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 40 | ← | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | → | Archive 50 |
The article Rook (comics) is written like an essay and includes sentences in the first person. Would someone more knowledgeable in Warren magazines care to take a look at it? -- Pc13 ( talk) 12:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Our esteemed colleague, J Greb has recently removed the character navoboxes from The Avengers film project under the rationale that the film is not centered on any individual character. While this is true I am of the opinion that this film is important to the understanding of these characters (atleast the big four) in other media. These boxes provide ease of navigation for readers reseachering a specific character and if one were navigating between Captain America or Thor films leaving out The Avengers seems inappropiate, especially since they are within the same fictional universe. I have not challegend J Greb's good faith edits but other editors have leading to some minor disputes, so I am asking to build concensus here either in support or against the inclusion of these navboxes.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
I proposed the following mergers:
I hope to have some opinions. Bye -- Crazy runner ( talk) 19:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tweet Me Harder. Thanks, rʨanaɢ ( talk) 18:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The article One-Above-All is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One-Above-All until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. MBelgrano ( talk) 23:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
I have opened a discussion about the manual of style that impacts all of the comic book articles we edit. Please post your opinion there. Spidey 104 14:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Based on [1] we may want to keep an eye on Fantastic Four, Mister Fantastic, Invisible Woman, Thing (comics), and Spider-Man for "new" infobox images.
- J Greb ( talk) 02:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
The announcement of the new Spider-Man film's title The Amazing Spider-Man led me to review the topics that share this title. As a result, I've requested a move that can either affect the comic book series article or the disambiguation page. The discussion can be seen here. Erik ( talk | contribs) 21:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Additional eyes and input could be used at Talk:Ultimate Comics: Captain America.
Thanks
- J Greb ( talk) 00:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Dwayne was arguably the greatest, finest, most decent, and largely unsung, current voice in western animation. I was greatly saddened to hear that he had passed away. Is there anything we can do here to bring attention to and celebrate his legacy? Dave ( talk) 15:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Most of the information within these articles is redundantly repeated in the other articles. I understand that Aqualad and Tempest (DC Comics) work as a hybrid disambiguation/article, but their current state are violations of WP:Content forking and WP:CRUFT. For example, if I were to search for Garth/Tempest without knowing his location, I'd write Tempest, be directed to Tempest (disambiguation) where I'd have to read and choose to go to Tempest (comics). Then, I'd have to go to Tempest (DC Comics) just to find out that I should've gone to Garth (comics) instead.
As for the contents of Tempest (DC Comics), it just includes a very short copped out summary of the Joshua Clay and Garth articles which is terribly unneeded because Tempest (comics) already lists both articles in the disambiguation page. Basically, what I propose is that Tempest (DC Comics) be redirected to Tempest (comics) while Aqualad be redirected to Garth (comics). Because only two characters have owned the "Aqualad" moniker, per WP:HATNOTE/ WP:SIMILAR, a hatnote at the top of Garth that directs you to Jackson Hyde is sufficient.
A discussion at the Village Pump regarding categories that are mostly used for comic book characters was archived without reaching consensus. I've raised the issue again, and on the suggestion of another user am announcing it here in the hope of attracting more discussion. Feezo (Talk) 04:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of DC Comics characters who can fly is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DC Comics characters who can fly until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. bibliomaniac 1 5 20:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
The new Age of X article is in need of a lot of help referencing the information included in it. I have tagged the article and made posts on registered contributors with frequent edits to the page, but it hasn't seemed to help. I am not reading this storyline, otherwise I would fix it myself. There have to be some editors out there who are reading this story and can provide the necessary references to this article (and possibly shorten it to be more concise). Spidey 104 14:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
This sentence is trying to say too much:
I think this works better:
Then add when Olive Byrne is next referenced:
Not perfect, I agree, but I think better than leading in with an information dump. 203.35.82.136 ( talk) 20:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
We have a new comics-related Good Article: G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics). :) BOZ ( talk) 17:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Could those interested in comics-related articles voice their opinion on the Beth Sotelo deletion discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 01:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Someone grabbed an image from Deviantart and uploaded it on File:Psylocke-20050603013519041.jpg, on top of the image that was already there. I'm not sure how to restore it to the previous image - anyone know how to fix that? BOZ ( talk) 19:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Done. Theres a revert link in the file history section.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 19:06, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
These are some really minor stuff, and I don't want to edit war, so could anyone take a look at this and/or this and give an opinion? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 16:14, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Recently a lot of people delete these sections from articles. While i find it understandable for appearance lists, i can't say the same for bibliographies or especially collected editions. There seemed to be discussions here already about this point, but no consensus was reached. Deleting appearance lists makes sense since they get too long too easily, although the same can be said for bibliographies. But i can see absolutely no reason why lists covering collected editions featuring the character should be deleted from the articles. IchiGhost ( talk) 18:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I've recently expanded the Arthur Adams article, complete with multiple sources for all in the info therein, and images as well. The article was previously rated B class because two criteria: referencing/citation and coverage/accuracy, were not met. I'm reasonably certain that both of these would be seen as having been met now. Can someone reevaluate the article? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 18:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Is there any standard on listing of team affiliations? Alphabetical? Notability? Chronological? Luminum ( talk) 06:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I would say put the leader or leaders first, then put the rest chronologically, and in cases where multiple members joined in the same issue (like in Giant-Size X-Men #1), list them alphabetically. I don't think there's an objective metric for comparative notability. Nightscream ( talk) 07:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I recently started a discussion about the template that members of the project may have an opinion about. Spidey 104 22:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Detroit Steel (Comics) is now nominated for deletion. Please post comments for or against in the discussion. Thank you. Spidey 104 18:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Fandraltastic has been posting sections on action figures on numerous character articles. They are unreferenced, so I'm not sure how much cleanup this needs, but I am posting here as a heads-up. 108.69.80.49 ( talk) 06:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Over whether two seperate incarnations of the comic need a link to the "list of stories" page. 203.35.135.133 ( talk) 22:05, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Seems settled now 203.35.135.133 ( talk) 02:37, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
It has been proposed that Front Line (comics) be merged into the Daily Bugle article. Please post your opinions. Spidey 104 20:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Also in the news: water is still wet. ;) 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 14:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Omega Gang has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
JeepdaySock (AKA,
Jeepday) 16:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Rainbowcat is a sort-of new user, in the sense that while the account was registered a while ago, they were mostly inactive until last month. Most of their contributions since then have been to add superhero and supervillain categories to various character articles. Would anyone be willing to coach them in the proper way to go about this, to prevent all the reverting and edit warring that has been going on over this? 108.69.80.49 ( talk) 12:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Brian Boru is awesome keeps on removing infobox for the multiple teams in the Defenders (comics). I have tried talking to him on this matter before and I have left a message on his talk page. Can an administrator lock the page. Spshu ( talk) 22:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
You claim to not want to dig through the "full minutia" of what is going, but you not even paying attention to see completely what is going on in this issue. My previous attempts at discussion with him even when I link to the various attempts that you seem to dismiss or ignore so I won't repeat them for a third time. There was a pre-existing discussion on the article talk page where BBiA doesn't even show up to discuss any thing. So I am in the wrong because I could force him to come to the talk page to discuss it and I discuss the issue with others. Is it because I didn't start the discussion. So this finally stuff doesn't hold. I made a request to have the article locked which an adminstrator did before during the last edit war, so it seem like the thing to do this time and that did bring him to the talk page. He doesn't seem to stop reverting until forced to. No one has ever pointed to the WP:BRD page to me since I got here and the non-article "space" of Wikipedia has poor structure when I have tried to navigate around. A talk page discussion is a talk page discussion to me, so I don't see any reason that we have to be so uptight that the discussion has to accur on the articles talk page and the BRD doesn't specify what it means by "the talk page". Discussion can easily be move from one talk page to another. And it looks like the BRD is a newer page, a replacement page for others. Spshu ( talk) 14:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Can anyone explain the move of The Escapist (character) to The Escapist (comics)? It doesn't seem quite right to me, but I'm happy to have it explained. 139.168.161.27 ( talk) 09:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Does this seem alright, or was it better before that change was reverted? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 19:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Does a family link with Jean Grey is enought for a character to have its own article ? For me, it is no. Is there a way to merge Brian Grey (paternal uncle), Roy Dennefer (uncle), Phyliss Dennefer (maternal aunt), Sara Grey (sister), Paul Bailey (comics) (brother-in-law), Joey Bailey (nephew), Gailyn Bailey (niece) into an article ? For example, Jean Grey's family members but I am open to other suggestions. I have serious doubts about the notability of these articles taken separately and the possibility to find significant coverage of the subject.-- Crazy runner ( talk) 10:10, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Yeah definitely. Excuse me for saying article but I do mean redirections too. And it would help for navigation purposes for the redirection title to be the same title as if it is a article. And list of Marvel characters can also link the minor character list article as well. The List of Marvel characters can be useful on linking every character for it is the main reason why it's useful. That and it can make easier navigation. Jhenderson 777 20:04, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Well.... at least there's a bold start to compacting them... - J Greb ( talk) 03:15, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Exactly if you go at what Jake said Jean Grey would be the proper place for the redirection (like Billy Connors and Martha Connors redirecting to Lizard (comics)) for right now. That would be conveniant for the time being. Jhenderson 777 14:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey- I just got hold of a lovely picture for this article, but the photographer commented that it was a shame that the article was so short. I really don't know comics- is there a chance anyone could give the article a little TLC? Thanks. J Milburn ( talk) 10:20, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Frida (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 10:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi - I've posted up a Peer Review Request which can be found at
Wikipedia:Peer review/G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics)/archive1 and a Copy Edit Request at
Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests#G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics). It passed GA assessment in early March, and I've been doing some work since then to prepare it for an FA nomination. Your help would be appreciated. Thanks! --
Jake fuersturm (
talk) 22:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I was just wondering what guideline you use for inclusion of separate comics? I just stumbled on The Isle of Mechanical Men and I think this does not meet the criteria outlined in wp:NBOOK, but I wanted to get some more input before starting an AFD and wasting everybodies time. Yoenit ( talk) 07:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated Wikipedia:WikiProject Media franchises for deletion at WP:MFD. Please comment here for any concerns. Thank for your time. Regards, JJ98 ( Talk) 19:56, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rl'nnd is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rl'nnd until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Cambalachero ( talk) 13:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone have any independent sources discussing this character at all? Even briefly? This'd be greatly appreciated in the Cultural_references section in the Tasmanian_Devil article proper, where it's the one citation needed tag left to fill in (and it sounds like a cool character :) Casliber ( talk · contribs) 15:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Recently, a few Category:Comics art by foo have been created by SingToMePlease ( talk · contribs), for example: Category:Comics art by Dan Gormley. There does not seem to be any subcategory of Category:Comics designed to hold these so I'm guessing that this is actually something that was agreed on in some way by this WikiProject. Is that the case? Should these categories be sent for deletion or should something like Category:Comics art by artist be created? Pichpich ( talk) 17:52, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
There is recently proposed merge that needs some additional opinions. Spidey 104 15:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
So, if the rule of thumb (as in Wiki's MoS) is that long works are italicized and short works are in quotation marks, e.g.
what does an arc count as? Surely the maxim is "if you can go out and buy it hardcover it's a long work"? I was thinking, moreover, on comic book arks. The opening to one article as stands currently reads:
But surely by virtue of being such an extended storyline, and so recognisably a brand, it should be The Dark Phoenix Saga? With regards to the Buffy arcs, which I first had in mind, should the disctintion not be between arcs, e.g. The Long Way Home (issues 1-4) and " The Chain" (issue 5, standalone)? This is the approach taken, analogously, in television wikiprojects, with episodes and serials. Take for example, Doctor Who. Classic serials are rendered e.g. The Daleks, or Survival, whereas modern 40-minute episodes are presented as " Rose" or, in the case of two-parters whose issues are of separate identities, " Aliens of London"/ World War Three". When the show or its spin-offs has two-parters that are presented as one title, it enters 'serial' territory, so we have The End of Time in Doctor Who, or Whatever Happened to Sarah Jane? (spin-off series two-parter), or Torchwood: Children of Earth (of which individual episodes are "Day One", "Day Three", etc.)
I suggest that the comic book Wikiproject should draw up a rationale behind its divisions of long and short works; we seem to know that limited series (e.g. House of M) are long works, but we do not seem to believe long works can be contained within longer works (e.g. " Elegy", which ran seven issues in Detective Comics).~ Zythe Talk to me! 14:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
User Nteinkvnc has recently edited a lot of comic book articles (primarily DC) and his grammar is horrendous. I believe he may not be a native english speaker. His talk page has a comment by another editor offer help/advice, but that hasn't changed his editing. I have tried to keep track of his edits, but I am already busy without stalking a busy editor. Any advice? Anyone willing to help fix his edits? Not all of his edits are bad, but many are. Spidey 104 14:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey, just set up an article on Pop Hollinger, could use some review and collaboration!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 15:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm assuming we need a source for the voice actor on an amusement park attraction? If so, please see this and this. 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 17:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I'm a huge fan of Bill Willingham's Elemental's series of comics and wanted to participate in this project and add a substantial amount of information on the comic book and the various characters involved. The project home page suggests suggestions to participate should be made here? [It also says to add your name as a participant 'below' yet when you look there is nowhere to add it - help with that would be good too.] I am relatively new to this but I would like to have a good go and would welcome the go ahead and perhaps some pointers. I've read the suggested pages on style etc. Much obliged. Mutant Raccoon ( talk) 0:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
The article Nemesis (Ultraverse) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nemesis (Ultraverse) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
If I interpret the exemplars correctly, it's okay to list all the collections of a comic in its article - has this changed? I'm asking because the Bibliography section of Lucky Luke keeps getting removed. The editor doesn't seem willing to discuss or at least explain his standpoint (before reverting him I started a section on the talk page), merely repeating that “we don't do appearances lists”. Can someone else please explain to me why that information keeps getting removed (it's not a list of appearances but a list of published books one could buy/order in a book store)? I looked for a discussion about this on the project's pages but didn't find anything - if this has been discussed before a link to that discussion will probably suffice. Thanks in advance, -- Six words ( talk) 19:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Tenebrae states that the MOS is not to have bibliographies, but I can't really find that in there. Anyway, the MOS is written mainly from an American-style comic book point of view, while Lucky Luke is a European-style BD, a series of books, not a magazine. Note that most of these books are bluelinks, and that these books have on average sold 3 to 4 million copies each. It may be better to put the list in a separate article, but it should definitely not be removed, as it consitutes the full history of the series. They are not "collected editions", they are the primary publication mechanism (not the first, in many cases that was a comics magazine like Spirou (magazine) or Pilote) of stand-alone stories which are continuously in print. Fram ( talk) 07:22, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Fred Jones (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.--
Crazy runner (
talk) 05:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Dittomaster has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 05:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Irving (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 06:04, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Duane Wilson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 06:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Top 100 Comic Book Heroes - IGN If any were bordering on notability, this might help give them a push in the right direction. Blake ( Talk· Edits) 13:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Hey, guys. We're having a discussion on which photo would be a better Infobox portrait for the Larry Hama article here. Can anyone reading this join in? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 06:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
I was wondering, filling in an infobox on a fictional comic book character, and they have been around for a long time published by multiple companies and titles, do you fill in information based on their original status when created, their status as of how they were most well known, how they are NOW, or all through their career? For instance, on affiliation with a team, they were originally solo, then printed by another company with a team, then printed by another company solo. Do I list the team anyways, and just make clear in the body text that is was a temporary affiliation? Mathewignash ( talk) 20:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am interested in working on this at en.ws if it is in fact in the public domain. It is listed at this site as PD, and appears at archive.org as well. The archive.org scan appears to be from the former site so I am hesitant if it only is there because of the claim from this self-published site; can anyone confirm if the work is public domain? Or any insight would be awesome. Thank you - Theornamentalist ( talk) 13:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted.
Note: This article was nominated for deletion before Crazy runner added numerous references to the article.
Kurt Parker ( talk) 15:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Was my edit vandalism? [8] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 22:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I was going to attempt to revise the Cerebus the Aardvark article (I think it badly needs it), and part of my revision was to spin the 9 storylines of the book into separate articles (only High Society has anything like substance to it yet):
I started some of them, but at Talk:Cerebus the Aardvark, User:JasonAQuest objected to it, so I've stopped for the time being. I'd like to get some feedback from some other people on whether it's a good idea to have separate pages for the storylines (obviously I think it is), and reach a consensus on it before continuing. CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 21:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
So...does all this constitute consensus, or indifference? I mean, should I go ahead (when I find the time)? CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 14:20, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone know what cover this comic is a homage to? I know I recognize it. http://www.comicvine.com/transformers-timelines-generation-2-redux/37-236736/ ? Mathewignash ( talk) 20:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Since when did we start allowing people to cite the Handbook of the Marvel Universe? Aren't we supposed to avoid citing other encyclopedia sources? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/References lists it as a great source. Doczilla STOMP! 04:04, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Here's what's driving me nuts: List_of_Amalgam_Comics_characters. Consensus was that we wouldn't list DC/Marvel merged characters or which characters merged into them unless characters appeared in the actual comics and the merges were explicitly depicted in the origin source. Now it's full of merges alleged by http://www.marvunapp.com - which does not look to me like an official extension of the DC/Marvel manuals but another editor cites Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/References as if it is. I do not find Jeff Christiansen or his site listed anywhere on Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/References. Am I missing something? Doczilla STOMP! 09:00, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Per this discussion, is being nominated for and/or winning an Eisner award grounds for notability? I would tend to assume that nomination = no, winning = yes, but the question's been raised as to whether the award itself is significant enough that winning it is considered notable. Thanks for the assist. Doniago ( talk) 15:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
(Sorry this is so long)
For a little while I've been incubating an Autobio comics page in my sandbox. I haven't put a lot of work into it yet, as I've got other things on my plate (currently putting the most work into Chester Brown-related pages).
However, I got into a bit of a scuffle with TJ Black, who found out about the page I'm working on. He objects to my starting the page without project approval (actually, he wants me to leave wikipedia, but that's neither here nor there). So I'm proposing it here before continuing with it further.
There is an Autobiographical comics page, but in the Alternative comics community for a couple of decades now, the terms "autobiographical comics", "confessional autobio" and "autobio (comics)" have been used in a special way to talk about a subgenre of comics in which the author is particularly revealing about themselves. Works generally typifying the genre are Binky Brown Meets the Holy Virgin Mary by Justin Green, the autobio of Robert Crumb, Harvey Pekar's American Splendor, Chester Brown's autobio comics, all of Joe Matt's works, Daddy's Girl by Debbie Drechsler, and a number of others ( Art Spiegelman's Maus is often included as well).
Reasons for proposing an "autobio" page as separate from the "autobiographical" page:
Reasons for choosing the title "Autobio comics":
I could bore you people with reference after reference to the use of the term. I'm sure there are people here who familiar with it. I honestly don't care what it gets called, but I do think it should be distinct from "Autobiographical comics".
Why not make it a subsection of "Autobiographical comics"?
I hope to get some feedback on what other people think about starting the page. I had assumed the term had been so widespread for so long that it never crossed my mind that anyone would object to it until TJ Black said that, because he personally had never heard of the term, it basically doesn't exist.
To be honest, I don't care if I get "support" per se, as long as nobody else objects to having the page. I absolutely cannot fathom why anyone would so object to it, especially when there is someone both knowledgeable enough and motivated to do it—there are plently of people knowledgeable enough, but who can be bothered to actually do it? I can, so why on earth would anyone try to discourage it? I can't imagine pulling that on someone without a rock-solid reason—at least more solid than "I've never heard of it".
(having said all this, I actually have no intention of working on the page in the very near future, as I have a number of other things on my plate first).
CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 14:20, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
STOP !!!
Curly Turkey should receive a warning that he has to be careful with OR, reliable sources, ... if he wants to write such an article. I think that the warning has already be given. Now let him do some work and at the end juge the article if he has enought sources or content if he decides to merge it due to lack of sources. 130.120.37.11 ( talk) 07:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't want to contribute to the Autobiographical comics page, because
Please try to understand that adding a subsection to the Autobiographical comics page is not what I object to per se, but that such a section cannot be cleanly added. The page is a massive list which gives little context (other than breaking things into decades, but not separating cultures). It also makes the bizarre claim that it's a Canadian, American and French thing, and then goes on to list a pile of Japanese comics. All unreferenced. If someone wants to clean things up to make room for me, that'd be nice. I, personally, have no idea where to start, aside from rewriting the thing from scratch (which would mean the loss of quite a bit of content, as I have no idea what to do with it). So who's gonna help clean things up? ..............dead silence.................. (*)please note that I'm using the term "autobio" here to avoid using a long phrase in its place. I really want to keep the lid on that can of worms. CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 10:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Can you provide a reliable source that makes the distinction between the wider class of autobiographical comics, and the subclass of autobio comics? Are there any reliable sources giving examples of comics that are autobiographies, but not autobio? The objections so far are not that your sources aren't reliable, but that they don't support the distinction you are trying to make, and aren't sufficient as a justification for two separate pages. As far as I can see, reliable sources call the same books "autobio", "autobiographies", "autobiographical comics", ... without further distinction or explanation, as if they are synonyms. Fram ( talk) 11:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Both of you, stop it. No more namecalling, no more sockpuppet accusations (open a WP:SPI if you have evidence, otherwise drop it), no more replies to one another. It doesn't matter if "the other" has the last word, just let it be. Fram ( talk) 13:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
TJ Black has decided that my unconditional surrender is not sufficient and is now continuing to browbeat me on my User_talk:Curly_Turkey#? talk page. Apparently I'm dirty for seven generations or something now for the horrible sins I've committed on this page. Could someone please direct me to the appropriate page of rites I can perform to atone for my abject horribleness? Unforgivable Sinner 02:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
The article List of minor Marvel Comics characters has been AFD'd. You may vote your opinion if it should stay or go here. Happy editing. Jhenderson 777 14:38, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I was looking at these pages here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Real_Ghostbusters_(comics)
and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostbusters:_Legion
Wouldn't it be better to combine the two as Ghostbusters (Comics)? Then someone could add the other series based on the property. Not just the Now Comics, Marvel UK, and 88MPH series but the one that Tokyopop did and the one that IDW Publishing is currently doing. This will then gather up all the various series (from different publishers) that have (and are currently) based on the property in one place. It would be more convient for readers. Don't you think? Giantdevilfish ( talk) 02:00, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
The image for Steve Ditko is up for deletion.
- J Greb ( talk) 18:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
To those helping out by adding reception sections for character articles in the top superheroes list: An IP user added notes to several articles, but did not include a link to the IGN list, so if you are helping out with this, you might want to fill out what they added. 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 02:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted. Kurt Parker ( talk) 13:58, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I brought this up wit User:Jhenderson777 a little while ago, but i want to bring these articles to everyone's attention:
Please leave your thoughts. Rusted AutoParts ( talk) 13:40 25 May 2011 (UTC)
The bio section on Mystique is long enough already, but someone added this unusually long section which appears to document the events of a single comic book! Anyone with some time on their hands care to give it a big trim? 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 11:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Is it a good idea to have these on character pages? Mabye yes, maybe no, but these are unsourced: Doctor Strange and Namor. 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 11:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
~
Any help fixing it up would be appreciated!!!-- S G Command 15:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Given that a major motion picture is likely to be a much bigger use of this title, this should probably be moved to X-Men: First Class (comics), and either the film moved from X-Men: First Class (film) to X-Men: First Class, or X-Men: First Class turned into a disambiguation page. postdlf ( talk) 15:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I favor turning X-Men: first Class into a dab page, and adding dab parentheticals onto the titles of the film and comic book articles using page moves. Nightscream ( talk) 19:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
We do not need a Crystal ball. The movie, a hollywood blockbuster, is already the main topic right now. But in any case, there shouldn't be a DAB of only 2 entries: one should keep the name, and link to the other in a hatnote Cambalachero ( talk) 02:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Another editor attempted to switch the primary and secondary topics, and an admin had to fix the moves. See WP:ANI#X-Men: First Class. The way I see it, we had two options in mind here, a disambiguation page listing both topics, or the film being primary with the comic book series being secondary. Since the setup follows the latter option now, we could request a move for the disambiguation page setup to see if the consensus is in favor of that. Erik ( talk | contribs) 20:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
For The Smurfs vs. The Smurfs (film), I just added a hatnote for the film to the main article: the film currently gets more traffic than the main page, but in this case it shouldn't be switched (unless the film becomes a really big hit, it will be the other way around one or two years from now) in my opinion. However, The Smurfs are a franchise of 50+ years running, while X-Men: First Class is much less established, so the situation is not really comparable. Fram ( talk) 13:45, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
It seems to me that this category is being over-used. There are, in truth, very few articles that are about actual comic book titles. The
Superman (vol 2) comic is one. However, any character who appeared in a self-titled comic seems to appear in the category. For example
Aquaman. The Aquaman article is about the character, not the title, although the publication history of the character usually acts as a defacto story of eponymous and other titles. "And other titles" is important. As is the fact that it only covers the character's appearances. If Aquaman was replace in his own title for a year, those issues are covered in that character's article. If there are back-up stories featuring other characters (and important issue in a title's story) that isn't covered. A disambig page would refer to the character, not the title.
To sum up: A article about a character isn't an article about a comic book title and the category should be for articles about titles. Or am I wrong here?
Duggy 1138 (
talk) 13:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
I have recently proposed moves of two comic book articles.
Spidey 104 14:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted. Spidey 104 21:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted.-- Crazy runner ( talk) 19:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Portal:Superhero fiction has been nominated for deletion. 65.94.47.63 ( talk) 07:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Please comment I created categories for unfinished and upcoming comics, per Category:Unfinished creative works and Category:Upcoming products—these are two very different things than a comic which is merely unpublished (and belongs to Category:Unreleased works by medium.) A comic like (e.g.) Sonic Disruptors was published, it just wasn't completed, whereas Flashpoint has not been published yet, but is upcoming. Twilight of the Superheroes is clearly an unpublished comic—it was never begun as a comic (it was merely scripted) and it is not slated to be released. I implemented these changes and inserted these categories into {{ Infobox future comic}} and List of comics that were never published, but User:J Greb removed them and wanted a discussion. I did this on our talk pages, but I guess that isn't sufficient. Thoughts? — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:11, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
OutdentPardon me I've not made myself clear. There are three types of comics I'm talking about here:
I did not create the first category, but I did create the latter two. The distinction seems clear to me: comics that were never even made, versus periodicals that were started and abandoned, versus comics that will (presumably) be released at some point. {{ Infobox future comics}} only applies to the latter of these and it was for this template that I replaced Category:Unpublished comics (which already existed) with Category:Upcoming comics (which I created) with the intention of separating these different kinds of publications. I have also never applied this template to any article, but it's clear to me that it only belongs on upcoming comics (not Sonic Disruptors—which will never be finisehd—nor Twilight of the Superheroes—which will never be begun as a publication at all.) Does that clarify? If I come across as pedantic here, please excuse me—I'm only trying to explain myself. Do these distinctions make sense and do you now see how they fit into a broader category scheme? — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 04:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I was looking at Jack Kirby and Biblography of... and I was wondering is it worth adding a section to writer/artists pages "List of characters created" (or a better section title (shouldn't be too hard)).
I understand there can be issues... determining who created what, whether the go by year or company, importances of characters, it being pointless on a lot of creator's pages, and a number of other things that I'm sure you guys will see imediately, but I'm interested to see what people think. 203.35.82.133 ( talk) 09:36, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Has anyone else noticed that the http://www.toonopedia.com/ web site has not been updated since February? The "Today in Toons" page lists the date as Friday, February 12, 1911. I used to check this web site a couple of times a week, and there was always someting new. Did something happen to Dan Markstein? -- Drvanthorp ( talk) 03:06, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I have a little problem with the consistancy in the articles:
These two moves are related and the singular discussion for the move is here. Spidey 104 16:04, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
There is a question of scope for the new Spider-Man: Big Time article. Please post opinions to the article talk page for us to come to a consensus. Thank you. Spidey 104 20:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Comics for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview questions here. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. If you have any questions, you can leave a note on my talk page. Have a great day. – SMasters ( talk) 12:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC) |
User:Harley Hudson proposed the deletion of all the articles about episodes from Spider-Man animated series [15]. I am agree that these articles have not enought notability and some of them are just a plot but a merging with a list of episodes by seasons will help keep informations and fix the problem. I have the feeling but I can be wrong that Harley Hudson prefers to delete articles instead of trying to fix them. There are no pages with a list of episodes and short summaries from seasons 1 and 5, valuable informations about episodes from seasons 2, 3, 4 can go into Spider-Man (1994 TV series) Season 2, Spider-Man (1994 TV series) Season 3 and Spider-Man (1994 TV series) Season 4. 85.171.170.161 ( talk) 03:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
We've kicked this around a few times and recently have been operating under an apparent consensus of not including appearance lists (AL) as sections unto themselves in a character article
Is this the still the current consensus? If so, we need to amend the MoS and exemplars pages to reflect it.
The reason I'm asking is that it's reared up again at Vext and since we didn't update things last time around, I'm leery to do it now without double checking.
FWIW, I can see a number of issues with inclusion:
- J Greb ( talk) 22:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
( ←) I'm not opposed to that type of solution, we just have to be clear on when/where it's done. Batman, Spider-Man, Wonder Woman, Flash, etc make sense. Vext, Orion, Taskmanster, etc don't. And some - like Aquaman - are going to have quibbles along the way. In the long run that will help deal with the issue Duggy raised below on catgorizing arcticles for comic book titles.
But with regard to the original intent of this post. What I'm proposing is to:
Thoughts?
- J Greb ( talk) 23:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I removed the bibliography section on Mastermind (Jason Wyngarde), but it got reverted. I thought it was the consensus that we remove these sections? 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 23:43, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
There's a discussion on Talk:Venom (comics)#Bibliography that I wanted to direct everyone's attention to, as it concerns the removal of the "Bibliography" section of the article, as well as Bibliography of Spider-Man titles. - SudoGhost ™ 19:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi wp:comics squad!
I was just doing an article on Justice League Dark, as part of my John Constantine obsession, and was wondering if it might be worth focusing the efforts of a few editors to cover the whole universe reboot due in September, to improve the focus of the efforts being made. My knowledge is entirely in the more odd side of DC, and as much love as I have for Supes, Batman, et al, I know I'm ill equipped to cover those bases!
Anyway, I really just wanted to guage interest in this, so let me know if you want to collaborate or think this might be a good (or awful) idea. Benny Digital Speak Your Brains 08:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I was just curious what this measures? Cloveapple ( talk) 17:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
The page needs to be corrected and improved because some IP addresses have added material. Someone who is familiar with the story of the could help. Negativecharge ( talk) 18:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Please someone take a look into this situation, where an IP editor(s) has been alleging errors made by comics creators without posting a source. [16] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 22:47, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
This page needs something; potentially it could become a chronology of tens of thousands of characters. The page needs to be refocused into a narrower topic, or possibly split into two pages. The page has a section for the various superheroes that deputed in each decade, but after the 1930's, the topic becomes way two large. The page could be culled down to a page of superhero debuts before, say, 1940, which would produce a nice pre-golden-age chronology, but I hate to trow away the after-1940 work that other people have contributed. Any suggestions?-- Drvanthorp ( talk) 03:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
The British comics workgroup seems to dead or dormant, so I'll raise my question here. It seems to me that in a lot of ways, particularly in the names of categories, American comic book terminology has been ported directly onto British comics in ways that don't fit. I've just created an article for Frank Bellamy's great serial in the Eagle, Fraser of Africa, and in trying to categorise it i've had to put it in Category:Eagle (comic book) titles and Category:Eagle (comic book) characters, which are sub-categories of Category:Eagle (comic book).
First of all, the Eagle is not a comic book, it's a comic. That's what we call them over here. The names of these categories should be changed to match the article title, which is Eagle (comic), not Eagle (comic book).
Secondly, "titles" is used in American comics for the names of publications published by a particular company, not features in a particular publication. Under those terms, Eagle is itself a "title". I'm not sure what the best term would be for a feature within a title like Fraser of Africa, but I lead towards "comic strip". "Serial" doesn't work as not all such strips are in serial format, "series" can mean the publication, and "feature" is too vague.
The same "title" terminology is used for other British comics - Category:2000 AD titles, Category:Crisis titles - while Category:DC Thomson Comics titles contains a mixture of titles and features, and Category:Marvel UK titles, Category:Rebellion Developments titles and Category:Trident Comics titles seem to be used correctly.
I propose:
That's before we consider whether we shouldn't have separate categories for the Eagle launched in 1950 and the Eagle launched in 1982, and if so, what they should be called.
Anyone have any objections, or better ideas? -- Nicknack009 ( talk) 11:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
...that seems a nice way to thank editors who are conscientious in always adding a WebCitation or Archive.org link when they add a footnote or EL, which is critical in preventing link rot. If anyone wants to use it, see the code on this page's edit mode. I don't know who created this, but compliments and acknowledgment to him/her.
Thank you for archiving | |
Message and signature go here. |
-- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Hellboy#Appearances_in_popular_culture - I figured anyone knowledgeable in comic books could help. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 07:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
I noticed that the page for Hawk (G.I. Joe) has the "Category:Devil's Due characters". Now I know he didn't originate in their comics, being a licensed GI Joe property, but he did appear in some Joe comics from DD. He also appeared in some IDW, Dreamwave and Marvel. Is this an appropriate use of categories, or should it be limited to only character? Should we list every publisher who had the character appear, only the first, or none at all for licensed toy line characters like this? Mathewignash ( talk) 18:59, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Your comments are requested here at a merge discussion about the best merge target for Rebel Ralston, Dino Manelli, and Happy Sam Sawyer. Any constructive contributions would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 12:09, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Nteinkvnc's notes: please rewrite good sentences seems to be missing key words from grammar, thanks you. - Nteinkvnc ( talk) 3:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
I've noticed that this user tends to remove subheaders from articles [17]. Is there any consensus on this sort of thing? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 16:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I thought that we had already resolved the issue of referring to one character as another's archenemy, that we needed a WP:RS to establish this? [18] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 14:51, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Imapaqrat is adding the categories; Category:Hostess comic ad characters, Category:Food advertising characters and Category:Advertising characters across character articles. It should also be noted that List of Hostess Comic Ad advertising characters which he/she created is up for speedy deletion.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Is this all original research? We don't have a solid connection between the film character and the comics character except that they are both named "Jason" and have similar powers. 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 23:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Please comment (for or against) in the discussion for merging Ghost Rider 2099 (character) into the Ghost Rider article. Spidey 104 13:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
I have recently discovered the Ultimate Comics: X-Men article (created by brand new user The ultimate x-man). I don't know enough on the subject (or the recent history of the Ultimate Universe in general) to be an effective fixer, so all I could do was some minor clean-up. I am hoping this post will recruit some help before this article grows into too big of a mess. Spidey 104 18:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
There is a discussion occuring involving the episode order of this TV series and the inclusion of a 'micro-series' here. Input would be greatly appreciated. -- ProfessorKilroy ( talk) 02:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
There is currently a Manual of Style discussion debating the merits of keeping or removing "Fictional character biography" sections from all Wikipedia articles. Many people involved in this project probably have opinions (for and against) on this, so I wanted to inform all of you so the discussion could have a full complement of people involved in the process. Spidey 104 17:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
This is something that has been a long time coming, but we need a clear point as to which names for characters can/should be used where in the articles. Right now we've got names in infoboxes, lead sections, tables, templates, and elsewhere that attempt to cover every option used for a character. By way of example:
|
|
And this is just a smattering of the high end characters.
Frankly, we should be sticking to the commonly used names - "Clark Kent", "Dick Grayson", "Ben Grimm", "Hank McCoy", etc - in the 'box, lead, and tables. No honorifics, no expansion of commonly used nicknames, no rarely used second or third names. If the "full" name is notable for some citable reason, it can get its due mention in the body of the article.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Anyone have an opinion on this? [20] There was previously some discussion on the talk page, but the editor in question did not respond. 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 03:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
The Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man title is going to relaunch next month with the new Miles Morales Spider-Man as the star. It's going to start again from issue #1. My question is, do we create an entirely new page for this book now, or does this become part of the Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man page? I see when the comic last relaunched we created a new page (the old one was Ultimate Spider-Man), but it appears this new one is retaining the name Ultimate Comics Spider-Man (see [here http://marvel.com/comic_books/issue/38394/ultimate_comics_spider-man_2011_1] and here) so I'm not sure how it should be handled this time around. — Hun ter Ka hn 16:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
I've been running through articles and merging to List of minor DC Comics characters or List of minor Marvel Comics characters as appropriate - plot only, no notability actually displayed. But I've been running into plot only articles that merging doesn't seem appropriate because:
The articles I've run across so far include:
|
Some of these wouldn't move to the lists I've indicated, but all of them need a solid look at improvement.
(I'm cross posting this to the main project as well.)
- J Greb ( talk) 14:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place on the micro-series and episode order of the Avengers:EMH show. I invite you to leave your thoughts here. Input would be greatly appreciated. -- ProfessorKilroy ( talk) 08:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
In case anyone wants to look this one over: [21] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 18:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
I've been adding/editing most of the material on the Dynamo 5-related articles since creating them a few years ago, and have a question for which I need objective opinions. Can everyone here offer their views here? I really need them in order to proceed. Nightscream ( talk) 02:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
DC is officially calling it a relaunch and repeatedly saying "not a reboot". The original definition for a reboot (and the one that is still used for computers and movie/TV series) is a complete start from scratch. Some people still use that for comics. I know many have broadened the usage in comics because they (and especially DC) have so many "soft reboots" but I think for clarity and citability the page should be 2011 DC Universe relaunch.
Thoughts? Duggy 1138 ( talk) 00:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Yeah "The New 52" is the name that DC is using, so it should be moved to that. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 09:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
There seems to be a persistent vandal only account editing on articles such as Marvel Comics, Silver Age of Comic Books and MAX (comics) who seems intent on deleting article text without explanation. Seem to be using both the range 218.186.9.X and now user accounts (TheRoD1988). -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 12:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Still at it - reported but no admin response,so there is nothing else I can do. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 13:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Please come participate in the discussion and poll (since there is a list for graphic novels, too). Thank you. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 17:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Please participate here: Talk:Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film)#Requested move. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 05:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I think beano-style comics ( The Beano is the most popular in the genre) that is comics that are British and mainly consist of humour strips. There should be an article on that genre but I can not think of a proper name for it. comics such as The Dandy, Monster Fun, Comic Cuts, Smash! (comics), Buster (comics) and Whizzer and Chips among numerous others would fall into this genre. Eopsid ( talk) 21:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mr. Nebula is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Nebula until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Cambalachero ( talk) 02:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Barbara Gordon is currently at FAC. Any help with copy-editing or other concerns would be appreciated. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 21:39, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Before it escalates, I thought I'd bring it over here.
In Carlie Cooper, the article originally reads as follows:
User:MultipleTom believes it should read:
I think the former is the more encyclopedic approach in that it approaches the character from a real-world perspective, whereas the latter follows an 'in-universe' summary of the comic. Thoughts?-- CyberGhostface ( talk) 04:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I propose that since her marriage to Barry Allen has been retconned and that she is more well known as Iris West outside the comics, I propose moving the page to Iris West or Iris West I. - 67.171.250.39 ( talk) 16:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC) "Common name would be as is. We don't do roman numberals nor do we base it on today issue over the bulk of the character history of use. - J Greb ( talk) 00:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Is it appropriate to have a list of enemies in the Luke Cage article, such as this? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 23:52, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
I would appreciate some help in improving on the quality of Gold Digger (comics) and possibly List of Gold Digger characters, by adding more references, characters, improving the structure, etcetera, to help get more attention for the book.
It is the most extensive (and charming) creator-owned American comicbook that is currently published, so it seems like a major shame that it doesn't get more attention, praise (and maybe an Avatar The Last Airbender or Ben 10: Ultimate Alien style animated series). The book is quite wonderful, and very ambitious, nowadays, even though it naturally started much weaker at the beginning, and definitely deserves a lot more love. Dave ( talk) 17:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if this matters to anyone, but 2010s in comics has been proposed for deletion on the grounds that it has no content. I created that page because I felt it was inevitable and I wanted to get rid of the redlink in the template, but I'm not particularly attached to it. Just an FYI. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 05:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Ilovethebeano ( talk · contribs) has been busily creating articles on very minor strips in the UK children's comics, The Dandy and The Beano. These aren't the major or long-lived strips, we've no issue with those, but on strips that often only lasted for one joke across a few issues. Basic notability is a problem, but so is the depth of coverage possible - most of these articles do no more than link a strip name with an artist and a publication date. With the lack of referencing, I assume no more than a primary source from The Beano itself, there's no scope for any expansion beyond this. As well as the strip articles being unreferenced, there are also a number of unrefed BLPs appearing on the comic artists.
A look at their talk page and their contribs history will show the problem. Despite regular notes on their talk page, they seem disinterested in changing this or discussing further. Time, I think, for the Trout Of Wisdom to be summoned. Andy Dingley ( talk) 11:50, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
I think Ilovethebeano has returned under the new username. beandand and here are his contributions. [23] he has made three new articles on comic strips (all from different comics mind you not just the Beano). Spoofer McGraw, Willy Nilly (comic strip) and Corporal Clott. the last of which is now a redirect. Eopsid ( talk) 10:28, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I suspect User:WizzKid XD [24] may be the same user abusing multiple accounts. Stephenb (Talk) 09:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I think Flavourbeans may also be ilovethebeano/beandand. He has also made a number of short articles on Beano/dandy comic strips. Such as Lucy Grimm, Bea and Ivy, Rocky's Horror Show, Stripz and Zappy. I have put merge notices on all these articles except for Stripz which I think should remain and Zappy (a strip from a fanzine) which has a deletion notice on there. Eopsid ( talk) 11:24, 13 October 2011 (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 40 | ← | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | → | Archive 50 |
The article Rook (comics) is written like an essay and includes sentences in the first person. Would someone more knowledgeable in Warren magazines care to take a look at it? -- Pc13 ( talk) 12:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Our esteemed colleague, J Greb has recently removed the character navoboxes from The Avengers film project under the rationale that the film is not centered on any individual character. While this is true I am of the opinion that this film is important to the understanding of these characters (atleast the big four) in other media. These boxes provide ease of navigation for readers reseachering a specific character and if one were navigating between Captain America or Thor films leaving out The Avengers seems inappropiate, especially since they are within the same fictional universe. I have not challegend J Greb's good faith edits but other editors have leading to some minor disputes, so I am asking to build concensus here either in support or against the inclusion of these navboxes.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 18:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
I proposed the following mergers:
I hope to have some opinions. Bye -- Crazy runner ( talk) 19:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tweet Me Harder. Thanks, rʨanaɢ ( talk) 18:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
The article One-Above-All is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One-Above-All until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. MBelgrano ( talk) 23:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
I have opened a discussion about the manual of style that impacts all of the comic book articles we edit. Please post your opinion there. Spidey 104 14:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Based on [1] we may want to keep an eye on Fantastic Four, Mister Fantastic, Invisible Woman, Thing (comics), and Spider-Man for "new" infobox images.
- J Greb ( talk) 02:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
The announcement of the new Spider-Man film's title The Amazing Spider-Man led me to review the topics that share this title. As a result, I've requested a move that can either affect the comic book series article or the disambiguation page. The discussion can be seen here. Erik ( talk | contribs) 21:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Additional eyes and input could be used at Talk:Ultimate Comics: Captain America.
Thanks
- J Greb ( talk) 00:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Dwayne was arguably the greatest, finest, most decent, and largely unsung, current voice in western animation. I was greatly saddened to hear that he had passed away. Is there anything we can do here to bring attention to and celebrate his legacy? Dave ( talk) 15:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Most of the information within these articles is redundantly repeated in the other articles. I understand that Aqualad and Tempest (DC Comics) work as a hybrid disambiguation/article, but their current state are violations of WP:Content forking and WP:CRUFT. For example, if I were to search for Garth/Tempest without knowing his location, I'd write Tempest, be directed to Tempest (disambiguation) where I'd have to read and choose to go to Tempest (comics). Then, I'd have to go to Tempest (DC Comics) just to find out that I should've gone to Garth (comics) instead.
As for the contents of Tempest (DC Comics), it just includes a very short copped out summary of the Joshua Clay and Garth articles which is terribly unneeded because Tempest (comics) already lists both articles in the disambiguation page. Basically, what I propose is that Tempest (DC Comics) be redirected to Tempest (comics) while Aqualad be redirected to Garth (comics). Because only two characters have owned the "Aqualad" moniker, per WP:HATNOTE/ WP:SIMILAR, a hatnote at the top of Garth that directs you to Jackson Hyde is sufficient.
A discussion at the Village Pump regarding categories that are mostly used for comic book characters was archived without reaching consensus. I've raised the issue again, and on the suggestion of another user am announcing it here in the hope of attracting more discussion. Feezo (Talk) 04:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of DC Comics characters who can fly is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DC Comics characters who can fly until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. bibliomaniac 1 5 20:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
The new Age of X article is in need of a lot of help referencing the information included in it. I have tagged the article and made posts on registered contributors with frequent edits to the page, but it hasn't seemed to help. I am not reading this storyline, otherwise I would fix it myself. There have to be some editors out there who are reading this story and can provide the necessary references to this article (and possibly shorten it to be more concise). Spidey 104 14:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
This sentence is trying to say too much:
I think this works better:
Then add when Olive Byrne is next referenced:
Not perfect, I agree, but I think better than leading in with an information dump. 203.35.82.136 ( talk) 20:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
We have a new comics-related Good Article: G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics). :) BOZ ( talk) 17:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Could those interested in comics-related articles voice their opinion on the Beth Sotelo deletion discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 01:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Someone grabbed an image from Deviantart and uploaded it on File:Psylocke-20050603013519041.jpg, on top of the image that was already there. I'm not sure how to restore it to the previous image - anyone know how to fix that? BOZ ( talk) 19:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Done. Theres a revert link in the file history section.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 19:06, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
These are some really minor stuff, and I don't want to edit war, so could anyone take a look at this and/or this and give an opinion? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 16:14, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Recently a lot of people delete these sections from articles. While i find it understandable for appearance lists, i can't say the same for bibliographies or especially collected editions. There seemed to be discussions here already about this point, but no consensus was reached. Deleting appearance lists makes sense since they get too long too easily, although the same can be said for bibliographies. But i can see absolutely no reason why lists covering collected editions featuring the character should be deleted from the articles. IchiGhost ( talk) 18:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I've recently expanded the Arthur Adams article, complete with multiple sources for all in the info therein, and images as well. The article was previously rated B class because two criteria: referencing/citation and coverage/accuracy, were not met. I'm reasonably certain that both of these would be seen as having been met now. Can someone reevaluate the article? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 18:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Is there any standard on listing of team affiliations? Alphabetical? Notability? Chronological? Luminum ( talk) 06:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I would say put the leader or leaders first, then put the rest chronologically, and in cases where multiple members joined in the same issue (like in Giant-Size X-Men #1), list them alphabetically. I don't think there's an objective metric for comparative notability. Nightscream ( talk) 07:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I recently started a discussion about the template that members of the project may have an opinion about. Spidey 104 22:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Detroit Steel (Comics) is now nominated for deletion. Please post comments for or against in the discussion. Thank you. Spidey 104 18:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Fandraltastic has been posting sections on action figures on numerous character articles. They are unreferenced, so I'm not sure how much cleanup this needs, but I am posting here as a heads-up. 108.69.80.49 ( talk) 06:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Over whether two seperate incarnations of the comic need a link to the "list of stories" page. 203.35.135.133 ( talk) 22:05, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Seems settled now 203.35.135.133 ( talk) 02:37, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
It has been proposed that Front Line (comics) be merged into the Daily Bugle article. Please post your opinions. Spidey 104 20:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Also in the news: water is still wet. ;) 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 14:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Omega Gang has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
JeepdaySock (AKA,
Jeepday) 16:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Rainbowcat is a sort-of new user, in the sense that while the account was registered a while ago, they were mostly inactive until last month. Most of their contributions since then have been to add superhero and supervillain categories to various character articles. Would anyone be willing to coach them in the proper way to go about this, to prevent all the reverting and edit warring that has been going on over this? 108.69.80.49 ( talk) 12:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
User:Brian Boru is awesome keeps on removing infobox for the multiple teams in the Defenders (comics). I have tried talking to him on this matter before and I have left a message on his talk page. Can an administrator lock the page. Spshu ( talk) 22:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
You claim to not want to dig through the "full minutia" of what is going, but you not even paying attention to see completely what is going on in this issue. My previous attempts at discussion with him even when I link to the various attempts that you seem to dismiss or ignore so I won't repeat them for a third time. There was a pre-existing discussion on the article talk page where BBiA doesn't even show up to discuss any thing. So I am in the wrong because I could force him to come to the talk page to discuss it and I discuss the issue with others. Is it because I didn't start the discussion. So this finally stuff doesn't hold. I made a request to have the article locked which an adminstrator did before during the last edit war, so it seem like the thing to do this time and that did bring him to the talk page. He doesn't seem to stop reverting until forced to. No one has ever pointed to the WP:BRD page to me since I got here and the non-article "space" of Wikipedia has poor structure when I have tried to navigate around. A talk page discussion is a talk page discussion to me, so I don't see any reason that we have to be so uptight that the discussion has to accur on the articles talk page and the BRD doesn't specify what it means by "the talk page". Discussion can easily be move from one talk page to another. And it looks like the BRD is a newer page, a replacement page for others. Spshu ( talk) 14:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Can anyone explain the move of The Escapist (character) to The Escapist (comics)? It doesn't seem quite right to me, but I'm happy to have it explained. 139.168.161.27 ( talk) 09:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Does this seem alright, or was it better before that change was reverted? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 19:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Does a family link with Jean Grey is enought for a character to have its own article ? For me, it is no. Is there a way to merge Brian Grey (paternal uncle), Roy Dennefer (uncle), Phyliss Dennefer (maternal aunt), Sara Grey (sister), Paul Bailey (comics) (brother-in-law), Joey Bailey (nephew), Gailyn Bailey (niece) into an article ? For example, Jean Grey's family members but I am open to other suggestions. I have serious doubts about the notability of these articles taken separately and the possibility to find significant coverage of the subject.-- Crazy runner ( talk) 10:10, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Yeah definitely. Excuse me for saying article but I do mean redirections too. And it would help for navigation purposes for the redirection title to be the same title as if it is a article. And list of Marvel characters can also link the minor character list article as well. The List of Marvel characters can be useful on linking every character for it is the main reason why it's useful. That and it can make easier navigation. Jhenderson 777 20:04, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Well.... at least there's a bold start to compacting them... - J Greb ( talk) 03:15, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Exactly if you go at what Jake said Jean Grey would be the proper place for the redirection (like Billy Connors and Martha Connors redirecting to Lizard (comics)) for right now. That would be conveniant for the time being. Jhenderson 777 14:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey- I just got hold of a lovely picture for this article, but the photographer commented that it was a shame that the article was so short. I really don't know comics- is there a chance anyone could give the article a little TLC? Thanks. J Milburn ( talk) 10:20, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Frida (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 10:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi - I've posted up a Peer Review Request which can be found at
Wikipedia:Peer review/G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics)/archive1 and a Copy Edit Request at
Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests#G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero (Marvel Comics). It passed GA assessment in early March, and I've been doing some work since then to prepare it for an FA nomination. Your help would be appreciated. Thanks! --
Jake fuersturm (
talk) 22:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I was just wondering what guideline you use for inclusion of separate comics? I just stumbled on The Isle of Mechanical Men and I think this does not meet the criteria outlined in wp:NBOOK, but I wanted to get some more input before starting an AFD and wasting everybodies time. Yoenit ( talk) 07:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated Wikipedia:WikiProject Media franchises for deletion at WP:MFD. Please comment here for any concerns. Thank for your time. Regards, JJ98 ( Talk) 19:56, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rl'nnd is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rl'nnd until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Cambalachero ( talk) 13:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone have any independent sources discussing this character at all? Even briefly? This'd be greatly appreciated in the Cultural_references section in the Tasmanian_Devil article proper, where it's the one citation needed tag left to fill in (and it sounds like a cool character :) Casliber ( talk · contribs) 15:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Recently, a few Category:Comics art by foo have been created by SingToMePlease ( talk · contribs), for example: Category:Comics art by Dan Gormley. There does not seem to be any subcategory of Category:Comics designed to hold these so I'm guessing that this is actually something that was agreed on in some way by this WikiProject. Is that the case? Should these categories be sent for deletion or should something like Category:Comics art by artist be created? Pichpich ( talk) 17:52, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
There is recently proposed merge that needs some additional opinions. Spidey 104 15:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
So, if the rule of thumb (as in Wiki's MoS) is that long works are italicized and short works are in quotation marks, e.g.
what does an arc count as? Surely the maxim is "if you can go out and buy it hardcover it's a long work"? I was thinking, moreover, on comic book arks. The opening to one article as stands currently reads:
But surely by virtue of being such an extended storyline, and so recognisably a brand, it should be The Dark Phoenix Saga? With regards to the Buffy arcs, which I first had in mind, should the disctintion not be between arcs, e.g. The Long Way Home (issues 1-4) and " The Chain" (issue 5, standalone)? This is the approach taken, analogously, in television wikiprojects, with episodes and serials. Take for example, Doctor Who. Classic serials are rendered e.g. The Daleks, or Survival, whereas modern 40-minute episodes are presented as " Rose" or, in the case of two-parters whose issues are of separate identities, " Aliens of London"/ World War Three". When the show or its spin-offs has two-parters that are presented as one title, it enters 'serial' territory, so we have The End of Time in Doctor Who, or Whatever Happened to Sarah Jane? (spin-off series two-parter), or Torchwood: Children of Earth (of which individual episodes are "Day One", "Day Three", etc.)
I suggest that the comic book Wikiproject should draw up a rationale behind its divisions of long and short works; we seem to know that limited series (e.g. House of M) are long works, but we do not seem to believe long works can be contained within longer works (e.g. " Elegy", which ran seven issues in Detective Comics).~ Zythe Talk to me! 14:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
User Nteinkvnc has recently edited a lot of comic book articles (primarily DC) and his grammar is horrendous. I believe he may not be a native english speaker. His talk page has a comment by another editor offer help/advice, but that hasn't changed his editing. I have tried to keep track of his edits, but I am already busy without stalking a busy editor. Any advice? Anyone willing to help fix his edits? Not all of his edits are bad, but many are. Spidey 104 14:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey, just set up an article on Pop Hollinger, could use some review and collaboration!-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 15:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm assuming we need a source for the voice actor on an amusement park attraction? If so, please see this and this. 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 17:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I'm a huge fan of Bill Willingham's Elemental's series of comics and wanted to participate in this project and add a substantial amount of information on the comic book and the various characters involved. The project home page suggests suggestions to participate should be made here? [It also says to add your name as a participant 'below' yet when you look there is nowhere to add it - help with that would be good too.] I am relatively new to this but I would like to have a good go and would welcome the go ahead and perhaps some pointers. I've read the suggested pages on style etc. Much obliged. Mutant Raccoon ( talk) 0:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
The article Nemesis (Ultraverse) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nemesis (Ultraverse) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
If I interpret the exemplars correctly, it's okay to list all the collections of a comic in its article - has this changed? I'm asking because the Bibliography section of Lucky Luke keeps getting removed. The editor doesn't seem willing to discuss or at least explain his standpoint (before reverting him I started a section on the talk page), merely repeating that “we don't do appearances lists”. Can someone else please explain to me why that information keeps getting removed (it's not a list of appearances but a list of published books one could buy/order in a book store)? I looked for a discussion about this on the project's pages but didn't find anything - if this has been discussed before a link to that discussion will probably suffice. Thanks in advance, -- Six words ( talk) 19:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Tenebrae states that the MOS is not to have bibliographies, but I can't really find that in there. Anyway, the MOS is written mainly from an American-style comic book point of view, while Lucky Luke is a European-style BD, a series of books, not a magazine. Note that most of these books are bluelinks, and that these books have on average sold 3 to 4 million copies each. It may be better to put the list in a separate article, but it should definitely not be removed, as it consitutes the full history of the series. They are not "collected editions", they are the primary publication mechanism (not the first, in many cases that was a comics magazine like Spirou (magazine) or Pilote) of stand-alone stories which are continuously in print. Fram ( talk) 07:22, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Fred Jones (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.--
Crazy runner (
talk) 05:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Dittomaster has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 05:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Irving (comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 06:04, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
The article Duane Wilson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Crazy runner (
talk) 06:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Top 100 Comic Book Heroes - IGN If any were bordering on notability, this might help give them a push in the right direction. Blake ( Talk· Edits) 13:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Hey, guys. We're having a discussion on which photo would be a better Infobox portrait for the Larry Hama article here. Can anyone reading this join in? Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 06:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
I was wondering, filling in an infobox on a fictional comic book character, and they have been around for a long time published by multiple companies and titles, do you fill in information based on their original status when created, their status as of how they were most well known, how they are NOW, or all through their career? For instance, on affiliation with a team, they were originally solo, then printed by another company with a team, then printed by another company solo. Do I list the team anyways, and just make clear in the body text that is was a temporary affiliation? Mathewignash ( talk) 20:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I am interested in working on this at en.ws if it is in fact in the public domain. It is listed at this site as PD, and appears at archive.org as well. The archive.org scan appears to be from the former site so I am hesitant if it only is there because of the claim from this self-published site; can anyone confirm if the work is public domain? Or any insight would be awesome. Thank you - Theornamentalist ( talk) 13:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted.
Note: This article was nominated for deletion before Crazy runner added numerous references to the article.
Kurt Parker ( talk) 15:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Was my edit vandalism? [8] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 22:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I was going to attempt to revise the Cerebus the Aardvark article (I think it badly needs it), and part of my revision was to spin the 9 storylines of the book into separate articles (only High Society has anything like substance to it yet):
I started some of them, but at Talk:Cerebus the Aardvark, User:JasonAQuest objected to it, so I've stopped for the time being. I'd like to get some feedback from some other people on whether it's a good idea to have separate pages for the storylines (obviously I think it is), and reach a consensus on it before continuing. CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 21:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
So...does all this constitute consensus, or indifference? I mean, should I go ahead (when I find the time)? CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 14:20, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone know what cover this comic is a homage to? I know I recognize it. http://www.comicvine.com/transformers-timelines-generation-2-redux/37-236736/ ? Mathewignash ( talk) 20:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Since when did we start allowing people to cite the Handbook of the Marvel Universe? Aren't we supposed to avoid citing other encyclopedia sources? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/References lists it as a great source. Doczilla STOMP! 04:04, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Here's what's driving me nuts: List_of_Amalgam_Comics_characters. Consensus was that we wouldn't list DC/Marvel merged characters or which characters merged into them unless characters appeared in the actual comics and the merges were explicitly depicted in the origin source. Now it's full of merges alleged by http://www.marvunapp.com - which does not look to me like an official extension of the DC/Marvel manuals but another editor cites Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/References as if it is. I do not find Jeff Christiansen or his site listed anywhere on Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/References. Am I missing something? Doczilla STOMP! 09:00, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Per this discussion, is being nominated for and/or winning an Eisner award grounds for notability? I would tend to assume that nomination = no, winning = yes, but the question's been raised as to whether the award itself is significant enough that winning it is considered notable. Thanks for the assist. Doniago ( talk) 15:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
(Sorry this is so long)
For a little while I've been incubating an Autobio comics page in my sandbox. I haven't put a lot of work into it yet, as I've got other things on my plate (currently putting the most work into Chester Brown-related pages).
However, I got into a bit of a scuffle with TJ Black, who found out about the page I'm working on. He objects to my starting the page without project approval (actually, he wants me to leave wikipedia, but that's neither here nor there). So I'm proposing it here before continuing with it further.
There is an Autobiographical comics page, but in the Alternative comics community for a couple of decades now, the terms "autobiographical comics", "confessional autobio" and "autobio (comics)" have been used in a special way to talk about a subgenre of comics in which the author is particularly revealing about themselves. Works generally typifying the genre are Binky Brown Meets the Holy Virgin Mary by Justin Green, the autobio of Robert Crumb, Harvey Pekar's American Splendor, Chester Brown's autobio comics, all of Joe Matt's works, Daddy's Girl by Debbie Drechsler, and a number of others ( Art Spiegelman's Maus is often included as well).
Reasons for proposing an "autobio" page as separate from the "autobiographical" page:
Reasons for choosing the title "Autobio comics":
I could bore you people with reference after reference to the use of the term. I'm sure there are people here who familiar with it. I honestly don't care what it gets called, but I do think it should be distinct from "Autobiographical comics".
Why not make it a subsection of "Autobiographical comics"?
I hope to get some feedback on what other people think about starting the page. I had assumed the term had been so widespread for so long that it never crossed my mind that anyone would object to it until TJ Black said that, because he personally had never heard of the term, it basically doesn't exist.
To be honest, I don't care if I get "support" per se, as long as nobody else objects to having the page. I absolutely cannot fathom why anyone would so object to it, especially when there is someone both knowledgeable enough and motivated to do it—there are plently of people knowledgeable enough, but who can be bothered to actually do it? I can, so why on earth would anyone try to discourage it? I can't imagine pulling that on someone without a rock-solid reason—at least more solid than "I've never heard of it".
(having said all this, I actually have no intention of working on the page in the very near future, as I have a number of other things on my plate first).
CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 14:20, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
STOP !!!
Curly Turkey should receive a warning that he has to be careful with OR, reliable sources, ... if he wants to write such an article. I think that the warning has already be given. Now let him do some work and at the end juge the article if he has enought sources or content if he decides to merge it due to lack of sources. 130.120.37.11 ( talk) 07:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't want to contribute to the Autobiographical comics page, because
Please try to understand that adding a subsection to the Autobiographical comics page is not what I object to per se, but that such a section cannot be cleanly added. The page is a massive list which gives little context (other than breaking things into decades, but not separating cultures). It also makes the bizarre claim that it's a Canadian, American and French thing, and then goes on to list a pile of Japanese comics. All unreferenced. If someone wants to clean things up to make room for me, that'd be nice. I, personally, have no idea where to start, aside from rewriting the thing from scratch (which would mean the loss of quite a bit of content, as I have no idea what to do with it). So who's gonna help clean things up? ..............dead silence.................. (*)please note that I'm using the term "autobio" here to avoid using a long phrase in its place. I really want to keep the lid on that can of worms. CüRlyTüRkey Talk Contribs 10:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Can you provide a reliable source that makes the distinction between the wider class of autobiographical comics, and the subclass of autobio comics? Are there any reliable sources giving examples of comics that are autobiographies, but not autobio? The objections so far are not that your sources aren't reliable, but that they don't support the distinction you are trying to make, and aren't sufficient as a justification for two separate pages. As far as I can see, reliable sources call the same books "autobio", "autobiographies", "autobiographical comics", ... without further distinction or explanation, as if they are synonyms. Fram ( talk) 11:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Both of you, stop it. No more namecalling, no more sockpuppet accusations (open a WP:SPI if you have evidence, otherwise drop it), no more replies to one another. It doesn't matter if "the other" has the last word, just let it be. Fram ( talk) 13:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
TJ Black has decided that my unconditional surrender is not sufficient and is now continuing to browbeat me on my User_talk:Curly_Turkey#? talk page. Apparently I'm dirty for seven generations or something now for the horrible sins I've committed on this page. Could someone please direct me to the appropriate page of rites I can perform to atone for my abject horribleness? Unforgivable Sinner 02:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
The article List of minor Marvel Comics characters has been AFD'd. You may vote your opinion if it should stay or go here. Happy editing. Jhenderson 777 14:38, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I was looking at these pages here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Real_Ghostbusters_(comics)
and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostbusters:_Legion
Wouldn't it be better to combine the two as Ghostbusters (Comics)? Then someone could add the other series based on the property. Not just the Now Comics, Marvel UK, and 88MPH series but the one that Tokyopop did and the one that IDW Publishing is currently doing. This will then gather up all the various series (from different publishers) that have (and are currently) based on the property in one place. It would be more convient for readers. Don't you think? Giantdevilfish ( talk) 02:00, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
The image for Steve Ditko is up for deletion.
- J Greb ( talk) 18:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
To those helping out by adding reception sections for character articles in the top superheroes list: An IP user added notes to several articles, but did not include a link to the IGN list, so if you are helping out with this, you might want to fill out what they added. 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 02:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted. Kurt Parker ( talk) 13:58, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I brought this up wit User:Jhenderson777 a little while ago, but i want to bring these articles to everyone's attention:
Please leave your thoughts. Rusted AutoParts ( talk) 13:40 25 May 2011 (UTC)
The bio section on Mystique is long enough already, but someone added this unusually long section which appears to document the events of a single comic book! Anyone with some time on their hands care to give it a big trim? 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 11:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Is it a good idea to have these on character pages? Mabye yes, maybe no, but these are unsourced: Doctor Strange and Namor. 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 11:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
~
Any help fixing it up would be appreciated!!!-- S G Command 15:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Given that a major motion picture is likely to be a much bigger use of this title, this should probably be moved to X-Men: First Class (comics), and either the film moved from X-Men: First Class (film) to X-Men: First Class, or X-Men: First Class turned into a disambiguation page. postdlf ( talk) 15:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I favor turning X-Men: first Class into a dab page, and adding dab parentheticals onto the titles of the film and comic book articles using page moves. Nightscream ( talk) 19:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
We do not need a Crystal ball. The movie, a hollywood blockbuster, is already the main topic right now. But in any case, there shouldn't be a DAB of only 2 entries: one should keep the name, and link to the other in a hatnote Cambalachero ( talk) 02:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Another editor attempted to switch the primary and secondary topics, and an admin had to fix the moves. See WP:ANI#X-Men: First Class. The way I see it, we had two options in mind here, a disambiguation page listing both topics, or the film being primary with the comic book series being secondary. Since the setup follows the latter option now, we could request a move for the disambiguation page setup to see if the consensus is in favor of that. Erik ( talk | contribs) 20:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
For The Smurfs vs. The Smurfs (film), I just added a hatnote for the film to the main article: the film currently gets more traffic than the main page, but in this case it shouldn't be switched (unless the film becomes a really big hit, it will be the other way around one or two years from now) in my opinion. However, The Smurfs are a franchise of 50+ years running, while X-Men: First Class is much less established, so the situation is not really comparable. Fram ( talk) 13:45, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
It seems to me that this category is being over-used. There are, in truth, very few articles that are about actual comic book titles. The
Superman (vol 2) comic is one. However, any character who appeared in a self-titled comic seems to appear in the category. For example
Aquaman. The Aquaman article is about the character, not the title, although the publication history of the character usually acts as a defacto story of eponymous and other titles. "And other titles" is important. As is the fact that it only covers the character's appearances. If Aquaman was replace in his own title for a year, those issues are covered in that character's article. If there are back-up stories featuring other characters (and important issue in a title's story) that isn't covered. A disambig page would refer to the character, not the title.
To sum up: A article about a character isn't an article about a comic book title and the category should be for articles about titles. Or am I wrong here?
Duggy 1138 (
talk) 13:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
I have recently proposed moves of two comic book articles.
Spidey 104 14:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted. Spidey 104 21:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Please post your opinion on the discussion page for whether or not this article should be deleted.-- Crazy runner ( talk) 19:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Portal:Superhero fiction has been nominated for deletion. 65.94.47.63 ( talk) 07:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Please comment I created categories for unfinished and upcoming comics, per Category:Unfinished creative works and Category:Upcoming products—these are two very different things than a comic which is merely unpublished (and belongs to Category:Unreleased works by medium.) A comic like (e.g.) Sonic Disruptors was published, it just wasn't completed, whereas Flashpoint has not been published yet, but is upcoming. Twilight of the Superheroes is clearly an unpublished comic—it was never begun as a comic (it was merely scripted) and it is not slated to be released. I implemented these changes and inserted these categories into {{ Infobox future comic}} and List of comics that were never published, but User:J Greb removed them and wanted a discussion. I did this on our talk pages, but I guess that isn't sufficient. Thoughts? — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:11, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
OutdentPardon me I've not made myself clear. There are three types of comics I'm talking about here:
I did not create the first category, but I did create the latter two. The distinction seems clear to me: comics that were never even made, versus periodicals that were started and abandoned, versus comics that will (presumably) be released at some point. {{ Infobox future comics}} only applies to the latter of these and it was for this template that I replaced Category:Unpublished comics (which already existed) with Category:Upcoming comics (which I created) with the intention of separating these different kinds of publications. I have also never applied this template to any article, but it's clear to me that it only belongs on upcoming comics (not Sonic Disruptors—which will never be finisehd—nor Twilight of the Superheroes—which will never be begun as a publication at all.) Does that clarify? If I come across as pedantic here, please excuse me—I'm only trying to explain myself. Do these distinctions make sense and do you now see how they fit into a broader category scheme? — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 04:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I was looking at Jack Kirby and Biblography of... and I was wondering is it worth adding a section to writer/artists pages "List of characters created" (or a better section title (shouldn't be too hard)).
I understand there can be issues... determining who created what, whether the go by year or company, importances of characters, it being pointless on a lot of creator's pages, and a number of other things that I'm sure you guys will see imediately, but I'm interested to see what people think. 203.35.82.133 ( talk) 09:36, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Has anyone else noticed that the http://www.toonopedia.com/ web site has not been updated since February? The "Today in Toons" page lists the date as Friday, February 12, 1911. I used to check this web site a couple of times a week, and there was always someting new. Did something happen to Dan Markstein? -- Drvanthorp ( talk) 03:06, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I have a little problem with the consistancy in the articles:
These two moves are related and the singular discussion for the move is here. Spidey 104 16:04, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
There is a question of scope for the new Spider-Man: Big Time article. Please post opinions to the article talk page for us to come to a consensus. Thank you. Spidey 104 20:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Comics for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview questions here. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. If you have any questions, you can leave a note on my talk page. Have a great day. – SMasters ( talk) 12:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC) |
User:Harley Hudson proposed the deletion of all the articles about episodes from Spider-Man animated series [15]. I am agree that these articles have not enought notability and some of them are just a plot but a merging with a list of episodes by seasons will help keep informations and fix the problem. I have the feeling but I can be wrong that Harley Hudson prefers to delete articles instead of trying to fix them. There are no pages with a list of episodes and short summaries from seasons 1 and 5, valuable informations about episodes from seasons 2, 3, 4 can go into Spider-Man (1994 TV series) Season 2, Spider-Man (1994 TV series) Season 3 and Spider-Man (1994 TV series) Season 4. 85.171.170.161 ( talk) 03:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
We've kicked this around a few times and recently have been operating under an apparent consensus of not including appearance lists (AL) as sections unto themselves in a character article
Is this the still the current consensus? If so, we need to amend the MoS and exemplars pages to reflect it.
The reason I'm asking is that it's reared up again at Vext and since we didn't update things last time around, I'm leery to do it now without double checking.
FWIW, I can see a number of issues with inclusion:
- J Greb ( talk) 22:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
( ←) I'm not opposed to that type of solution, we just have to be clear on when/where it's done. Batman, Spider-Man, Wonder Woman, Flash, etc make sense. Vext, Orion, Taskmanster, etc don't. And some - like Aquaman - are going to have quibbles along the way. In the long run that will help deal with the issue Duggy raised below on catgorizing arcticles for comic book titles.
But with regard to the original intent of this post. What I'm proposing is to:
Thoughts?
- J Greb ( talk) 23:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I removed the bibliography section on Mastermind (Jason Wyngarde), but it got reverted. I thought it was the consensus that we remove these sections? 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 23:43, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
There's a discussion on Talk:Venom (comics)#Bibliography that I wanted to direct everyone's attention to, as it concerns the removal of the "Bibliography" section of the article, as well as Bibliography of Spider-Man titles. - SudoGhost ™ 19:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi wp:comics squad!
I was just doing an article on Justice League Dark, as part of my John Constantine obsession, and was wondering if it might be worth focusing the efforts of a few editors to cover the whole universe reboot due in September, to improve the focus of the efforts being made. My knowledge is entirely in the more odd side of DC, and as much love as I have for Supes, Batman, et al, I know I'm ill equipped to cover those bases!
Anyway, I really just wanted to guage interest in this, so let me know if you want to collaborate or think this might be a good (or awful) idea. Benny Digital Speak Your Brains 08:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I was just curious what this measures? Cloveapple ( talk) 17:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
The page needs to be corrected and improved because some IP addresses have added material. Someone who is familiar with the story of the could help. Negativecharge ( talk) 18:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Please someone take a look into this situation, where an IP editor(s) has been alleging errors made by comics creators without posting a source. [16] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 22:47, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
This page needs something; potentially it could become a chronology of tens of thousands of characters. The page needs to be refocused into a narrower topic, or possibly split into two pages. The page has a section for the various superheroes that deputed in each decade, but after the 1930's, the topic becomes way two large. The page could be culled down to a page of superhero debuts before, say, 1940, which would produce a nice pre-golden-age chronology, but I hate to trow away the after-1940 work that other people have contributed. Any suggestions?-- Drvanthorp ( talk) 03:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
The British comics workgroup seems to dead or dormant, so I'll raise my question here. It seems to me that in a lot of ways, particularly in the names of categories, American comic book terminology has been ported directly onto British comics in ways that don't fit. I've just created an article for Frank Bellamy's great serial in the Eagle, Fraser of Africa, and in trying to categorise it i've had to put it in Category:Eagle (comic book) titles and Category:Eagle (comic book) characters, which are sub-categories of Category:Eagle (comic book).
First of all, the Eagle is not a comic book, it's a comic. That's what we call them over here. The names of these categories should be changed to match the article title, which is Eagle (comic), not Eagle (comic book).
Secondly, "titles" is used in American comics for the names of publications published by a particular company, not features in a particular publication. Under those terms, Eagle is itself a "title". I'm not sure what the best term would be for a feature within a title like Fraser of Africa, but I lead towards "comic strip". "Serial" doesn't work as not all such strips are in serial format, "series" can mean the publication, and "feature" is too vague.
The same "title" terminology is used for other British comics - Category:2000 AD titles, Category:Crisis titles - while Category:DC Thomson Comics titles contains a mixture of titles and features, and Category:Marvel UK titles, Category:Rebellion Developments titles and Category:Trident Comics titles seem to be used correctly.
I propose:
That's before we consider whether we shouldn't have separate categories for the Eagle launched in 1950 and the Eagle launched in 1982, and if so, what they should be called.
Anyone have any objections, or better ideas? -- Nicknack009 ( talk) 11:45, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
...that seems a nice way to thank editors who are conscientious in always adding a WebCitation or Archive.org link when they add a footnote or EL, which is critical in preventing link rot. If anyone wants to use it, see the code on this page's edit mode. I don't know who created this, but compliments and acknowledgment to him/her.
Thank you for archiving | |
Message and signature go here. |
-- Tenebrae ( talk) 22:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Hellboy#Appearances_in_popular_culture - I figured anyone knowledgeable in comic books could help. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 07:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
I noticed that the page for Hawk (G.I. Joe) has the "Category:Devil's Due characters". Now I know he didn't originate in their comics, being a licensed GI Joe property, but he did appear in some Joe comics from DD. He also appeared in some IDW, Dreamwave and Marvel. Is this an appropriate use of categories, or should it be limited to only character? Should we list every publisher who had the character appear, only the first, or none at all for licensed toy line characters like this? Mathewignash ( talk) 18:59, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Your comments are requested here at a merge discussion about the best merge target for Rebel Ralston, Dino Manelli, and Happy Sam Sawyer. Any constructive contributions would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 12:09, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Nteinkvnc's notes: please rewrite good sentences seems to be missing key words from grammar, thanks you. - Nteinkvnc ( talk) 3:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
I've noticed that this user tends to remove subheaders from articles [17]. Is there any consensus on this sort of thing? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 16:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I thought that we had already resolved the issue of referring to one character as another's archenemy, that we needed a WP:RS to establish this? [18] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 14:51, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Imapaqrat is adding the categories; Category:Hostess comic ad characters, Category:Food advertising characters and Category:Advertising characters across character articles. It should also be noted that List of Hostess Comic Ad advertising characters which he/she created is up for speedy deletion.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 13:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Is this all original research? We don't have a solid connection between the film character and the comics character except that they are both named "Jason" and have similar powers. 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 23:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Please comment (for or against) in the discussion for merging Ghost Rider 2099 (character) into the Ghost Rider article. Spidey 104 13:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
I have recently discovered the Ultimate Comics: X-Men article (created by brand new user The ultimate x-man). I don't know enough on the subject (or the recent history of the Ultimate Universe in general) to be an effective fixer, so all I could do was some minor clean-up. I am hoping this post will recruit some help before this article grows into too big of a mess. Spidey 104 18:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
There is a discussion occuring involving the episode order of this TV series and the inclusion of a 'micro-series' here. Input would be greatly appreciated. -- ProfessorKilroy ( talk) 02:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
There is currently a Manual of Style discussion debating the merits of keeping or removing "Fictional character biography" sections from all Wikipedia articles. Many people involved in this project probably have opinions (for and against) on this, so I wanted to inform all of you so the discussion could have a full complement of people involved in the process. Spidey 104 17:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
This is something that has been a long time coming, but we need a clear point as to which names for characters can/should be used where in the articles. Right now we've got names in infoboxes, lead sections, tables, templates, and elsewhere that attempt to cover every option used for a character. By way of example:
|
|
And this is just a smattering of the high end characters.
Frankly, we should be sticking to the commonly used names - "Clark Kent", "Dick Grayson", "Ben Grimm", "Hank McCoy", etc - in the 'box, lead, and tables. No honorifics, no expansion of commonly used nicknames, no rarely used second or third names. If the "full" name is notable for some citable reason, it can get its due mention in the body of the article.
- J Greb ( talk) 23:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Anyone have an opinion on this? [20] There was previously some discussion on the talk page, but the editor in question did not respond. 108.69.80.43 ( talk) 03:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
The Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man title is going to relaunch next month with the new Miles Morales Spider-Man as the star. It's going to start again from issue #1. My question is, do we create an entirely new page for this book now, or does this become part of the Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man page? I see when the comic last relaunched we created a new page (the old one was Ultimate Spider-Man), but it appears this new one is retaining the name Ultimate Comics Spider-Man (see [here http://marvel.com/comic_books/issue/38394/ultimate_comics_spider-man_2011_1] and here) so I'm not sure how it should be handled this time around. — Hun ter Ka hn 16:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
I've been running through articles and merging to List of minor DC Comics characters or List of minor Marvel Comics characters as appropriate - plot only, no notability actually displayed. But I've been running into plot only articles that merging doesn't seem appropriate because:
The articles I've run across so far include:
|
Some of these wouldn't move to the lists I've indicated, but all of them need a solid look at improvement.
(I'm cross posting this to the main project as well.)
- J Greb ( talk) 14:34, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place on the micro-series and episode order of the Avengers:EMH show. I invite you to leave your thoughts here. Input would be greatly appreciated. -- ProfessorKilroy ( talk) 08:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
In case anyone wants to look this one over: [21] 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 18:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
I've been adding/editing most of the material on the Dynamo 5-related articles since creating them a few years ago, and have a question for which I need objective opinions. Can everyone here offer their views here? I really need them in order to proceed. Nightscream ( talk) 02:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
DC is officially calling it a relaunch and repeatedly saying "not a reboot". The original definition for a reboot (and the one that is still used for computers and movie/TV series) is a complete start from scratch. Some people still use that for comics. I know many have broadened the usage in comics because they (and especially DC) have so many "soft reboots" but I think for clarity and citability the page should be 2011 DC Universe relaunch.
Thoughts? Duggy 1138 ( talk) 00:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Yeah "The New 52" is the name that DC is using, so it should be moved to that. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 09:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
There seems to be a persistent vandal only account editing on articles such as Marvel Comics, Silver Age of Comic Books and MAX (comics) who seems intent on deleting article text without explanation. Seem to be using both the range 218.186.9.X and now user accounts (TheRoD1988). -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 12:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Still at it - reported but no admin response,so there is nothing else I can do. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 13:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Please come participate in the discussion and poll (since there is a list for graphic novels, too). Thank you. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 17:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Please participate here: Talk:Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film)#Requested move. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 05:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I think beano-style comics ( The Beano is the most popular in the genre) that is comics that are British and mainly consist of humour strips. There should be an article on that genre but I can not think of a proper name for it. comics such as The Dandy, Monster Fun, Comic Cuts, Smash! (comics), Buster (comics) and Whizzer and Chips among numerous others would fall into this genre. Eopsid ( talk) 21:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mr. Nebula is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Nebula until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Cambalachero ( talk) 02:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Barbara Gordon is currently at FAC. Any help with copy-editing or other concerns would be appreciated. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 21:39, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Before it escalates, I thought I'd bring it over here.
In Carlie Cooper, the article originally reads as follows:
User:MultipleTom believes it should read:
I think the former is the more encyclopedic approach in that it approaches the character from a real-world perspective, whereas the latter follows an 'in-universe' summary of the comic. Thoughts?-- CyberGhostface ( talk) 04:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I propose that since her marriage to Barry Allen has been retconned and that she is more well known as Iris West outside the comics, I propose moving the page to Iris West or Iris West I. - 67.171.250.39 ( talk) 16:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC) "Common name would be as is. We don't do roman numberals nor do we base it on today issue over the bulk of the character history of use. - J Greb ( talk) 00:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Is it appropriate to have a list of enemies in the Luke Cage article, such as this? 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 23:52, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
I would appreciate some help in improving on the quality of Gold Digger (comics) and possibly List of Gold Digger characters, by adding more references, characters, improving the structure, etcetera, to help get more attention for the book.
It is the most extensive (and charming) creator-owned American comicbook that is currently published, so it seems like a major shame that it doesn't get more attention, praise (and maybe an Avatar The Last Airbender or Ben 10: Ultimate Alien style animated series). The book is quite wonderful, and very ambitious, nowadays, even though it naturally started much weaker at the beginning, and definitely deserves a lot more love. Dave ( talk) 17:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I don't know if this matters to anyone, but 2010s in comics has been proposed for deletion on the grounds that it has no content. I created that page because I felt it was inevitable and I wanted to get rid of the redlink in the template, but I'm not particularly attached to it. Just an FYI. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 05:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Ilovethebeano ( talk · contribs) has been busily creating articles on very minor strips in the UK children's comics, The Dandy and The Beano. These aren't the major or long-lived strips, we've no issue with those, but on strips that often only lasted for one joke across a few issues. Basic notability is a problem, but so is the depth of coverage possible - most of these articles do no more than link a strip name with an artist and a publication date. With the lack of referencing, I assume no more than a primary source from The Beano itself, there's no scope for any expansion beyond this. As well as the strip articles being unreferenced, there are also a number of unrefed BLPs appearing on the comic artists.
A look at their talk page and their contribs history will show the problem. Despite regular notes on their talk page, they seem disinterested in changing this or discussing further. Time, I think, for the Trout Of Wisdom to be summoned. Andy Dingley ( talk) 11:50, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
I think Ilovethebeano has returned under the new username. beandand and here are his contributions. [23] he has made three new articles on comic strips (all from different comics mind you not just the Beano). Spoofer McGraw, Willy Nilly (comic strip) and Corporal Clott. the last of which is now a redirect. Eopsid ( talk) 10:28, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I suspect User:WizzKid XD [24] may be the same user abusing multiple accounts. Stephenb (Talk) 09:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I think Flavourbeans may also be ilovethebeano/beandand. He has also made a number of short articles on Beano/dandy comic strips. Such as Lucy Grimm, Bea and Ivy, Rocky's Horror Show, Stripz and Zappy. I have put merge notices on all these articles except for Stripz which I think should remain and Zappy (a strip from a fanzine) which has a deletion notice on there. Eopsid ( talk) 11:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)