character template. Dwanyewest ( talk) 20:58, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Well since neither of us are gonna agree I discussed it here which is neutral
[59]
Dwanyewest (
talk)
21:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
This IP (and possibly others, I can't remember) has been going around posting possibly bogus "real names" for various comics characters and I'm getting tired of reverting them. Can anyone help me keep an eye on that? Thanks. 24.148.0.83 ( talk) 12:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I invite you to come participate in a peer review of Portal:Speculative fiction. You can see (and participate in) the discussion here. Thank you for your time. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:28, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I've started a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#ComixTalk about whether ComixTalk should be consider reliable. Any input would be appreciated, regards, Guest9999 ( talk) 16:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Needs alot of work for anybody who has time Primarily the article is overly detail but could use a complete rewrite. -- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 21:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
[[Category:Postmodern superhero comics]] - this is a terrible idea - what is meant here by post-modern? what reliable sources are being used to suggest that a comic is 'post-modern', etc etc. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 08:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
This category seems awfully POV: What exactly constitutes a "postmodern" comic? The term, which originally meant art in the period following modern art, has been expanded to include postmodern literature, but the definitions and examples there don't appear to be particularly applicable to mainstream comic books, certainly. How do we decide what a "postmodern comic book" is? Is there a definition at some reliable source? It seems to me from a quick glance at this list that it contains a smorgasbord of self-referential stories, break-the-fourth-wall stories, and retcon stories. How exactly are these disparate things "postmodern" by the accepted definitions of postmodern literature?
There appears to be no discussion about any of this at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. I don't want to be a stick-in-the-mud, but for the sake of the Project's credibility, I believe these questions merit discussion.
Just noticed this Category:Mythology-based superheroes popping up as well. - TriiipleThreat ( talk) 15:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Now we have Category:Paragon superheroes - this guy is a menace. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 21:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Seems they've retired and then popped up as a sock puppet ( Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marcus Brute) pretty much doing the same again. New categories include: Category:Kree, Category:Fictional extraterrestrial-human hybrids and Category:Superhero fiction/ Category:Superhero fiction by medium. Those last two being is a real pain as he has jammed it into the category structure largely based on the article superhero fiction which is a troubling article as most of it is/should be dealt with at superhero, the central article for this genre, and superhero comics - see my comments at Talk: Superhero fiction). Unpicking all that looks to be a headache.
He seems intent on hammering these categories in and not engaging with other editors who have concerns so keep an eye out as it might not be the last of this and it'll be pretty obvious if it starts again. ( Emperor ( talk) 03:06, 22 March 2010 (UTC))
Regarding the above
Please see:
Now... anyone want to tackle pruning the "Comics by... categories to match the parent's limiter?
- J Greb ( talk) 02:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles ( BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.
The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>> Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Archive 41/Unreferenced BLPs<<<
If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.
Thank you.
For instance, Calvin and Hobbes' infobox has |caption= Calvin and Hobbes took many wagon rides over the years. This one showed up on the cover of the first collection of comic strips. but it's not displaying under the image (which I'd prefer) or displayed when hovering over the image. Galatee ( talk) 22:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
An editor has started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Multiple use of commercial links regarding whether the use of multiple commercial links, such as official sites and Amazon.com, to reference air dates, publication dates, and release dates for media works is "spam". Said discussion stems from a second editor claiming it was and stripping all such references out of several FA and FL articles including episode and chapter lists, and attacking another editor as a "spammer" for referencing several more lists in a similar fashion. Additional views would be useful. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 13:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeus_(Marvel_Comics) is a complete transcription from the Official Handbook to the Marvel Universe. I mention it here because I don't have time to rewrite it. P.S. I've been checking old copies against some handbook issues I have, I already found Yondu had been an outright copy as well. I managed to fix that. Lots42 ( talk) 00:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm rewriting this page significantly to include citations and a bibliography - seems appropriate with the Marvel Comics announcement this week that they are publishing his old Marvelman material in June. Problem is the bibliography is around 150 items if all his known strips and editorships are included (I'm using Bails, Gifford, McAlpine and several published articles).
All thoughts welcome, here preferably. Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 21:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC) (who can't get the clock to accept British Summer Time so the sig is an hour out!)
Done and published for anyone to play with. There's a few notes on the relevant talk page. I have a feeling I'll learn quite a bit about how to do web references from this one, but thought it would be easier to learn from nice people correcting my mistakes than get a headache from trying to puzzle it all out from the rules or other pages (an activist, I'm afraid). Cheers! Archiveangel ( talk) 23:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
We really need to finalize what the biographical section is called. Is it "Character biography" or just "Biography"? "Summary" or "Character history"?
I agree with an earlier assessment that use of the term "Fictional" is clumsy as of course the characters are not real (also stated in the lead) and implies there is in fact a "real" non-fiction version of said Biography available?
Can we settle this one?
Asgardian ( talk) 01:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)