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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
This archive page covers approximately the dates between 6 July 2005 and 24 August 2005.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)
Please add new archivals to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive06. Thank you. Hiding talk 19:45, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
I've noticed a discrepancy between our Ultimates and Ultimate X-Men articles that needs to be reconciled soon. The members of the Ultimates are linked to, and have articles titled as Ultimate Captain America, while the Ultimate X-Men members are merely linked to as the original continuity characters- the ultimate profile is folded in, and has a section within the page (as seen on Colossus (comics). I find two problems here:
I propose that we move all of the "Ultimate" character data and SHBs into subsections of the original characters' articles (as has been done with Colossus, and other X-Men. If the Ultimate character data grows large enough to warrant its own article, it should be titled something like Captain America (Ultimate). Comments? -- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:50, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
There are currently two different naming conventions being used for Ultimate Marvel characters. Some Ultimate characters have their own articles such as Ultimate Captain America. Others have entries in the article of the MU character, such as Colossus (comics). It was suggested that a poll be held to determine consensus.
Please sign your name using three tildes (~~~) under the position you support, possibly adding a brief comment. If you are happy with more than one possibility, you may wish to sign your names to more than one place. Extended commentary should be placed below, in the section marked "Discussion".
Discuss the Ultimates Naming Survey here.
Most Ultimate and MU characters share a lot of backstory, so separate articles may lead to unnecessary duplication. -- DropDeadGorgias
While I would have preferred higher participation, I think that this poll has been lingering long enough. As it stands, the policy that is winning in votes is:
However, the vote doesn't express as clear a consensus as I would like to start making these sweeping changes. JamDav, SoM, Hiding, are any of you still adamantly opposed to the merging of these characters into the main character articles? If any of you are, are there any middle-road proposals or changes to the existing proposal that you would like to make? If not, we can add this policy to the main WikiProject comics page, and start fixing the articles that do not comply with this policy at the end of this week. --
DropDeadGorgias
(talk) 21:56, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
I thought I was supporting the merging back of content. That's certainly what I thought I voted for. Hiding 12:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I was just wondering, do we have any notability guidelines as per WP:MUSIC? If not, shouldn't we knock some up? Hiding 19:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'll try and knock these thoughts up onto a seperate project page and get an RfC up in the next few days to try and stimulate more conversation. Hiding 5 July 2005 22:00 (UTC)
Mary Jane Watson | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
File:Comic spiderman mar jane.jpg | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
|
What d'y'think? Discuss at /templates#Supporting_characters_infobox_.28supersupportingbox.29- SoM 15:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
OK, I've just blocked this user for 24 hours for repeated copyvio, right after I had just warned him. Looking through his edit history, it seems like most of his edits are full page comic panels that violate wikipedia copyright policy. What do you guys think, should we mass-revert his edits, it seems like it might be necessary in this case. -- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 22:27, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
How about a subpage so there is a place to list comics related articles that need to be worked on or checked? Such as asking that a newly added superhero box be checked for format or accuracy. RJFJR 04:22, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
I like the Essential reading section on Ra's al Ghul#Essential reading. Maybe our project should set down guidelines for similar entries in all of our comic articles? We could have links to the major issues/trades that deal with crucial moments in a characters story arcs? -- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:14, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
Could all project members help us reach a consensus on this page regarding the level of detail needed to describe Wolverine's powers. Hiding 19:25, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
I pretty much back up SoM on this ScifiterX 22:00, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
While on RC patrol I encountered the brand-new article Kade. Can someone who knows more about comics than I do (and I know virtually nothing) clean it up and make sure it's in the right categories and stuff like that? Thanks! -- Angr/ tɔk tə mi 07:33, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
Okay this is a bit complicated and may have been covered before, but I think that in certain cases where a character has a long history of multiple titles then that character's eponymous title should get an entry, separate from that characters more "general" page, for the publication history of the eponymous title.
That may read a bit garbled, but for example look at Superman. The character has its own entry of course, ( Superman), but there are also pages for Action Comics and Adventures of Superman but none for the Superman comic. If Action and Adventures deserve their own pages then why not Superman? of course the main Superman article mentions the title in passing but is that enough?
This is not a problem unique to Supes of course. Batman, for instance, has separate entries for every notable title he's had save Batman itself, and Im sure the same is true for other multi-title characters such as Spider-Man and the X-Men.
The problem has come up for me recently as Ive been writing a few entries for creators. It seems wrong somehow to link to Spider-Man for a credit, especially after being able to link to Marvel Knights Spider-Man.
I could just go ahead and create the pages I suppose, but I think this idea might be controversial and Im know a lot of wikilinks would need to be changed. So what do you guy think?
Sorry about the length of this rant by the way. Hueysheridan 16:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I've seen separate entries for Madman and Madman (comics). The first article is about the character, the second article is about the comic. Dawn22 14 August 2005
This is going to keep being a problem for us, but we can cut down on the problem significantly by making our article naming policy very obvious. I copy/pasted a version of it from the Talk archives and merged it with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comic books), and if everyone likes that policy I suggest we put it someplace where people will see it, and try to enforce it. A couple articles that need renaming/moving, if that policy holds:
- leigh (φθόγγος) 04:09, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
The article 1959 in comics looks like it should be moved to a different title but I don't know where. Anyone have a suggestion? RJFJR 21:40, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
Having categories like "British comics artists", "American comics artists", etc, allows for there to be a page of "comics creators by country". But doesn't this mean that there's very little point in having an all-encompassing category of "comics writer" and "comics artist"? Wouldn't it be better for every writer/artist/letterer to be categorised by country (usually meaning their country of long-term residence)? Vizjim 14:07, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I was asked about Flash villains on my user page, and thought I'd bring it here:
Im not sure where this is appropriate to discuss and am brand new to this project and relatively new to the Wikipedia in general but I think it would be very useful to craete a list of the 616 canon including a detailed list of all comics describing events in the 616 Marvel continuity that and perhaps also a list of semi-canon works such as the Age of Apocalypse because it was a possible future that did come to pass but was corrected AND gave the 616 timeline important players such as X-Man and Sugar Man. Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions? Zephyrprince 20:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
'Yes, you are misreading it, see below. Thanks Zephyrprince 23:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello Zephyrprince, welcome to Wikipedia. Don't you think a list of all the events in the 616 continuity might be rather long? After all 616 includes pretty much every Marvel title except the Ultimate ones. Iron Ghost 22:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
First of all, I don't mean that we would describe the events but rather list the issues and series set in the 616 continuity and it is perposterous to say that Ultimate titles are the only ones not set in 616. A great deal of volume one of Excalibur takes place in other worlds although that would be on the second list that I proposed because it involves key players' 616 personas (the same could be said for Mutant X), the 1602 titles are not 616, the Rogue mini-series is arguably not cannon because of discontinuity, the Children of the Atom series, the Mangaverse, Days of Future Past is semi-cannon as is the XSE limited series, and there are countless more. yes, a great deal of what has been published is cannon but that is the point. Zephyrprince 23:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
`I just think that that sort of discussion/argument/debate could be really healthy Zephyrprince 10:55, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Nevertheless, 616 continuity comprises the vast bulk of everything Marvel have produced for over fourty years. A list would have to include several thousands of issues, you would have to go back all the way to Namor the Sub-Mariner (1939). Iron Ghost 00:06, 9 August 2005 (UTC) `Well that appeals to me. If anyone else is interested, please contact me. Zephyrprince 01:04, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Thought I'd introduce myself - User:Peteashton. Relatively new Wikipedian though I've been using it for a long while now. I've been involved with the British small press comics scene for a good 15 years now and have amassed a rather daunting number of zines and issues of TCJ. Seems logical to transfer that information onto Wikipedia.
My first three article of any note are Rian Hughes, Glenn Dakin and Escape Magazine. Feedback, editing and fleshing out would be appreciated! I also threw together List of Comics Journal interview subjects which has some gaps. Issues I've covered are in Talk. Folk might find it useful.
My plan is to circle around the Escape crowd and develop a history of British small press comics, something I've been meaning to do for a couple of years now. Then I'll start on the US scene (Top Shelf, Highwater, D&Q, Non, etc). And then.....
Peteashton 08:11, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi folks,
I just wanted to let you know about a list of votes for deletion on articles related to comics and animation. You can find the list here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation.
Since you're interested in comics and improving Wikipedia's coverage of them, you might want to monitor this list.
If you find the list useful, please also help to maintain it by adding new items and archiving old ones. Thanks!
Cheers,
-- Visviva 16:03, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
PS New members are needed and welcome at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting. Hope to see you there!
Partly in response to Hiding's post at Talk:Wolverine_(comics)#Section_listings, partly because this came up before, we didn't get anything near a consensus and it fizzled out.
I accept, even if I don't like, the fact that most people want Ultimate versions included in the main articles. With that in mind, here's how I think articles should go, as a starting point. Characters like Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, etc that have become more general pop culture icons aren't included so much in this.
(Introduction)
Obvious, no actual heading. Basically listing current/primary codename, real name, other significant codenames, publishing company, creators. Since long intros seem to be frowned upon in general, that should be pretty much it.
Publication history (open to renaming suggestions for most of these)
Real-life history of the character, who wrote it, what series they've had, their longevity, etc. Focusing on the comic, but passing mentions of all other-media versions, and acknowledging where these versions have impacted on the comics. Also mentioning reboots, etc.
Primary continuity - Golden Age version', Pre-Crisis version, Post-Crisis version, Marvel Universe version, etc if there's more than one comics version, Character biography if there isn't.
Filling in the first (or primary, if the "main" version isn't the original) continuity version of the character's history. Subsequent sections, Ultimate Marvel version, etc should follow if necessary, noting divergances. If the character is sufficiently different, in name, etc, or the article is excessively long, then this should be short and a Main article: ARTICLE NAME link should be provided.
Appearances in other media
Again, this depends on the significance of the other-media versions. If it can be covered in a sufficiently short space, here, otherwise breakout.
Powers and abilities
Discussing the commonalities only of the "major" versions (except where one, as with Superfriends Wonder Woman is completely different), leaning towards the primary and current versions but not excluding the others. Should not be excessive, or copyvio OHOTMU, etc stats - which are rarely held to in the comics anyway.
Bibliography
Sub-heading: List of titles
This should be a complete list of all solo stories of the character, as with most comics bibliographies now [i.e. in the form Booperman #1-499 (Geldof 3092 - Hexember 3189, Fictional Comics), etc as a bulleted list]
Sub-heading: List of Significant stories
What it says on the tin, with the same idea as #Essential Reading above. Need to be checked for POV, etc, obviously.
External links
Bet you can't guess ;)
Comment? - SoM 20:52, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
My thoughts SoM responded to were to have the powers section as a subsection of the main cahracter biography, and the Ultimate version and other media at the end, to discuss variations from the main character. Otherwise, to me, it doesn't seem clear which version the powers belong to, and if there are some characters whose divergent alter egos have differing powers, it makes sense to have established the original powers before discussing the diverging character's powers.
However, I would still suggest the other media section should be below the powers section in the above version, if that one is preferred, again for clarity.
But yeah, thoughts either way are appreciated, and we could then list the decision at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars for future reference. Hiding talk 22:21, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
Personally, I think the intro suggested is repeating much of the information in the box to the right so that shold be rethought.-- Jamdav86 09:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Otherwise, this is the article layout I'll suggest:
Just my views. -- Jamdav86 09:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Just to move this on a bit, no-one else seems to have joined in.
Thoughts? Hiding talk 19:34, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
I like it, because its similar to my suggestion above and I don't really care about where the powers and abilities section is -- Jamdav86 18:00, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm a newbie to WikiProject Comics, although I've contributed a couple of articles to the general Wikipedia, so tell me if I'm out of line here - for example, if this issue has already been settled somewhere else.
It seems to me that one of the most important discussions to have here is to determine the scope of the terms "comics", "comic strips", "webcomics", "comic books", "cartoons", "animated cartoons", "graphic novels", "manga", and so on. (They may be overlapping.)
Example 1: I was highly annoyed to find that the Wikipedia article on Max and Moritz describes it as a comic strip. Max and Moritz is an illustrated rhymed story, and I don't see any meaningful distinction between it and "The Cat in the Hat" by Dr. Seuss. The reason it's frequently mentioned in histories of comic strips is that it was an inspiration for The Katzenjammer Kids, which is clearly one of the early comic strips.
Example 2: According to the discussion page, Astérix, Jeremiah, and Tintin were removed from the List of comic strips page because they were considered comic books. In that case, the same should apply to Blake and Mortimer. Some other questionable entries are Believe It Or Not!, which is not narrative; Dennis the Menace (UK), which is a full page in a comic book (in tabloid format); and Howard the Duck, which is a comic book.
Since my main interest is newspaper comic strips, I would like to suggest the distinguishing characteristics of comic strips, and open the floor for discussion. When consensus is reached, the next step would be to eliminate noncompliant works from the List of comic strips.
1. A comic strip must have pictures. It need not have words (allow pantomime strips like Henry and Ferd'nand). If it has words, they may be in speech balloons, captions, or both (allow Prince Valiant and Tarzan). Speech balloons are not necessarily enclosed. Captions should be within the panel area, or one or two lines of text directly underneath it (allow Dennis the Menace and Marmaduke; disallow Dave Barry's humor column with MacNelly illustrations, Rodolphe Töpffer's stories, Droodles). A panel is a single picture, representing a scene caught at a single moment, with its attendant text (dialogue or caption), usually enclosed in a frame line.
2. A comic strip is a serial publication. It appears in a periodical printed medium of communication, usually a newspaper or magazine (should the Internet be allowed?). Normally it continues to appear for an indefinite period, as long as it remains in demand, or until the author dies or retires. Individual installments of the strip, corresponding to single issues of its host medium, are narrative - they tell a story or part of a story. Installments may consist of one or several panels (note that most multi-panel comic strips occasionally use a single panel when appropriate, e.g. Non Sequitur). Consecutive installments may or may not form an extended narrative. There may or may not be continuing characters (allow Bizarro and Dreams of a Rarebit Fiend).
3. A comic strip, reproduced in any other medium, is still a comic strip. Some of the earliest comic books were devoted to reprints of comic strips, and there are many collections of comic strips in book format.
4. A comic book is not a comic strip. I wasn't able to come up with a clear criterion to distinguish between comic strips and comic books. Does the word "strip" imply one horizontal row? If there are multiple rows of panels in an installment (or, a fortiori, multiple pages), does that make it a comic book story? Ed Wheelan's newspaper comic strip Minute Movies typically had two rows of panels crammed together horizontally. It would be a shame to separate Sunday funnies from daily comic strips: most of them have the same titles, authors, and continuities as the dailies. In the first half of the twentieth century, many Sunday funnies occupied all or nearly all of a newspaper page. If the daily Gasoline Alley is a comic strip, the Sunday Gasoline Alley page should be too. On the other hand, it would be reasonable to call The Spirit a comic book. It was distributed with the Sunday newspaper, but its stories covered several full pages. Should all magazines devoted primarily to cartoon stories be called comic books? Should Sergio Aragonés's "drawn-out drawings" in MAD be called a comic strip? How about the Hazel cartoons in the Saturday Evening Post, by Ted Key, or Hoest's Laugh Parade in Parade Magazine? How about Pee Wee Harris in Boys' Life? I would disallow The Spirit, "drawn-out drawings", Hazel, Laugh Parade, and Pee Wee Harris. Is that the consensus?
Gwil 06:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Does that help any? I think as you say, it is a question of usage of the term comic strip around the world that causes the problem. I think if the list clearly defines what is included and not included, that would solve inclusion and exclusion issues somewhat. At the moment the list uses the comic strip article as its definition for inclusion and exclusion, which currently doesn't discuss the single panel, which at the moment has an article at Gag cartoon, but does include the European and UK definition. However the article is currently somewhat North American centric. However, this discussion, if it relates to List of comic strips, is probably best had there. Hiding talk 13:11, 24 August 2005 (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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
This archive page covers approximately the dates between 6 July 2005 and 24 August 2005.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)
Please add new archivals to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive06. Thank you. Hiding talk 19:45, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
I've noticed a discrepancy between our Ultimates and Ultimate X-Men articles that needs to be reconciled soon. The members of the Ultimates are linked to, and have articles titled as Ultimate Captain America, while the Ultimate X-Men members are merely linked to as the original continuity characters- the ultimate profile is folded in, and has a section within the page (as seen on Colossus (comics). I find two problems here:
I propose that we move all of the "Ultimate" character data and SHBs into subsections of the original characters' articles (as has been done with Colossus, and other X-Men. If the Ultimate character data grows large enough to warrant its own article, it should be titled something like Captain America (Ultimate). Comments? -- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:50, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
There are currently two different naming conventions being used for Ultimate Marvel characters. Some Ultimate characters have their own articles such as Ultimate Captain America. Others have entries in the article of the MU character, such as Colossus (comics). It was suggested that a poll be held to determine consensus.
Please sign your name using three tildes (~~~) under the position you support, possibly adding a brief comment. If you are happy with more than one possibility, you may wish to sign your names to more than one place. Extended commentary should be placed below, in the section marked "Discussion".
Discuss the Ultimates Naming Survey here.
Most Ultimate and MU characters share a lot of backstory, so separate articles may lead to unnecessary duplication. -- DropDeadGorgias
While I would have preferred higher participation, I think that this poll has been lingering long enough. As it stands, the policy that is winning in votes is:
However, the vote doesn't express as clear a consensus as I would like to start making these sweeping changes. JamDav, SoM, Hiding, are any of you still adamantly opposed to the merging of these characters into the main character articles? If any of you are, are there any middle-road proposals or changes to the existing proposal that you would like to make? If not, we can add this policy to the main WikiProject comics page, and start fixing the articles that do not comply with this policy at the end of this week. --
DropDeadGorgias
(talk) 21:56, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
I thought I was supporting the merging back of content. That's certainly what I thought I voted for. Hiding 12:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I was just wondering, do we have any notability guidelines as per WP:MUSIC? If not, shouldn't we knock some up? Hiding 19:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'll try and knock these thoughts up onto a seperate project page and get an RfC up in the next few days to try and stimulate more conversation. Hiding 5 July 2005 22:00 (UTC)
Mary Jane Watson | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
File:Comic spiderman mar jane.jpg | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
|
What d'y'think? Discuss at /templates#Supporting_characters_infobox_.28supersupportingbox.29- SoM 15:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
OK, I've just blocked this user for 24 hours for repeated copyvio, right after I had just warned him. Looking through his edit history, it seems like most of his edits are full page comic panels that violate wikipedia copyright policy. What do you guys think, should we mass-revert his edits, it seems like it might be necessary in this case. -- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 22:27, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
How about a subpage so there is a place to list comics related articles that need to be worked on or checked? Such as asking that a newly added superhero box be checked for format or accuracy. RJFJR 04:22, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
I like the Essential reading section on Ra's al Ghul#Essential reading. Maybe our project should set down guidelines for similar entries in all of our comic articles? We could have links to the major issues/trades that deal with crucial moments in a characters story arcs? -- DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:14, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
Could all project members help us reach a consensus on this page regarding the level of detail needed to describe Wolverine's powers. Hiding 19:25, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
I pretty much back up SoM on this ScifiterX 22:00, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
While on RC patrol I encountered the brand-new article Kade. Can someone who knows more about comics than I do (and I know virtually nothing) clean it up and make sure it's in the right categories and stuff like that? Thanks! -- Angr/ tɔk tə mi 07:33, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
Okay this is a bit complicated and may have been covered before, but I think that in certain cases where a character has a long history of multiple titles then that character's eponymous title should get an entry, separate from that characters more "general" page, for the publication history of the eponymous title.
That may read a bit garbled, but for example look at Superman. The character has its own entry of course, ( Superman), but there are also pages for Action Comics and Adventures of Superman but none for the Superman comic. If Action and Adventures deserve their own pages then why not Superman? of course the main Superman article mentions the title in passing but is that enough?
This is not a problem unique to Supes of course. Batman, for instance, has separate entries for every notable title he's had save Batman itself, and Im sure the same is true for other multi-title characters such as Spider-Man and the X-Men.
The problem has come up for me recently as Ive been writing a few entries for creators. It seems wrong somehow to link to Spider-Man for a credit, especially after being able to link to Marvel Knights Spider-Man.
I could just go ahead and create the pages I suppose, but I think this idea might be controversial and Im know a lot of wikilinks would need to be changed. So what do you guy think?
Sorry about the length of this rant by the way. Hueysheridan 16:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I've seen separate entries for Madman and Madman (comics). The first article is about the character, the second article is about the comic. Dawn22 14 August 2005
This is going to keep being a problem for us, but we can cut down on the problem significantly by making our article naming policy very obvious. I copy/pasted a version of it from the Talk archives and merged it with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comic books), and if everyone likes that policy I suggest we put it someplace where people will see it, and try to enforce it. A couple articles that need renaming/moving, if that policy holds:
- leigh (φθόγγος) 04:09, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
The article 1959 in comics looks like it should be moved to a different title but I don't know where. Anyone have a suggestion? RJFJR 21:40, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
Having categories like "British comics artists", "American comics artists", etc, allows for there to be a page of "comics creators by country". But doesn't this mean that there's very little point in having an all-encompassing category of "comics writer" and "comics artist"? Wouldn't it be better for every writer/artist/letterer to be categorised by country (usually meaning their country of long-term residence)? Vizjim 14:07, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I was asked about Flash villains on my user page, and thought I'd bring it here:
Im not sure where this is appropriate to discuss and am brand new to this project and relatively new to the Wikipedia in general but I think it would be very useful to craete a list of the 616 canon including a detailed list of all comics describing events in the 616 Marvel continuity that and perhaps also a list of semi-canon works such as the Age of Apocalypse because it was a possible future that did come to pass but was corrected AND gave the 616 timeline important players such as X-Man and Sugar Man. Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions? Zephyrprince 20:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
'Yes, you are misreading it, see below. Thanks Zephyrprince 23:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello Zephyrprince, welcome to Wikipedia. Don't you think a list of all the events in the 616 continuity might be rather long? After all 616 includes pretty much every Marvel title except the Ultimate ones. Iron Ghost 22:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
First of all, I don't mean that we would describe the events but rather list the issues and series set in the 616 continuity and it is perposterous to say that Ultimate titles are the only ones not set in 616. A great deal of volume one of Excalibur takes place in other worlds although that would be on the second list that I proposed because it involves key players' 616 personas (the same could be said for Mutant X), the 1602 titles are not 616, the Rogue mini-series is arguably not cannon because of discontinuity, the Children of the Atom series, the Mangaverse, Days of Future Past is semi-cannon as is the XSE limited series, and there are countless more. yes, a great deal of what has been published is cannon but that is the point. Zephyrprince 23:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
`I just think that that sort of discussion/argument/debate could be really healthy Zephyrprince 10:55, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Nevertheless, 616 continuity comprises the vast bulk of everything Marvel have produced for over fourty years. A list would have to include several thousands of issues, you would have to go back all the way to Namor the Sub-Mariner (1939). Iron Ghost 00:06, 9 August 2005 (UTC) `Well that appeals to me. If anyone else is interested, please contact me. Zephyrprince 01:04, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Thought I'd introduce myself - User:Peteashton. Relatively new Wikipedian though I've been using it for a long while now. I've been involved with the British small press comics scene for a good 15 years now and have amassed a rather daunting number of zines and issues of TCJ. Seems logical to transfer that information onto Wikipedia.
My first three article of any note are Rian Hughes, Glenn Dakin and Escape Magazine. Feedback, editing and fleshing out would be appreciated! I also threw together List of Comics Journal interview subjects which has some gaps. Issues I've covered are in Talk. Folk might find it useful.
My plan is to circle around the Escape crowd and develop a history of British small press comics, something I've been meaning to do for a couple of years now. Then I'll start on the US scene (Top Shelf, Highwater, D&Q, Non, etc). And then.....
Peteashton 08:11, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi folks,
I just wanted to let you know about a list of votes for deletion on articles related to comics and animation. You can find the list here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation.
Since you're interested in comics and improving Wikipedia's coverage of them, you might want to monitor this list.
If you find the list useful, please also help to maintain it by adding new items and archiving old ones. Thanks!
Cheers,
-- Visviva 16:03, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
PS New members are needed and welcome at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting. Hope to see you there!
Partly in response to Hiding's post at Talk:Wolverine_(comics)#Section_listings, partly because this came up before, we didn't get anything near a consensus and it fizzled out.
I accept, even if I don't like, the fact that most people want Ultimate versions included in the main articles. With that in mind, here's how I think articles should go, as a starting point. Characters like Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, etc that have become more general pop culture icons aren't included so much in this.
(Introduction)
Obvious, no actual heading. Basically listing current/primary codename, real name, other significant codenames, publishing company, creators. Since long intros seem to be frowned upon in general, that should be pretty much it.
Publication history (open to renaming suggestions for most of these)
Real-life history of the character, who wrote it, what series they've had, their longevity, etc. Focusing on the comic, but passing mentions of all other-media versions, and acknowledging where these versions have impacted on the comics. Also mentioning reboots, etc.
Primary continuity - Golden Age version', Pre-Crisis version, Post-Crisis version, Marvel Universe version, etc if there's more than one comics version, Character biography if there isn't.
Filling in the first (or primary, if the "main" version isn't the original) continuity version of the character's history. Subsequent sections, Ultimate Marvel version, etc should follow if necessary, noting divergances. If the character is sufficiently different, in name, etc, or the article is excessively long, then this should be short and a Main article: ARTICLE NAME link should be provided.
Appearances in other media
Again, this depends on the significance of the other-media versions. If it can be covered in a sufficiently short space, here, otherwise breakout.
Powers and abilities
Discussing the commonalities only of the "major" versions (except where one, as with Superfriends Wonder Woman is completely different), leaning towards the primary and current versions but not excluding the others. Should not be excessive, or copyvio OHOTMU, etc stats - which are rarely held to in the comics anyway.
Bibliography
Sub-heading: List of titles
This should be a complete list of all solo stories of the character, as with most comics bibliographies now [i.e. in the form Booperman #1-499 (Geldof 3092 - Hexember 3189, Fictional Comics), etc as a bulleted list]
Sub-heading: List of Significant stories
What it says on the tin, with the same idea as #Essential Reading above. Need to be checked for POV, etc, obviously.
External links
Bet you can't guess ;)
Comment? - SoM 20:52, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
My thoughts SoM responded to were to have the powers section as a subsection of the main cahracter biography, and the Ultimate version and other media at the end, to discuss variations from the main character. Otherwise, to me, it doesn't seem clear which version the powers belong to, and if there are some characters whose divergent alter egos have differing powers, it makes sense to have established the original powers before discussing the diverging character's powers.
However, I would still suggest the other media section should be below the powers section in the above version, if that one is preferred, again for clarity.
But yeah, thoughts either way are appreciated, and we could then list the decision at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars for future reference. Hiding talk 22:21, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
Personally, I think the intro suggested is repeating much of the information in the box to the right so that shold be rethought.-- Jamdav86 09:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Otherwise, this is the article layout I'll suggest:
Just my views. -- Jamdav86 09:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Just to move this on a bit, no-one else seems to have joined in.
Thoughts? Hiding talk 19:34, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
I like it, because its similar to my suggestion above and I don't really care about where the powers and abilities section is -- Jamdav86 18:00, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm a newbie to WikiProject Comics, although I've contributed a couple of articles to the general Wikipedia, so tell me if I'm out of line here - for example, if this issue has already been settled somewhere else.
It seems to me that one of the most important discussions to have here is to determine the scope of the terms "comics", "comic strips", "webcomics", "comic books", "cartoons", "animated cartoons", "graphic novels", "manga", and so on. (They may be overlapping.)
Example 1: I was highly annoyed to find that the Wikipedia article on Max and Moritz describes it as a comic strip. Max and Moritz is an illustrated rhymed story, and I don't see any meaningful distinction between it and "The Cat in the Hat" by Dr. Seuss. The reason it's frequently mentioned in histories of comic strips is that it was an inspiration for The Katzenjammer Kids, which is clearly one of the early comic strips.
Example 2: According to the discussion page, Astérix, Jeremiah, and Tintin were removed from the List of comic strips page because they were considered comic books. In that case, the same should apply to Blake and Mortimer. Some other questionable entries are Believe It Or Not!, which is not narrative; Dennis the Menace (UK), which is a full page in a comic book (in tabloid format); and Howard the Duck, which is a comic book.
Since my main interest is newspaper comic strips, I would like to suggest the distinguishing characteristics of comic strips, and open the floor for discussion. When consensus is reached, the next step would be to eliminate noncompliant works from the List of comic strips.
1. A comic strip must have pictures. It need not have words (allow pantomime strips like Henry and Ferd'nand). If it has words, they may be in speech balloons, captions, or both (allow Prince Valiant and Tarzan). Speech balloons are not necessarily enclosed. Captions should be within the panel area, or one or two lines of text directly underneath it (allow Dennis the Menace and Marmaduke; disallow Dave Barry's humor column with MacNelly illustrations, Rodolphe Töpffer's stories, Droodles). A panel is a single picture, representing a scene caught at a single moment, with its attendant text (dialogue or caption), usually enclosed in a frame line.
2. A comic strip is a serial publication. It appears in a periodical printed medium of communication, usually a newspaper or magazine (should the Internet be allowed?). Normally it continues to appear for an indefinite period, as long as it remains in demand, or until the author dies or retires. Individual installments of the strip, corresponding to single issues of its host medium, are narrative - they tell a story or part of a story. Installments may consist of one or several panels (note that most multi-panel comic strips occasionally use a single panel when appropriate, e.g. Non Sequitur). Consecutive installments may or may not form an extended narrative. There may or may not be continuing characters (allow Bizarro and Dreams of a Rarebit Fiend).
3. A comic strip, reproduced in any other medium, is still a comic strip. Some of the earliest comic books were devoted to reprints of comic strips, and there are many collections of comic strips in book format.
4. A comic book is not a comic strip. I wasn't able to come up with a clear criterion to distinguish between comic strips and comic books. Does the word "strip" imply one horizontal row? If there are multiple rows of panels in an installment (or, a fortiori, multiple pages), does that make it a comic book story? Ed Wheelan's newspaper comic strip Minute Movies typically had two rows of panels crammed together horizontally. It would be a shame to separate Sunday funnies from daily comic strips: most of them have the same titles, authors, and continuities as the dailies. In the first half of the twentieth century, many Sunday funnies occupied all or nearly all of a newspaper page. If the daily Gasoline Alley is a comic strip, the Sunday Gasoline Alley page should be too. On the other hand, it would be reasonable to call The Spirit a comic book. It was distributed with the Sunday newspaper, but its stories covered several full pages. Should all magazines devoted primarily to cartoon stories be called comic books? Should Sergio Aragonés's "drawn-out drawings" in MAD be called a comic strip? How about the Hazel cartoons in the Saturday Evening Post, by Ted Key, or Hoest's Laugh Parade in Parade Magazine? How about Pee Wee Harris in Boys' Life? I would disallow The Spirit, "drawn-out drawings", Hazel, Laugh Parade, and Pee Wee Harris. Is that the consensus?
Gwil 06:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Does that help any? I think as you say, it is a question of usage of the term comic strip around the world that causes the problem. I think if the list clearly defines what is included and not included, that would solve inclusion and exclusion issues somewhat. At the moment the list uses the comic strip article as its definition for inclusion and exclusion, which currently doesn't discuss the single panel, which at the moment has an article at Gag cartoon, but does include the European and UK definition. However the article is currently somewhat North American centric. However, this discussion, if it relates to List of comic strips, is probably best had there. Hiding talk 13:11, 24 August 2005 (UTC)