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 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 |
Haven't we already seen Category:Comic characters adapted into the Marvel Cinematic Universe or something like it, at least a dozen times or more before? Is this a sock do you think, or could this be just a new person who thought they saw something that needed to exist? 2601:241:4280:161:7CB9:D7A6:1893:1E73 ( talk) 04:54, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to blacklist certain titles of categories? Is so, perhaps we could use that to blacklist variations of "Category:X-Men franchise characters" and the like before he creates them. Or that the very least, have them creation-protected. Dark Knight 2149 01:51, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Here's a start: User:TheJoebro64/sandbox/CensoredScribe categories JOE BRO 64 23:30, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
A few of us over at the Webcomics work group happen to frequent the Wikimedia Discord server quite a lot, and we are considering asking the moderators there to create a space (channel) specifically for our discussions. ferret ( talk · contribs) suggested we'd ask the larger project if they are interested first, though. This would involve a certain level of activity on Discord and a banner on the WikiProject page. If there isn't enough interest here, I suppose we'll make it a purely webcomics-focused one. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 13:14, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Just asking [1]. I am of the opinion that cosmic entities like the Phoenix, or Galactus, etc, are beyond such classifications, but I could be wrong. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:142D:D882:130F:3CEB ( talk) 21:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
This series of edits is concerning me; is that independent commentary "POV-pushing", as the editor suggests? 2601:241:4280:161:DDA9:A4FF:741:DFFD ( talk) 14:41, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
I have created an article on Frank Cirocco, a comics artist and video game designer. Within the comics industry, he is best know as the co-creator of the Alien Legion series for Epic Comics. Cirocco has worked in the video game business for several decades but I have no proper reference sources for his extensive contributions in that field. Anyone who has expertise and reliable sources for the history of video game design/development is welcome to expand the new article. Your assistance is greatly appreciated! Mtminchi08 ( talk) 03:17, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I have started a discussion of whether Les tours de cristal should be merged into Bob Morane (comics) if anyone is interested please join at Talk:Bob Morane (comics) Dwanyewest ( talk) 15:33, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Just curious for what the consensus would be. User:Btpowers91 has been going around for some time changing "This character appears in this movie/game/whatever" to "This character appeared in this movie/game/whatever" or "This actor portrays" to "This actor portrayed". I for one thought that since we use present tense for fictional descriptions, should we not also use that for appearances outside of the main fiction? As in, whenever you read a comic, watch a movie or TV show, or play a game, those events are happening (over and over again, as it may be) while you are viewing them, rather than considering them past events? I'm not sure though, so I figured I would bring it up here. 76.231.73.99 ( talk) 12:55, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Mtminchi08 ( talk) 16:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
As in the opposite and equal to Darkforce presumably? User:Penguin7812 has added this to Cloak and Dagger (comics) [2] and Darkforce [3] without citation, making it impossible to tell if this is an actual thing from the comics, or if it is WP:OR. 76.231.73.99 ( talk) 13:13, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
As per this edit? 68.99.79.11 ( talk) 00:57, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I reverted it to just "character" again. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:23, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
There's a discussion regarding a potential WP:MOS on all fictional characters. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Manual of Style for fictional characters?. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 22:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Are these legit character categories? 68.99.79.11 ( talk) 04:31, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
There's an ongoing dispute regarding My Little Pony: Fiend-ship Is Magic at Talk:My Little Pony (IDW Publishing)#One-off or not.. Although it ran for five issues, Fiend-ship was published alongside Friendship Is Magic (IDW's primary publication) and Friends Forever (the secondary publication at that time), it did not replace Friends Forever as a secondary title outright, and all its issues were published within the month of April 2015. So I view Fiend-ship as a one-off publication like annuals, Holiday Special, and other specials. But someone thinks otherwise, and claims Fiend-ship should be considered as a secondary title along the lines of Micro-series, Friends Forever, Legends of Magic, Ponyville Mysteries and Nightmare Knights. Care to give a comment? JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 12:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Just perusing various comics related pages and noticed that someone seems very keen on inserting lead section paragraphs on character pages, naming actors in (usually recent) movie adaptations, usually in the form "made his/her cinematic debut...". This often follows mentions of other media appearances, but no other voice actors etc are usually mentioned, privileging movies over all other media, even the original comics. The original creators, or relevant historical creators, are rarely mentioned in these lead sections. Just actors.
Perhaps it is relevant in some cases, but even minor appearances like Mac Gargan in a recent movie are placed in the lead. Isn't the "In other media" section the proper place for this? Otherwise, why are only movie actors considered important enough for the lead section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.182.48.158 ( talk) 05:36, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
"Yahn Rgg and Ro-Nan also appears in this reality where he is the Ultimate Universe version of Yon-Rogg and Ronan." Reading that sentence straight on, it doesn't seem to make much sense. Are we talking about two characters, or one character with two identities? If we are talking about two characters, why are we using "appears" and "he is" instead of "appear" and "they are"? If we are talking about one character, why isn't this rewritten to make that clearer? I certainly am confused by this sentence, how about you? Perhaps User:Penguin7812 can explain the intention on keeping it reading in such a format [5]? 2601:241:4280:161:C03A:7EE:6362:F5B1 ( talk) 11:47, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello guys, I have been thinking about creating a article about Nyx, the main villain of Avengers No Road Home, most specifically this character [6]. I think the character should be mentioned in Wikipedia, but I don't if it should as a article or as a section in List of Marvel Comics characters: N. What do you think? Penguin7812 ( talk) 05:46, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
An editor has been adding a paragraph to dozen of articles along the lines of this example from Al Williamson:
References
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
It's always referencing one of two books in the The Artist Within series, and the strong majority are comics creator pages (there are some animation and other artists, but it leans comics enough that this seems the relevant project.) I want people's input on whether this is appropriate. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 23:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
As the editor in question, please find I started adding the info (with appropriate references) about The Artist Within to the various pages of those artists who agreed to be in the project not as promotional - but as a reference point, because the books document those artists within their creative working spaces. In that many of those artists have now passed, the collection of artists within the books serves as an important reference point of popular artists of the 20th century. It has become enough of a reference point, that venues such as the Academy Awards, the Eisner Awards, and publications such as The Atlantic Magazine, The Washington Post, and Newsday have utilized the portraits within it. While studios and processes are sometimes described within some artists wikipedia pages/articles, the Artist Within collection of the two books uniquely documents those artists and their individual creative workspaces. I hold that 1. being included with the overall collection of artists assembled is significant and not trivial, and 2. That the portraits of the artists within and depicting their native studio spaces is also significant as documentary reference on those individual artists and how they work/worked. My edits were perceived as being promotional when that was not the intention, and would like to seek discussion and consensus if the information is appropriate, and how it may be included. I suggested perhaps reworking the original sentence and including it as a book citation? Thank you for your thoughts. Martinishot77 ( talk) 00:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
After discussing at Talk:Spider-Man: Far From Home#Does the Chameleon appear in this movie? and getting no response from User:Hhggtg3279 who would rather edit-war [7] [8] than discuss his sources, it is clear to me that it is mere speculation to say that the Chameleon appears in Spider-Man: Far From Home in any capacity. All the sources I have seen which try to claim that a character named Dmitri is actually Chameleon have a lot of "may be" and "we think" sort of speculative talk - in other words, I have not seen a source which can confirm that this is the same character instead of just some random character who happens to be associate of fake-Fury. So, how do we determine that this Dimitri is really supposed to be an extremely low-key supervillain, using such dubious sources as "Blasting News", and then the link to comicbookmovie.com which says things like "May Introduce A Different Take On Chameleon", and notes that the director said "We're not specifically saying that he's...but we're not not saying." and somehow this user is translating that into proof that it was definitely the same character? Do we even have a source on the character's last name in the film being the same as the character's last name from the comics? Alternately, there is the ScreenRant link, which says "This immediately tipped off Marvel fans that he could be playing Dmitri Smerdyakov, better known as classic Spider-Man foe Chameleon. This role was never confirmed to be who Acar was playing, but we learned some surprising details about him." So, again, do the sources support the assertion that this is the same character? It looks to me like these sources are just speculating, and that there is no official confirmation and the movie doesn't identify him as such. Meanwhile, if my assertions are correct, then the user needs to stop edit-warring to include this information and find better sources to confirm his viewpoint. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 15:12, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Smerdyakov is not the only Marvel character with the name Dmitri, though he is the one most closely connected to Spider-Man. See here.
The most notable of the others is Dmitri Bukharin, the longest-serving character to use the Crimson Dynamo identity. Dimadick ( talk) 12:55, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
Please don't put spoilers for recent films in your subsection title because this page shows up on people's watch page. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 16:21, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
I have updated the Template:Thor family tree with its new current members. However, User:TriiipleThreat keeps reverting it to its original outdated form. We need to solve this as I don't see a reason why not to include these members of Thor's family as they're legit members and deserve to be in the main body and not just mentions. Penguin7812 (Talk Page) 11:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Who said that the placement judged the age of the characters.That’s how family trees work. They read top down and left to right. It’s best just to mirror the actual source. These new characters are still mentioned in prose, so no information is lost. I have no idea what’s going on in Template:Venom family tree. That looks like a mess.— TriiipleThreat ( talk) 10:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 July 12 Frietjes ( talk) 13:24, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Is this a WP:CRYSTAL violation? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 20:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
This page might need some looking into. I can’t edit war with him. I just wanted factual information. Not just what DC said. Jhenderson 777 16:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Grand Comics Database is peer editable just like Wikipedia. It is not a legitimate reference. It is ironic that this other user isn't interested in "what DC says:, given that they created the character. Of course, it's not just DC, it is also Overstreet, CGC, CBCS, and pretty much every comic book oriented database you can find online. Literally the only thing the other user tries to use- in contravention of all of the above other, actually factual sources- is Mikesamazingworld.com, which of course if you click the magnifying glass the other user tells you to, specifically states that "publication dates are NOT release dates", and that DC did not even release official release dates until 1958. Which is why "Mike" only gives "Approximate" release dates. Given that the other user is trying to edit Wikipedia to be in direct opposition to all known and accepted comic book authorities (Overstreet, CGC, CBCS), as well as DC Comics themselves: https://www.dcuniverse.com/encyclopedia/lex-luthor/ he should be required to come up with a much less flimsy citation that does not even actually say what he was attempting to edit. -jaydubp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaydubp ( talk • contribs) 19:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
@ Jhenderson777: Can we uninvolved get a...TL;DR for what's going on here? Reading that edit history was... interesting. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 20:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
An unreliable source but a well summarized read IMO. Jhenderson 777 13:58, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I've been trying to clean up the Template:Symbiote Family and Hosts to make them in line with how the vast majority of comic characters naboxes are formated (not including every single series/film/game that the character has apperead in for example) but another user keeps adding all this cruft back in. Last time it happened they reverted every single edit I had made to the template, even those which are unrelated to cruft links (such as the category link at the bottom) and called the version I had created a "mess" for whatever reason, while instead making this rather hard to read version with odd child boxes with small text instead of a propper use of subjeaders. ★Trekker ( talk) 15:41, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Spider-Man 3 literally was centered on Spider-Man having the symbiote suit and technically was the main antagonist throughout the film. Someone might feel different about that though. I welcome any opinion. Jhenderson 777 17:43, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Just giving a shoutout to anyone who can maybe help out or expand on this article. It’s off to a rusty start. Jhenderson 777 04:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
I am concerned that the user StickFigure1993 may be a sockpuppet. Either way all he does seem to be doing is adding fancruft in navboxes. Jhenderson 777 16:04, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Is Category:Spider-Man (2002 film series) characters a legitimate category? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 22:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Another one of the same type by the same editor: Category:Daredevil (film series) characters. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 23:39, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Is this article really necessary just out of curiosity? I can understand things this and potentially Batman and Robin (duo) being notable topics if done right. But I am not sure it is. Jhenderson 777 00:21, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
User:Penguin7812 was banned indefinitely yesterday as a sockpuppet of an account that was banned last year. Some of his contributions (image files mostly, a few templates, and a few articles) could have been useful in general, although I know we do not accept material from that sort of account. I don't know that restoring any of it would be acceptable, and I'm not even sure that trying to find another way to use any of it would be good, other than doing it over from scratch. Does anyone have an idea on what the ethics are for "I want it but can't have it" situations like this? :) Maybe it's a silly question, but I'm asking all the same. BOZ ( talk) 12:10, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I just had an GA nomination review saying I should probably change the infobox of this character out of confusion for readers which as of right now is the comic book character one. But I feel like I disagree on that. I feel like it should probably be like Harley Quinn etc. where the character was integrated as a character within the comic book universe. What are your thoughts on that? Jhenderson 777 02:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
In a number of articles on superheroes, the lede mentions lists of "Top 50 superhero characters" or whatever from various "prominent" magazines like IGN. I don't think these are insightful. Even if these magazines are "big" (however you judge that), these lists have probably been written by one or two geek-head journalists who were probably working on a tight deadline to make some click-bait article for their boss. If we want to demonstrate the significance of a character, we should use a more objective metric, such as movie ticket sales, comic book distribution, or merchandising revenue. That's what I tried to do in the Superman article. I found some figures for merchandising sales and comic book sales and put them in the article. Kurzon ( talk) 10:04, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
In movie articles, we routinely list awards from the Golden Globes or the Oscars. I think that may worthy of inclusion because those awards are voted on by a large body of people (industry insiders) so they carry a little more weight than a list that was probably written by just one or two geeks. Kurzon ( talk) 19:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
The big problem with these lists is the lack of objective criteria. A publication/journalist states that character X is 'greater' than character y. How is this decision reached, beyond WP:ILIKEIT? Even a list voted by the public will be problematic owing to self selection. -- Killer Moff- ill advisedly sticking his nose in since 2011 ( talk) 14:36, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
My two cents. There is actually nothing wrong with a reception of a journalist ranking characters on the greatest or worst or whatever. Wikipedia could use info like that more on the comic book articles more like the video game articles. Sure it's subjective but it works if the source is reliable. Jhenderson 777 02:23, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
WP:NPOV may apply here. An opinion on value of a character is only worth mentioning if it's held by the majority of the population, and some journalist's personal Top 10 list does nothing to prove his opinions are shared by the majority. On the other hand, things like TV ratings, box office takes, reader polls, and merchandising sales can provide some metric of popularity and cultural significance, even if not perfectly reliable. Kurzon ( talk) 09:30, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
We also got to seriously ask ourselves what makes a source notable. Anything that Albert Einstein said about the cosmos is worth mentioning in any physics article, because he rewrote the book on physics. Einstein earned that respectability. What has IGN done to make its opinions more respectable than that of the guy who runs your local comic shop? It's website ratings? Fox News and Breitbart get high ratings -- do we consider these respectable sources of information on American politics? Kurzon ( talk) 09:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Agree to disagree on that I suppose. Jhenderson 777 05:08, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Would you consider this edit to be dumping an excessive amount of plot info? I tried to remove it for that reason, but I was reverted and I do not want to edit war, especially if I am wrong about MOS:PLOT. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:30, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Is this a reliable source to identify that a certain actor voiced a certain character in a cartoon? 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 23:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
I don't know, but... does this (hundreds of edits already going back to just Aug 25, mostly just applying the deletion templates and warning the users who created the articles, little other activity) seem like quite a lot of PRODs and AFDs to be applied to comics character articles from just one user? I mean, Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Article alerts hasn't yet caught up with all of that, but I'm afraid it will implode epicly once it does. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 01:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
This entire discussion is alarming. And I have seen similar discussions here.
What is wrong with this Wikiproject. It seems to have gone off the rails, and is engaged in agreeing with and suborning the destruction of information on its subject, and for insufficient cause. It seems to be populated at least partly by people who don't seem to like comics very much. Maybe it should be renamed to WikiProject Anticomics or something.
I mean, other Wikiprojects don't have this attitude. Wikipedia:WikiProject Stations doesn't go around deleting articles on railway stations or cheering on people who do. Quite the opposite: they are interested in increasing the number of articles on railway stations. This is, you know, normal for a Wikiproject with that name. (There are surely a lot of people who have no interest in articles on railway stations and perhaps think they're dumb. Those people probably haven't joined WikiProject Stations, because that would be silly, and instead go and and create information in the areas that do interest them. Why it doesn't work this way with this Wikiproject I don't know. But sometimes entities get disfunctional. It's alright; it happens. The thing to do is right the ship, is all.)
It there isn't some kind of reform, such as suggesting that that people who have the wrong attitude perhaps look for other work, we are going to need outside eyes on this Wikiproject, and bring in the larger community to take a look at it, and decide what's to be done. Herostratus ( talk) 16:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I see you're looking for information on [subject]. We could have an article on this subject. In fact we did have an article on this subject! A nice one, too. But we deleted it. Because, while we are here to provide information, we don't think you should have too much information. But we wish you luck on your google search on this topic, and we hope and assume that you have time, interest, and skill to re-create the equivalent collection of sourced data which was in our article, before we destroyed it. Have a nice day, and fuck you! |
You really are something else, Herostratus. The great thing is, of course, that we can always recreate something that is deleted if someone feels it can be greatly improved. But I think you're presuming a lot about the comics cruft we have being "perfectly good" and "nice". Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 18:59, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
To my mind, I think he's focusing on the wrong things here. Are there a great many articles about characters that fail GNG? Absolutely. We, as the Comics Project, should not allow comics related articles which are unencyclopaedic. However, there is a way to be positive about this. Make articles which are. You can't create an article on a member of the Legion of Superheroes, so write the series, or the creators. Did they have their own series, or a back-up strip? Were they a character in an anthology? Do these avenues pass GNG? I think it's much more realistic to focus on the tangible facts of comics history. -- Killer Moff- ill advisedly sticking his nose in since 2011 ( talk) 12:54, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
OK. Well, the main point being whether one is hostile to the idea of expanded coverage of comics or not, not whether someone put their name on a list. Yeah and OK "ashamed" is a bit rich, I just mean that in this particular instance I don't think that this project did what I personally think it should have, and what I believe other projects might have. Don't mean to get all combative there. I do that sometimes.
So anyway, I wasn't talking about being too liberal regarding whether articles should meet the GNG. Let's say, for now and as things stand, that they should, or perhaps must. Let's say we can all agree on that. The question, on which I could be accused of being too liberal, is what refs are sufficiently reliable to be counted toward meeting the GNG.
So I mean, of the two articles on The Big Hit List that I looked at, Dragonmage meets the GNG and Uni-Mind could have been made so -- that is, I think they meet the GNG; it's something that reasonable people can disagree on, but IMO I have a strong case and I made it -- and it was destroyed anyway. This is, to me, a shame.
Alright. I have some points/questions/comments about the more general questions, and I'll make them in separate threads below, for anyone to engage or ignore as they see fit. Thank you for your engagement and sorry if I came off a bit strong. 19:29, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Several Wikipedia articles have an incredibly large number of citations made to two commercial websites - Mycomicshop.com and AtomicAvenue.com. While I would like to assume good faith, the sheer volume leans toward WP:CITESPAM and WP:NOTADVERTISING
See the following articles:
That's at least 2,649 citations to Mycomicshop.com and 1,592 citations to AtomicAvenue.com (a total of 4,241) spread across just eight articles. Wikipedia is not here to drive sales traffic to online retailers. Would we allow a "citation" to Walmart.com or Target.com on a clothing-related Wikipedia article? If someone wishes to buy a comic book, they can certainly find their own retail option of choice as in WP:YELLOWPAGES
Mtminchi08 ( talk) 00:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
These should, if possible, be replaced with Grand Comics Database citations. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 03:43, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
Looking for input, but was I right to revert this edit? The new editor who added that was apparently upset that I reverted their sprawling list of added abilities to the infobox, and tried to start a discussion on the article's talk page, but honestly their response is a bit rambling and I'm not sure where to start, so hopefully you have some input to help. It's not the first time (or the longest addition) that I have reverted from Thor's infobox, and I feel it is honestly long enough already without adding a dozen or so more things. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 04:11, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Any objections if I go thru the member list and remove those editors who haven't made an edit in two years (informing them what has been done)? @ Herostratus: go for it. Argento Surfer ( talk) 12:30, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Would anyone like to comment on the dispute happening here and at Taskmaster (comics)? It would appear that the user Amakuru wasn't aware of the discussions that took place in 2017 that led to WP:NCC being changed and is blocking certain page moves just because a lot of pages haven't been moved since then. Dark Knight 2149 23:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Superhero fiction is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Superhero fiction (2nd nomination) 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 high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. Certes ( talk) 10:07, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Some years ago Mark Millar wrote the Old Man Logan comic, set in its own continuity, the Wastelands. First it was a miniseries. Then there was a new one, which was actually a tie-in to Secret Wars: it started in the wastelands, then had him roam across other realms of Battleworld, and finally he landed in the main universe. The wastelands were eventually explored again in the series "Old Man Hawkeye" and "Old Man Quill", Logan returned to it in "Dead Man Logan", and now there will be a new one, "Avengers of the wastelands". Which is the correct place to talk about all this? The Old Man Logan article, or a new one? And if a new one, should it be called "Wastelands (Marvel Comics)" or something else? Ultimate someone ( talk) 18:01, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
An RfC that affects your project has been opened at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous). Please review the discussion and contribute as you see fit. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 15:06, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Somebody might need to look into this dispute on images. All I am aware is that I prefer the current image for now. Jhenderson 777 09:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
The talk page could benefit from others who have a good understanding of the WP COMICS MOS with regard to infobox images. The warring editors are missing the point. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 01:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
WP:COMICS editors are welcome, nay encouraged, to comment on the Darkseid infobox image discussion and RfC because we are nowhere near a consensus. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 18:55, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello there, WikiProject Comics! A couple Wikiproject doors down, I've taken up the somewhat masochistic task of trying to organize all the topic space covered by Wikiproject Dungeons & Dragons. We have a little bit of crossover space, in terms of List of Dungeons & Dragons comic books. Excuse the sad state of affairs in that list; an organizing list for the subtopic didn't even exist until a few hours ago.
Surprisingly (to me, anyway), although both D&D and comic books suffer from, if anything, an overabundance of articles on drilled-down microtopics, Wikipedia's coverage of the D&D-themed comic books is depressingly bare. Nevertheless, there are fairly big names attached to some of these series. I can't imagine its impossible to get reliable sources about their announcement, their release, and likely even reviews in contemporary reporting. But, um... I usually pride myself on my ability to source random topics, but I don't have the faintest clue where to look for reliable information about pre-Internet-era comic books. And if there are going to be articles on some of these titles, we're going to do them right.
So, does anyone have suggestions on where I'd look? I assume print periodicals are the go-to here, but I'm not sure which ones to start with (assuming I can even locate them! -- stuff I have a hope of finding is, of course, preferred). I'm most interested in quality sourcing for the major licensed runs: the 1987–1991 DC Comics titles, the 2001–2004 Kenzer & Company titles, and the 2004–2008 Devil's Due Publishing titles. The IDW stuff is recent enough to have web reporting, so that's just a matter of cleaning up the composite article we have now, sourcing things properly, and getting individual topics written where appropriate; I can do that. The earlier stuff... that's where I could use a hand! Squeamish Ossifrage ( talk) 03:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion here. My two cents is I feel like comic book related articles are now being ganged up by non comic book fans to be merged. As an mergist (when not notable) I am usually not bothered. But I feel they are quick to judge "not notable" just because an article is not perfect. Which should be a no-no. Jhenderson 777 15:28, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Was I wrong in thinking this is a notable topic? I personally thought so since it’s a major Wonder Woman location. But it could use more sources though. Jhenderson 777 04:43, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
The various lists of Marvel characters is pretty much just treated like a graveyard for non-notable characters. The DC lists are simply either tables or just lists of links. Should the Marvel lists be formatted to match DC? I feel like the characters currently in the lists should be redirected to relevant series articles in which they appear. It makes much more sense than having X amount of articles redirected to the lists, and then culled when the lists get too large. TTN ( talk) 17:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
I Agree that neither the DC or Marvel character lists are suit for purpose, the DC lists having no information, and Marvel too much. The Marvel lists in particular are being used to store non-notable information, and they both seem to fail every guideline of WP:LISTN and WP:LSC. In particular: "For example, all known species within a taxonomic family are relevant enough to include in a list of them; but List of Norwegian musicians would not be encyclopedically useful if it indiscriminately included every garage band mentioned in a local Norwegian newspaper." Similarly, we should not list every Marvel character, and certainly not provide in-depth bios. What I may be okay with is a much reduced table, providing character name, first appearance, creators, and a few sentences at most describing them and their powers. Think the back of a trading card. -- Killer Moff- ill advisedly sticking his nose in since 2011 ( talk) 11:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Just a heads up. That this relevant draft exists. It is in need of constructive copy edits as I take a much needed Wikbreak. Jhenderson 777 01:13, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
There has been some disagreement at the Bucky Barnes page as to whether the page should include villain categories. One argument is that since he was depicted as an antagonist in some story lines so he should be considered a villain, and the argument on the other hand is that since he was brainwashed he did not do these actions of his own volition so should not be considered a villain. What is the consensus for whether these categories should be included on this article? 2601:249:8A00:2500:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 04:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Is there somewhere this could be merged? It definitely has enough sources to stand alone, but it feels like it would be better placed as a section of an article rather than left as an eternal stub. It's more of a charitable publicity stunt than an actual character. TTN ( talk) 14:30, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
This has been discussed here numerous times before, but new user Classifiedleague has been adding the labels "superhero" and "supervillain" to the lead sentence of many character articles, including to those for whom such labels are not very clear (like Magneto and Loki, for example). I reverted some of them, but I think it would be a good idea to discuss, or at least remind ourselves why we use the neutral term "character" in many cases? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 01:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Argento Surfer, here's one - trivial non-appearances, should they be included? [9] Answer: almost never. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 07:08, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Batman in film, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 21:18, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
It has been suggested that Mr. A be merged with Question (character). See Talk:Mr. A#Merge?. Dark Knight 2149 00:09, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
I just contested a prod of these two article ( Corsair (comics) and Starjammers) If anyone can improve these articles I do much appreciate it. I would but I have other projects for now. Jhenderson 777 16:05, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello! I have recently created a bot to remove completed infobox requests and am sending this message to WikiProject Comics since the project currently has a backlogged infobox request category. Details about the task can be found at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PearBOT 2, but in short it removes all infobox requests from articles with an infobox, once a week. To sign up, reply with {{ ping|Trialpears}} and tell me if any special considerations are required for the Wikiproject. For example: if only a specific infobox should be detected, such as {{ infobox journal}} for WikiProject Academic Journals; or if an irregularly named infobox such as {{ starbox begin}} should be detected. Feel free to ask if you have any questions!
Sent on behalf of Trialpears ( talk) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
There is a noticeboard discussion on the reliability of We Got This Covered ( wegotthiscovered.com). If you are interested, please participate at WP:RSN § Omigosh, are Cheatsheet.com and WeGotThisCovered.com reliable?. — Newslinger talk 11:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
A relevant comic book character is nominated for deletion. You are welcome to share your opinion here. Jhenderson 777 21:00, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 08:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
The third sentence says he's ex-Special Operations Executive but there is no other mention of the SOE in the entire article; however there is mention of him being in the SAS–twice in both the infobox and article–which is a separate UK military organisation. This looks like a misunderstanding but I'm no DC expert and it is possible he was in both, so any input from someone knowledgeable on the Batman comics would be appreciated! (also the sentence in question is confusing in and of itself so would benefit from an edit anyway, even if it is factually correct) Snizzbut ( talk) 16:40, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Is this speculation on whether she will appear in the show? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:11, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
I have written a missing article, Age of X-Man, the crossover that took place this year before Hickman's relaunch. It has the editorial history, a pair of controversies, references, list of involved comics, etc; but I have not included yet a plot section, as I don't remember it well enough. Does someone else wants to help with it? It should be the easiest part of the article. Ultimate someone ( talk) 17:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Does this article serve any purpose outside of just being a massive plot dump? It seems like it hasn't really had any major discussion for over 11 years at this point. Arguments back in 2008 state that the identity in itself has enough discussion to be its own topic, but nothing like that is in the actual article currently. Something like Batman#Bruce Wayne seems like it should be completely sufficient to discuss the topic. I'm sure there are certainly sources discussing things like the breakdown of real identity vs the mask/suit and all that, but that would likely be something that could be an article in itself using examples from major heroes. I can't see a hero by hero breakdown being particularly viable. TTN ( talk) 12:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello to the members of this project. The Smurfs (comics) has an infobox that seems to be created from scratch. It takes up about a third pf the width of the article. I am guessing that the "Infobox comics meta series" is the one that should be used but I could be wrong. If anyone can fix things that would be most appreciated. MarnetteD| Talk 09:59, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Please can someone with a clue look at Template:Justice League characters? There seems to be a difference of opinion between IP editors as to what should be included. Thanks, Certes ( talk) 11:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
This is a neutral notice of discussion regarding an edit war at Wonder Woman. All comments are welcomed. Thank you.— TriiipleThreat ( talk) 19:34, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
I am reaching out to your project because your project may have an interest in this discussion: Template talk:Infobox character § Removing parameters regarding WP:WAF. Izno ( talk) 16:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Just a heads up that I contested an Batarang prod. So an AFD is probably next. If improvements can be done. Feel free. An major weapon of Batman that I would think everyone had heard of. Jhenderson 777 16:28, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Author Marjorie Liu who's well know for having written several of the characters solo books has stated that wrote the character with the intention to be of Asian descent, this is stated in the article itself. Ambaryer claims that here that the characters mother is "explicitly defined as Caucasian" despite that not being said anywhere on the page. When I asked for a citation to this Ambaryer changed the argument to "Liu's intent is meaningless if it didn't happen in the books" which to me seems a little odd, are we to assume every character is "explicitly Caucasian" unless it's stated explicitly by the character in the book? ★Trekker ( talk) 14:45, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a dispute regarding the wording in the first sentence at the Vertigo Comics article that could use some more eyes. The discussion is here. JOE BRO 64 21:17, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello all. There are currently deletion discussions ongoing for the characters Betty Clawman and Deathbolt. I've added a few sources to the topics but I believe there is potential for the articles to be expanded further. Unfortunately due to the AFDs, I'm now on a deadline to do so. lol Any input at the AFDs themselves is of course welcome, but if any of you guys have any additional reliable sources for these two characters that could either 1) be added to the articles or 2) be passed along to me so I can add them, it would be much appreciated. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 18:49, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
We probably need an article at Heroic Publishing (and a redir from its original name Hero Comics. It's a redlink from Sparkplug (comics), League of Champions, List of Eclipse Comics publications#C, Flare (comics), Huntsman (Heroic Publishing), etc. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:43, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.
For those of you at this very active WikiProject, your input would be very helpful, so I wanted to get your input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen.
we are discussing this proposal right now at:
* Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Idea for new community workspace
Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know.
thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 18:51, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Is this something we want to include in the Morbius, the Living Vampire article? 208.47.202.254 ( talk) 15:26, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Is this something we should be including in the article? 208.47.202.254 ( talk) 20:18, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Here, again, we have someone reinserting this in the article: [12] 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:09, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure why, but it looks like in the last few days, User:NeoBatfreak has been removing normal comics character images and replacing them with images of the characters on white backgrounds. It looks like there are a lot of these. Any idea if this is OK? 2601:249:8A00:2500:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 05:14, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I have nominated The Adventures of Tintin for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKay ( talk) 15:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Is the Moon Knight article better off with a huge rogues gallery section as added by User:PopCultureSuperHero here: [13]? Or does the article even need such a section at all, or is it better off with the more concise list that it had yesterday? 73.110.45.100 ( talk) 14:04, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
I just thought it could help the writers of the new show. I plan on making articles for everybody...kind of like a "Moon Knight" project. But in reality I just always revert changes done by non-registered accounts. PopCultureSuperHero ( talk) 07:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I made a new discussion in WT:Notability (fiction) regarding adding more restrictions on lists regarding fictional elements such as swords, animals, profession, and so on. if anyone is interested in bringing their opinion on the topic. here. Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 19:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I did an update of the plot synopsis of Gunnerkrigg Court, which had not been updated for the best part of a decade according to some notes there, but before removing the outdated mark, I'd like to request some help cleaning up the text. Anyone here who follows the comic and can help with this task? Not A Superhero ( talk) 03:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
I only glanced at the history of Atlantis (Marvel Comics). My question regarding his reverting is did anyone (including myself) violate the three revert rule. Also was the non-admin closure really a keep consensus as claimed? It seemed more on keep. Jhenderson 777 13:03, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Also can these select few warrant notability?:
Jhenderson 777 13:15, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Relevant discussion regarding comic book weapon here. Jhenderson 777 13:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Is there a general consensus on categories such as Category:X-Men supporting characters, created by new user User:7p12e? 2601:249:8A00:2500:F9DF:DD4C:83B5:E6EC ( talk) 16:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Just saw that Beautie from Astro City is up for deletion. I honestly don't know whether this subject is worth an article or not, so throwing it out here in case any of you guys know? — Hunter Kahn 15:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
This article used the neutral term "character", but User:MacCready is asserting without a source [14] that the character should be considered a supervillain. The character was depicted as an antagonist in the 2006 Neil Gaiman mini-series, but in the preceding 30 years of the character's existence I am not seeing anything that would indicate that "supervillain" is an appropriate term for this character. It is probably better to discuss here than edit-warring, though. 73.110.46.39 ( talk) 10:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
All these characters were planned to be merged but were reverted by the Toughpigs user saying I should discuss it. Sorry I can’t ping right now. So should some / all should be merged or should be left alone and this article idea be scrapped. The list is planned to replace the fancruft list article before then. It also reduces the fancruft of all the articles. Jhenderson 777 01:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Just curious, but is this citation format by Orenburg1 here, which I have only ever seen used in this one instance, preferable to this one here which I have seen used on many, many articles, including the rest of the same article? (Excepting, of course, that the "cite comic" template is really the one to use by editors not being lazy, guilty as charged, but here I am speaking of which of the two above are to be used in lieu of that.) 73.110.46.36 ( talk) 16:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Adding a note here about a merge discussion that's just started at Talk:Fatal Five#Merge discussion. The discussion involves whether to merge the five individual character articles from this group ( Mano (character), Emerald Empress, Persuader (comics), Tharok, and Validus) into the Fatal Five page. Any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 19:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Did she portray Mar-Vell as all the sources seem to say, or was she playing the Ultimate Marvel character Mahr Vehl as this IP is stating without any sources except their own honest-to-god-know-how? [15] 2601:249:8B80:4050:89AC:6152:E1C7:AC47 ( talk) 23:43, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
There's currently a discussion @ Talk:Rat_Queens#Rat_Queens_Vol.1_#11 on whether an editors own commentary of a comic book is considered a reliable source. Thoughts on the matter is requested. Jerm ( talk) 01:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Is it me, or is Category:Marvel Comics American superheroes kind of a weird category with no recognizable definition? Several of the characters in this new category created by User:Atvica aren't even remotely "American", unless you mean created by an American company, in which case we would have to include all superhero characters created by Marvel. 2601:249:8B80:4050:151F:16A8:DF8:8B0D ( talk) 13:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Editors may be interested in discussing my proposed merger at the Deadpool talk page. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 03:01, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
In the past I merged some articles like Jack Frost (Marvel Comics) and Blue Diamond (comics) among other Golden Age characters. But of lately ToughPigs has gotten back to to restoring them claiming they have passed Wp:GNG. If they did...great. But in my opinion they haven't and I feel that ToughPigs doesn't understand that sources like what he put out is not enough for the criteria of notability. He did nothing but add a few sources to improve and when I tag one article with GNG tag he just removes them. I have high respect for the editor though. Nothing but good faith I believe. I just bring it up because I want to know the community thoughts on it. Jhenderson 777 14:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
I am on the same page as
Toughpigs,
Hullaballoo Wolfowitz and
Argento Surfer here and want to add:
1) Secondary sources should not need to be recent, and I have seen nothing to that regard in
WP:GNG. It does not make much sense to require a topic to be discussed in secondary sources over and over again, on many topics there is simply a point where everything relevant is said.
2) Yes, a tertiary source should ideally quote the secondary (and primary) sources it uses. But if the absence of stated sources let's one suspect that a work is based only on primary sources, it becomes a secondary source itself. The definition of a tertiary source is that it's based on secondary sources, not that it may be called an encyclopedia.
So I see no reason why the discussed sources may not be used to establish notability as long as they are independent. The only remaining relevant question to me is, if works encompassing many fictional characters have enough content to (collectively) provide "significant coverage" for each.
Daranios (
talk) 13:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I wasnt upset. But I am annoyed now. Why? Because this is the second time you assumed I am upset. Please quit thinking I am upset every time I bring issues up. I am not that kind editor. Jhenderson 777 23:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
OK. So, maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but I am extremely skeptical of the accusations leveled against Scott Lobdell by the website BleedingCool and their supposed "outcome." As far as I can tell, there have been no other sources backing up the claims that Lobdell supposedly did what the article claims he did, no official word from DC and no official word from Lobdell himself regarding the supposed "Sensitivity Training.". That and considering the post they linked to was made in 2016 but is only now being linked to Lobdell raises more questions than it does answers. As a result, I think that the portion of the page relating to that article should be removed until such a time it can be confirmed via an official statement from Warner or DC.
Georgemiser ( talk) 12:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
In that case, might I kindly request the removal of that portion of the article untill such a time it can actually be proven to be factual? Georgemiser ( talk) 12:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
With all due respect, I think there is, indeed, a misunderstanding. Unless there is a source from DC or from one of Lobdell's social media accounts actually confirming this claim, the burden of proof is entirely on BleedingCool. They can claim that Lobdell said this to their reporter, but unless Lobdell or DC confirms it themselves, the information, in my mind, cannot and should not be treated as factual. Lobdell himself, to the best of my knowledge, has not once stated, through either Instagram or Twitter, that he has "enrolled" in anything. Unless multiple sources can back up the claim of this so-called enrollment, coupled with the fact that Lobdell is continuing to find work outside of DC, (See the recent news regarding his Green Hornet run for Dynamite Comics), then the site's claims, all of them from the linking the accusations to Lobdell to the claims of "Gender Sensitivity Courses", should rightfully be treated as suspect. Plus there is the likelihood that if this article is false, that this man is indeed being accused of a crime he didn't commit. Wikipedia is well above perpetuating that kind of misinformation. Georgemiser ( talk) 14:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Stucky (fandom) is currently a featured article nominee. The article is (in my biased assessment) in fairly good shape by FA requirement standards, but the reviews thus far have been from editors without knowledge of comic book subject material, and I would appreciate the perspective of editors who have familiarity with the characters/comics more broadly. Please feel free to leave comments at the article's review page. Thank you! Morgan695 ( talk) 21:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Do the sources added here support the claim for Selene (comics) (aka the Black Queen of the Hellfire Club) that "A version of the character appeared in the Underworld film series played by Kate Beckinsale"? 2601:249:8B80:4050:C1EC:F7AC:76F2:13B6 ( talk) 23:34, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
I'm assuming that this and this are the basic definition of trivial non-appearances that have no good reason to be mentioned in an article, unless I am somehow wrong? 2601:249:8B80:4050:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 03:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Please opine about whether the original creators of the comic book work should be cited/credited in the infobox of the film. Thanks. Gotitbro ( talk) 01:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
For some reason, FocoCasti is insisting that we need to include this comment in an article about a character who, by the user's own insistence is merely "briefly mentioned in a conversation" and does not actually appear in the film. I don't believe there is anything wrong with removing that, but rather than edit-warring I will ask, is it wrong for me to remove this mention? The user did note that there are similar articles with brief mentions, so hopefully they can identify these articles so we can remove the rest of the trivial non-appearances. 2601:249:8B80:4050:452F:2FDB:4E19:AA68 ( talk) 19:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
An editor with, I'm certain, good intentions, is nonetheless proposing wholesale deletion of between 200-300 WikiProject Comics images for reasons that, in the majority of cases in which I've looked, appear to be incorrect. A few images do appear to be overkill in articles and could be removed, but the majority of the sampling I've seen have, in my view, legitimate FURs and are being wrongly proposed for deletion.
Interested editors may want to comment on any of a number of images being proposed for deletion at:
@ Tenebrae:, User:The Squirrel Conspiracy notified the project a few sections above this one. Argento Surfer ( talk) 17:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
I am just curious and wondering if User:Mark Rhodes 12 is a sock of User:Banana Mutant or otherwise somehow connected? The new account seems to do a very similar type of editing, and was registered just a few days after the old account was blocked, and its first edit is very suspicious. BOZ ( talk) 02:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Just leaving the WikiProject a courtesy notice that I've nominated about 30 images from episodes of the SHIELD TV series for deletion. All of the nominations are per WP:NFCC 8 (with two also for 3a), and can be found at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 May 15. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 05:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello all. The Young Protectors is a superhero and LGBTQ-themed webcomic created by Alex Woolfson, started in 2012 and currently ongoing. Right now it's mentioned in the creator's page, but I've been wondering what criteria can be used to determine whether the comic merits a page of its own and to what depth describe it. Before I start creating a page that may get deleted, I thought I'd ask. Not A Superhero ( talk) 05:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi there. I've been asked to post a message here letting you know that I've been nominating a large number of non-free files from comic book articles for deletion.
Images that are not under a free license are required to follow the non-free content criteria (NFCC), which is a "policy with legal considerations" (which means that if the NFCC comes into conflict with any manual, guideline, or policy without legal considerations, the NFCC has overrules the other manual/guideline/policy). Most of the files I'm nominating for deletion are being nominated as violations of one of two sub-points to that policy: 3a and 8.
An image must meet all 10 criteria; failing any one criteria means that the image must be deleted.
I'd like to note that I'm not targeting comics specifically; I've already nominated some excessive non-free files in other areas. However, comic articles are a place with a large concentration of violations, owing to the large number of articles and the general lack of free replacements.
Criteria 3a is: "Minimal number of items. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information."
Most of the images I'm nominating are the second, third, fourth, etc. non-free depictions of a character on a page. For example, Rogue (Marvel Comics) has eight, which is the highest I've seen in an article thus far. When the depictions are substantially similar to one another, NFCC 3a boils down to "pick one". In such cases, I am nominating all of the substantially similar images except for the one in the infobox, so one image remains. When a character has a major redesign that I, as someone not familiar with comic books, can immediately recognize is a substantially different, I usually that image alone (unless it fails NFCC 8, below).
Criteria 8 is: Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
A lot of people misinterpret what this means. I recommend reading this section in Wikipedia:Non-free content as a starting point. This is actually a very high bar; it has generally been held in file deletion discussions that the existence of a subject/object/style/behavior/etc. is not enough to justify the use of a non-free image depicting it; the contents of the non-free must be directly discussed in a non-trivial fashion using properly referenced prose. To put it another way, the image supports the prose. If there's not text describing the subject that the image is supposed to illustrate, the image can't be critical to readers' understanding of the topic.
This also means that non-free images have to be closely related to the subject of the article. In an article on Thanos, it would be inappropriate to have non-free images of all of his henchmen, however those same images would likely be acceptable in the articles on those henchmen themselves.
This also means that a depiction of a character that only lasts for a minor arc (someone gets possessed and turns green, for example) do not meet NFCC 8, because the reader is able to understand the subject of the article as a whole (the character), without needing to see an image of how the looked in one specific book. However, if that brief depiction was the subject of substantial critical coverage by third party sources, and that prose is in the article, the image would be fine.
The answer to both of these is the same:
If you clean up the articles, you get to choose which depiction(s) remain. I generally pass over articles with only one or two images without nominating anything, and focus most of my attention on articles with larger numbers of non-free files, because that's where the need is greatest.
Anyone is able to participate in files for deletion discussions, however it's important to note that - if you want your comments to be taken into account by the closing admin - you need to make specific arguments as to why the file in question meets the NFCC. Point to the prose that justifies it. The admins in the file namespace will ignore WP:ILIKEIT comments. Because this is a policy with legal considerations, even if a majority of comments are for keeping the file, if none of them discuss why the file meets the NFCC, the file will likely still be deleted.
If there's non-trivial coverage of an image and I missed it, note it in the FfD. I am quite willing to withdraw nominations if either a good argument for keeping a specific image comes forward, or if prose is added to justify an image after the nomination.
I do not watch this page, so please ping me if you reply.
Sincerely, The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 08:04, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Bumping so archive bot doesn't eat this while I'm still nominating files. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 07:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
There is a MoS RfC that editors here may be interested in, about whether to use "is" or "was" to describe periodicals that are no longer being published. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 15:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
User:Josiahkester has been adding a long list of abilities on the Gladiator (Kallark) article (and was previously doing this on Hyperion (comics) as well), so I am wondering if we should be including a long list of abilities like that? 98.32.192.121 ( talk) 20:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
I completed a thorough GA review for Free Comic Book Day on 11 May but the nominator hasn't made a registered edit since 6 May, and I was hoping someone here might be willing to take up the nominator's role in the review process. I believe that the article can meet the GA criteria and have made specific suggestions on the nomination page. If you do decide to take up this task, please leave a note here to inform others. – Reidgreg ( talk) 14:46, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
In light of the protests in the US: Punisher#In politics and popular culture. 2601:240:102:EC27:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 23:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
There is discussion on whether the new article Characters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe should be name changed. Feel free to discuss on talk page. Jhenderson 777 17:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Just asking here, because new user User:Rickyar rewrote the publication history section and I think it would be good to get comments from other editors on whether this was an improvement to the article. The user has been warned for edit-warring, so hopefully discussing here will be more productive. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 18:14, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I've authored many articles so I disagree with the characterization that I am "new." Also, I'm the one who requested help from someone continually reverting, and I get warned by this editor. Argento, that's how comic history is categorized. Golden age to modern. These subheaders are on all comic villains and heroes in wikipedia. Rickyar ( talk) 20:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I created Dan Danglo from the RD list. It was just tagged for notability. Feel free to expand it if you have access to more RS. Thanks! Zigzig20s ( talk) 14:09, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
New user User:HyprMarc has been changing the lead sentence of characters who died in MCU films to say that So-and-so "was" a fictional character. Am I mistaken, or does the death of a character (in just one medium, not all media) mean that a character is no longer fictional? Even if a character's death in a film somehow makes that character non-fictional, if the character is alive in another medium (comics, television, etc), should we want to declare that character dead in all media? I will revert all of these edits, but this may be worth discussing. 2601:249:8B80:4050:D4DF:BB92:DF00:334C ( talk) 12:34, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
User:HyprMarc continues to make this change to articles, and has not replied to any attempt at discussion. User:TriiipleThreat and User:CarciaNullius reverted some of their edits, so I am going to go back and see if any others need to be undone. 2601:249:8B80:4050:6CB1:1540:EE61:E251 ( talk) 12:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Haven't variations of Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe film characters been deleted over and over again? 2601:240:10C:AB84:B4C2:8DE1:65FC:69F6 ( talk) 00:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I contend that Brother Voodoo has only recently been portrayed as a more traditional superhero, with his association with the Avengers and such. Previously, he could at best be argued as a very non-traditional superhero. In any case of ambiguity we typically use "character" in the lead sentence, rather than "superhero", although it was reverted by User:Jmgwilson as seen here: [16]. What is the general consensus to do in this case? 2601:249:8B80:4050:114A:BE09:1E2C:5ADB ( talk) 12:52, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Brother Voodoo has the same origin as Dr. Stange. A former Doctor who picked up the mystic arts. However, unlike the selfish Dr Stange brother Voodoo did it to help his own brother and stop an evil cult from taking over Haiti, his home. After stopping the cult he continued on as hero specifically to help protect the people of Haiti. His origin is the definition of a hero. This is all clearly stated in the article. If Swamp Thing who has been portrayed as an antihero on multiple occasions and gets the title superhero, so does Brother Voodoo. To do anything else is blatantly against a black character.
User:Jmgwilson
There is currently a discussion regarding whether the category Category:Time travelers should be included on Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe). Editors are welcomed to join the discussion at Talk:Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe)#Time travel category. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 20:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Some examples include Galactus ([ [17]]), Big Barda ([ [18]]) and Infinity-Man ([ [19]]). Despite being advised that said characters are not demons, the user has reverted. I've advised them to take it to the relevant Talk Page for a discussion. I note that there is some duplication in the linked categories, but I think first order of business is stopping the insertion of blatantly incorrect information. The user might take my advice but I doubt it. They will probably press on (unless they concede defeat and disappear, but I don't wish to scare off a new user). Bears watching. Asgardian ( talk) 18:39, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 13:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Is the new Category:Marvel Comics video game characters appropriate? If we keep it, there may be many characters that need to be added to it. 2601:249:8B80:4050:4036:4D18:4D94:789C ( talk) 23:38, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@ Vinny Weasel: I recommend discussing your recent mass removals here. Removing them again without replying here will be considered edit-warring. -- / Alex/ 21 00:28, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
identify key facts at a glance. Looking at his edit history, some of these things were up to 1,400 bytes just for voices! That's way too much for an infobox, and definitely not readable at a glance. As pointed out by TheJoebro64 in the Wonder Woman edit posted above, these pages are for comics characters primarily, and voice adaptations are secondary. The voice actors can be captured in the "Adaptations" or "In other media" sections.
There may be exceptions, Harley Quinn is the one that immediately jumps to mind, where a character was actually introduced in a format that includes a voice actor, and the voice becomes closely associated with the character. Those might warrant an infobox mention. The problem there is that voice actors come and go, and even Harley has a long list of people that have portrayed her at this point. A case might also be made for a performer that is predominantly associated with the character such as Kevin Conroy as Batman or Mark Hamill as Joker, but you run into the same problem, and it can quickly stop being an objective and become personal preference: " Will Arnett is just as good a Batman voice!" So even in the Harley example, if Arleen Sorkin is mentioned, it should be qualified with (originally) and probably commented that any other voices should be noted elsewhere.
Bottom line: In my view, this parameter is best reserved for somebody that was voiced in a 1-2 season adaptation that runs to completion with only 1-2 VAs as opposed to a character in a long-running serial. If any exceptions are made they need to be objectively bounded somehow. - 2pou ( talk) 18:08, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
I forget if this has come up before, but is this a good inclusion? 2601:240:10F:4F35:D503:FB4F:B425:C6D ( talk) 04:42, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
An article I translated about the French comics artist Cyril Pedrosa was moved to draftspace, due some issue about a mass input of badly translated articles using the Content Translation tool back in 2017. I checked the translation and the sources again, but I want a second opinion. Could someone in the project verify the sources and grammar to bring the article back to mainspace? (It passes WP:NBIO, the subject having won several comics awards)
Thank you. DanGFSouza ( talk) 17:04, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
I would appreciate input from other editors here. Argento Surfer ( talk) 21:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
I think it'd be great if someone added an article for The Old Guard (comics) series the movie is based on. Thematthewmurray ( talk) 14:51, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Several comics Navbox templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at this section of the Templates for discussion page. (Only four of them have Talk pages in order to show up on the Alerts page.)
I certainly have my opinion on this subject and will weigh in, but additional input either way may help develop a true consensus and potentially influence future Navbox use. Clearly people have opinions on both sides of the matter. - 2pou ( talk) 05:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
What is the opinion of making a special separation on a character page between "Spider-Man games" and "Other games" as seen at Doctor Octopus#Video games, and as argued for in this edit summary? As noted in that edit summary, the same thing is being done at Eddie Brock#Video games and Green Goblin in other media#Video games. 98.32.192.121 ( talk) 23:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
There are a couple of IPs and a registered user ( 2A00:23C7:46DD:2F01:255A:75A0:A208:F2F3 ( talk · contribs), 2A00:23C7:46DD:2F01:89A4:7002:E433:6C67 ( talk · contribs), Paulharv2 ( talk · contribs)) indiscriminately expanding character navboxes to include loosely associated characters and teammates.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 20:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Isn't Category:Antihero subjective by its very definition? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 20:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello, there is an article at AfD that needs input: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Tolibao (2nd nomination). It's been open since July 24, due to a lack of participation/consensus. Anyone interested is welcome to join the discussion. Thanks, // Timothy :: talk 17:27, 20 August 2020 (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 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 |
Haven't we already seen Category:Comic characters adapted into the Marvel Cinematic Universe or something like it, at least a dozen times or more before? Is this a sock do you think, or could this be just a new person who thought they saw something that needed to exist? 2601:241:4280:161:7CB9:D7A6:1893:1E73 ( talk) 04:54, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Is it possible to blacklist certain titles of categories? Is so, perhaps we could use that to blacklist variations of "Category:X-Men franchise characters" and the like before he creates them. Or that the very least, have them creation-protected. Dark Knight 2149 01:51, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Here's a start: User:TheJoebro64/sandbox/CensoredScribe categories JOE BRO 64 23:30, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
A few of us over at the Webcomics work group happen to frequent the Wikimedia Discord server quite a lot, and we are considering asking the moderators there to create a space (channel) specifically for our discussions. ferret ( talk · contribs) suggested we'd ask the larger project if they are interested first, though. This would involve a certain level of activity on Discord and a banner on the WikiProject page. If there isn't enough interest here, I suppose we'll make it a purely webcomics-focused one. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 13:14, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Just asking [1]. I am of the opinion that cosmic entities like the Phoenix, or Galactus, etc, are beyond such classifications, but I could be wrong. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:142D:D882:130F:3CEB ( talk) 21:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
This series of edits is concerning me; is that independent commentary "POV-pushing", as the editor suggests? 2601:241:4280:161:DDA9:A4FF:741:DFFD ( talk) 14:41, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
I have created an article on Frank Cirocco, a comics artist and video game designer. Within the comics industry, he is best know as the co-creator of the Alien Legion series for Epic Comics. Cirocco has worked in the video game business for several decades but I have no proper reference sources for his extensive contributions in that field. Anyone who has expertise and reliable sources for the history of video game design/development is welcome to expand the new article. Your assistance is greatly appreciated! Mtminchi08 ( talk) 03:17, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I have started a discussion of whether Les tours de cristal should be merged into Bob Morane (comics) if anyone is interested please join at Talk:Bob Morane (comics) Dwanyewest ( talk) 15:33, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Just curious for what the consensus would be. User:Btpowers91 has been going around for some time changing "This character appears in this movie/game/whatever" to "This character appeared in this movie/game/whatever" or "This actor portrays" to "This actor portrayed". I for one thought that since we use present tense for fictional descriptions, should we not also use that for appearances outside of the main fiction? As in, whenever you read a comic, watch a movie or TV show, or play a game, those events are happening (over and over again, as it may be) while you are viewing them, rather than considering them past events? I'm not sure though, so I figured I would bring it up here. 76.231.73.99 ( talk) 12:55, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Mtminchi08 ( talk) 16:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
As in the opposite and equal to Darkforce presumably? User:Penguin7812 has added this to Cloak and Dagger (comics) [2] and Darkforce [3] without citation, making it impossible to tell if this is an actual thing from the comics, or if it is WP:OR. 76.231.73.99 ( talk) 13:13, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
As per this edit? 68.99.79.11 ( talk) 00:57, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I reverted it to just "character" again. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:23, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
There's a discussion regarding a potential WP:MOS on all fictional characters. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Manual of Style for fictional characters?. Lord Sjones23 ( talk - contributions) 22:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Are these legit character categories? 68.99.79.11 ( talk) 04:31, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
There's an ongoing dispute regarding My Little Pony: Fiend-ship Is Magic at Talk:My Little Pony (IDW Publishing)#One-off or not.. Although it ran for five issues, Fiend-ship was published alongside Friendship Is Magic (IDW's primary publication) and Friends Forever (the secondary publication at that time), it did not replace Friends Forever as a secondary title outright, and all its issues were published within the month of April 2015. So I view Fiend-ship as a one-off publication like annuals, Holiday Special, and other specials. But someone thinks otherwise, and claims Fiend-ship should be considered as a secondary title along the lines of Micro-series, Friends Forever, Legends of Magic, Ponyville Mysteries and Nightmare Knights. Care to give a comment? JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 12:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Just perusing various comics related pages and noticed that someone seems very keen on inserting lead section paragraphs on character pages, naming actors in (usually recent) movie adaptations, usually in the form "made his/her cinematic debut...". This often follows mentions of other media appearances, but no other voice actors etc are usually mentioned, privileging movies over all other media, even the original comics. The original creators, or relevant historical creators, are rarely mentioned in these lead sections. Just actors.
Perhaps it is relevant in some cases, but even minor appearances like Mac Gargan in a recent movie are placed in the lead. Isn't the "In other media" section the proper place for this? Otherwise, why are only movie actors considered important enough for the lead section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.182.48.158 ( talk) 05:36, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
"Yahn Rgg and Ro-Nan also appears in this reality where he is the Ultimate Universe version of Yon-Rogg and Ronan." Reading that sentence straight on, it doesn't seem to make much sense. Are we talking about two characters, or one character with two identities? If we are talking about two characters, why are we using "appears" and "he is" instead of "appear" and "they are"? If we are talking about one character, why isn't this rewritten to make that clearer? I certainly am confused by this sentence, how about you? Perhaps User:Penguin7812 can explain the intention on keeping it reading in such a format [5]? 2601:241:4280:161:C03A:7EE:6362:F5B1 ( talk) 11:47, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello guys, I have been thinking about creating a article about Nyx, the main villain of Avengers No Road Home, most specifically this character [6]. I think the character should be mentioned in Wikipedia, but I don't if it should as a article or as a section in List of Marvel Comics characters: N. What do you think? Penguin7812 ( talk) 05:46, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
An editor has been adding a paragraph to dozen of articles along the lines of this example from Al Williamson:
References
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
It's always referencing one of two books in the The Artist Within series, and the strong majority are comics creator pages (there are some animation and other artists, but it leans comics enough that this seems the relevant project.) I want people's input on whether this is appropriate. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 23:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
As the editor in question, please find I started adding the info (with appropriate references) about The Artist Within to the various pages of those artists who agreed to be in the project not as promotional - but as a reference point, because the books document those artists within their creative working spaces. In that many of those artists have now passed, the collection of artists within the books serves as an important reference point of popular artists of the 20th century. It has become enough of a reference point, that venues such as the Academy Awards, the Eisner Awards, and publications such as The Atlantic Magazine, The Washington Post, and Newsday have utilized the portraits within it. While studios and processes are sometimes described within some artists wikipedia pages/articles, the Artist Within collection of the two books uniquely documents those artists and their individual creative workspaces. I hold that 1. being included with the overall collection of artists assembled is significant and not trivial, and 2. That the portraits of the artists within and depicting their native studio spaces is also significant as documentary reference on those individual artists and how they work/worked. My edits were perceived as being promotional when that was not the intention, and would like to seek discussion and consensus if the information is appropriate, and how it may be included. I suggested perhaps reworking the original sentence and including it as a book citation? Thank you for your thoughts. Martinishot77 ( talk) 00:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
After discussing at Talk:Spider-Man: Far From Home#Does the Chameleon appear in this movie? and getting no response from User:Hhggtg3279 who would rather edit-war [7] [8] than discuss his sources, it is clear to me that it is mere speculation to say that the Chameleon appears in Spider-Man: Far From Home in any capacity. All the sources I have seen which try to claim that a character named Dmitri is actually Chameleon have a lot of "may be" and "we think" sort of speculative talk - in other words, I have not seen a source which can confirm that this is the same character instead of just some random character who happens to be associate of fake-Fury. So, how do we determine that this Dimitri is really supposed to be an extremely low-key supervillain, using such dubious sources as "Blasting News", and then the link to comicbookmovie.com which says things like "May Introduce A Different Take On Chameleon", and notes that the director said "We're not specifically saying that he's...but we're not not saying." and somehow this user is translating that into proof that it was definitely the same character? Do we even have a source on the character's last name in the film being the same as the character's last name from the comics? Alternately, there is the ScreenRant link, which says "This immediately tipped off Marvel fans that he could be playing Dmitri Smerdyakov, better known as classic Spider-Man foe Chameleon. This role was never confirmed to be who Acar was playing, but we learned some surprising details about him." So, again, do the sources support the assertion that this is the same character? It looks to me like these sources are just speculating, and that there is no official confirmation and the movie doesn't identify him as such. Meanwhile, if my assertions are correct, then the user needs to stop edit-warring to include this information and find better sources to confirm his viewpoint. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 15:12, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Smerdyakov is not the only Marvel character with the name Dmitri, though he is the one most closely connected to Spider-Man. See here.
The most notable of the others is Dmitri Bukharin, the longest-serving character to use the Crimson Dynamo identity. Dimadick ( talk) 12:55, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
Please don't put spoilers for recent films in your subsection title because this page shows up on people's watch page. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 16:21, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
I have updated the Template:Thor family tree with its new current members. However, User:TriiipleThreat keeps reverting it to its original outdated form. We need to solve this as I don't see a reason why not to include these members of Thor's family as they're legit members and deserve to be in the main body and not just mentions. Penguin7812 (Talk Page) 11:02, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Who said that the placement judged the age of the characters.That’s how family trees work. They read top down and left to right. It’s best just to mirror the actual source. These new characters are still mentioned in prose, so no information is lost. I have no idea what’s going on in Template:Venom family tree. That looks like a mess.— TriiipleThreat ( talk) 10:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 July 12 Frietjes ( talk) 13:24, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Is this a WP:CRYSTAL violation? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 20:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
This page might need some looking into. I can’t edit war with him. I just wanted factual information. Not just what DC said. Jhenderson 777 16:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Grand Comics Database is peer editable just like Wikipedia. It is not a legitimate reference. It is ironic that this other user isn't interested in "what DC says:, given that they created the character. Of course, it's not just DC, it is also Overstreet, CGC, CBCS, and pretty much every comic book oriented database you can find online. Literally the only thing the other user tries to use- in contravention of all of the above other, actually factual sources- is Mikesamazingworld.com, which of course if you click the magnifying glass the other user tells you to, specifically states that "publication dates are NOT release dates", and that DC did not even release official release dates until 1958. Which is why "Mike" only gives "Approximate" release dates. Given that the other user is trying to edit Wikipedia to be in direct opposition to all known and accepted comic book authorities (Overstreet, CGC, CBCS), as well as DC Comics themselves: https://www.dcuniverse.com/encyclopedia/lex-luthor/ he should be required to come up with a much less flimsy citation that does not even actually say what he was attempting to edit. -jaydubp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaydubp ( talk • contribs) 19:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
@ Jhenderson777: Can we uninvolved get a...TL;DR for what's going on here? Reading that edit history was... interesting. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 20:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
An unreliable source but a well summarized read IMO. Jhenderson 777 13:58, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I've been trying to clean up the Template:Symbiote Family and Hosts to make them in line with how the vast majority of comic characters naboxes are formated (not including every single series/film/game that the character has apperead in for example) but another user keeps adding all this cruft back in. Last time it happened they reverted every single edit I had made to the template, even those which are unrelated to cruft links (such as the category link at the bottom) and called the version I had created a "mess" for whatever reason, while instead making this rather hard to read version with odd child boxes with small text instead of a propper use of subjeaders. ★Trekker ( talk) 15:41, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Spider-Man 3 literally was centered on Spider-Man having the symbiote suit and technically was the main antagonist throughout the film. Someone might feel different about that though. I welcome any opinion. Jhenderson 777 17:43, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Just giving a shoutout to anyone who can maybe help out or expand on this article. It’s off to a rusty start. Jhenderson 777 04:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
I am concerned that the user StickFigure1993 may be a sockpuppet. Either way all he does seem to be doing is adding fancruft in navboxes. Jhenderson 777 16:04, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Is Category:Spider-Man (2002 film series) characters a legitimate category? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 22:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Another one of the same type by the same editor: Category:Daredevil (film series) characters. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 23:39, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Is this article really necessary just out of curiosity? I can understand things this and potentially Batman and Robin (duo) being notable topics if done right. But I am not sure it is. Jhenderson 777 00:21, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
User:Penguin7812 was banned indefinitely yesterday as a sockpuppet of an account that was banned last year. Some of his contributions (image files mostly, a few templates, and a few articles) could have been useful in general, although I know we do not accept material from that sort of account. I don't know that restoring any of it would be acceptable, and I'm not even sure that trying to find another way to use any of it would be good, other than doing it over from scratch. Does anyone have an idea on what the ethics are for "I want it but can't have it" situations like this? :) Maybe it's a silly question, but I'm asking all the same. BOZ ( talk) 12:10, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I just had an GA nomination review saying I should probably change the infobox of this character out of confusion for readers which as of right now is the comic book character one. But I feel like I disagree on that. I feel like it should probably be like Harley Quinn etc. where the character was integrated as a character within the comic book universe. What are your thoughts on that? Jhenderson 777 02:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
In a number of articles on superheroes, the lede mentions lists of "Top 50 superhero characters" or whatever from various "prominent" magazines like IGN. I don't think these are insightful. Even if these magazines are "big" (however you judge that), these lists have probably been written by one or two geek-head journalists who were probably working on a tight deadline to make some click-bait article for their boss. If we want to demonstrate the significance of a character, we should use a more objective metric, such as movie ticket sales, comic book distribution, or merchandising revenue. That's what I tried to do in the Superman article. I found some figures for merchandising sales and comic book sales and put them in the article. Kurzon ( talk) 10:04, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
In movie articles, we routinely list awards from the Golden Globes or the Oscars. I think that may worthy of inclusion because those awards are voted on by a large body of people (industry insiders) so they carry a little more weight than a list that was probably written by just one or two geeks. Kurzon ( talk) 19:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
The big problem with these lists is the lack of objective criteria. A publication/journalist states that character X is 'greater' than character y. How is this decision reached, beyond WP:ILIKEIT? Even a list voted by the public will be problematic owing to self selection. -- Killer Moff- ill advisedly sticking his nose in since 2011 ( talk) 14:36, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
My two cents. There is actually nothing wrong with a reception of a journalist ranking characters on the greatest or worst or whatever. Wikipedia could use info like that more on the comic book articles more like the video game articles. Sure it's subjective but it works if the source is reliable. Jhenderson 777 02:23, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
WP:NPOV may apply here. An opinion on value of a character is only worth mentioning if it's held by the majority of the population, and some journalist's personal Top 10 list does nothing to prove his opinions are shared by the majority. On the other hand, things like TV ratings, box office takes, reader polls, and merchandising sales can provide some metric of popularity and cultural significance, even if not perfectly reliable. Kurzon ( talk) 09:30, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
We also got to seriously ask ourselves what makes a source notable. Anything that Albert Einstein said about the cosmos is worth mentioning in any physics article, because he rewrote the book on physics. Einstein earned that respectability. What has IGN done to make its opinions more respectable than that of the guy who runs your local comic shop? It's website ratings? Fox News and Breitbart get high ratings -- do we consider these respectable sources of information on American politics? Kurzon ( talk) 09:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Agree to disagree on that I suppose. Jhenderson 777 05:08, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Would you consider this edit to be dumping an excessive amount of plot info? I tried to remove it for that reason, but I was reverted and I do not want to edit war, especially if I am wrong about MOS:PLOT. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:30, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Is this a reliable source to identify that a certain actor voiced a certain character in a cartoon? 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 23:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
I don't know, but... does this (hundreds of edits already going back to just Aug 25, mostly just applying the deletion templates and warning the users who created the articles, little other activity) seem like quite a lot of PRODs and AFDs to be applied to comics character articles from just one user? I mean, Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Article alerts hasn't yet caught up with all of that, but I'm afraid it will implode epicly once it does. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 01:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
This entire discussion is alarming. And I have seen similar discussions here.
What is wrong with this Wikiproject. It seems to have gone off the rails, and is engaged in agreeing with and suborning the destruction of information on its subject, and for insufficient cause. It seems to be populated at least partly by people who don't seem to like comics very much. Maybe it should be renamed to WikiProject Anticomics or something.
I mean, other Wikiprojects don't have this attitude. Wikipedia:WikiProject Stations doesn't go around deleting articles on railway stations or cheering on people who do. Quite the opposite: they are interested in increasing the number of articles on railway stations. This is, you know, normal for a Wikiproject with that name. (There are surely a lot of people who have no interest in articles on railway stations and perhaps think they're dumb. Those people probably haven't joined WikiProject Stations, because that would be silly, and instead go and and create information in the areas that do interest them. Why it doesn't work this way with this Wikiproject I don't know. But sometimes entities get disfunctional. It's alright; it happens. The thing to do is right the ship, is all.)
It there isn't some kind of reform, such as suggesting that that people who have the wrong attitude perhaps look for other work, we are going to need outside eyes on this Wikiproject, and bring in the larger community to take a look at it, and decide what's to be done. Herostratus ( talk) 16:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I see you're looking for information on [subject]. We could have an article on this subject. In fact we did have an article on this subject! A nice one, too. But we deleted it. Because, while we are here to provide information, we don't think you should have too much information. But we wish you luck on your google search on this topic, and we hope and assume that you have time, interest, and skill to re-create the equivalent collection of sourced data which was in our article, before we destroyed it. Have a nice day, and fuck you! |
You really are something else, Herostratus. The great thing is, of course, that we can always recreate something that is deleted if someone feels it can be greatly improved. But I think you're presuming a lot about the comics cruft we have being "perfectly good" and "nice". Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 18:59, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
To my mind, I think he's focusing on the wrong things here. Are there a great many articles about characters that fail GNG? Absolutely. We, as the Comics Project, should not allow comics related articles which are unencyclopaedic. However, there is a way to be positive about this. Make articles which are. You can't create an article on a member of the Legion of Superheroes, so write the series, or the creators. Did they have their own series, or a back-up strip? Were they a character in an anthology? Do these avenues pass GNG? I think it's much more realistic to focus on the tangible facts of comics history. -- Killer Moff- ill advisedly sticking his nose in since 2011 ( talk) 12:54, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
OK. Well, the main point being whether one is hostile to the idea of expanded coverage of comics or not, not whether someone put their name on a list. Yeah and OK "ashamed" is a bit rich, I just mean that in this particular instance I don't think that this project did what I personally think it should have, and what I believe other projects might have. Don't mean to get all combative there. I do that sometimes.
So anyway, I wasn't talking about being too liberal regarding whether articles should meet the GNG. Let's say, for now and as things stand, that they should, or perhaps must. Let's say we can all agree on that. The question, on which I could be accused of being too liberal, is what refs are sufficiently reliable to be counted toward meeting the GNG.
So I mean, of the two articles on The Big Hit List that I looked at, Dragonmage meets the GNG and Uni-Mind could have been made so -- that is, I think they meet the GNG; it's something that reasonable people can disagree on, but IMO I have a strong case and I made it -- and it was destroyed anyway. This is, to me, a shame.
Alright. I have some points/questions/comments about the more general questions, and I'll make them in separate threads below, for anyone to engage or ignore as they see fit. Thank you for your engagement and sorry if I came off a bit strong. 19:29, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Several Wikipedia articles have an incredibly large number of citations made to two commercial websites - Mycomicshop.com and AtomicAvenue.com. While I would like to assume good faith, the sheer volume leans toward WP:CITESPAM and WP:NOTADVERTISING
See the following articles:
That's at least 2,649 citations to Mycomicshop.com and 1,592 citations to AtomicAvenue.com (a total of 4,241) spread across just eight articles. Wikipedia is not here to drive sales traffic to online retailers. Would we allow a "citation" to Walmart.com or Target.com on a clothing-related Wikipedia article? If someone wishes to buy a comic book, they can certainly find their own retail option of choice as in WP:YELLOWPAGES
Mtminchi08 ( talk) 00:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
These should, if possible, be replaced with Grand Comics Database citations. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 03:43, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
Looking for input, but was I right to revert this edit? The new editor who added that was apparently upset that I reverted their sprawling list of added abilities to the infobox, and tried to start a discussion on the article's talk page, but honestly their response is a bit rambling and I'm not sure where to start, so hopefully you have some input to help. It's not the first time (or the longest addition) that I have reverted from Thor's infobox, and I feel it is honestly long enough already without adding a dozen or so more things. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 04:11, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Any objections if I go thru the member list and remove those editors who haven't made an edit in two years (informing them what has been done)? @ Herostratus: go for it. Argento Surfer ( talk) 12:30, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Would anyone like to comment on the dispute happening here and at Taskmaster (comics)? It would appear that the user Amakuru wasn't aware of the discussions that took place in 2017 that led to WP:NCC being changed and is blocking certain page moves just because a lot of pages haven't been moved since then. Dark Knight 2149 23:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Superhero fiction is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Superhero fiction (2nd nomination) 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 high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. Certes ( talk) 10:07, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Some years ago Mark Millar wrote the Old Man Logan comic, set in its own continuity, the Wastelands. First it was a miniseries. Then there was a new one, which was actually a tie-in to Secret Wars: it started in the wastelands, then had him roam across other realms of Battleworld, and finally he landed in the main universe. The wastelands were eventually explored again in the series "Old Man Hawkeye" and "Old Man Quill", Logan returned to it in "Dead Man Logan", and now there will be a new one, "Avengers of the wastelands". Which is the correct place to talk about all this? The Old Man Logan article, or a new one? And if a new one, should it be called "Wastelands (Marvel Comics)" or something else? Ultimate someone ( talk) 18:01, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
An RfC that affects your project has been opened at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous). Please review the discussion and contribute as you see fit. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 15:06, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Somebody might need to look into this dispute on images. All I am aware is that I prefer the current image for now. Jhenderson 777 09:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
The talk page could benefit from others who have a good understanding of the WP COMICS MOS with regard to infobox images. The warring editors are missing the point. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 01:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
WP:COMICS editors are welcome, nay encouraged, to comment on the Darkseid infobox image discussion and RfC because we are nowhere near a consensus. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 18:55, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Hello there, WikiProject Comics! A couple Wikiproject doors down, I've taken up the somewhat masochistic task of trying to organize all the topic space covered by Wikiproject Dungeons & Dragons. We have a little bit of crossover space, in terms of List of Dungeons & Dragons comic books. Excuse the sad state of affairs in that list; an organizing list for the subtopic didn't even exist until a few hours ago.
Surprisingly (to me, anyway), although both D&D and comic books suffer from, if anything, an overabundance of articles on drilled-down microtopics, Wikipedia's coverage of the D&D-themed comic books is depressingly bare. Nevertheless, there are fairly big names attached to some of these series. I can't imagine its impossible to get reliable sources about their announcement, their release, and likely even reviews in contemporary reporting. But, um... I usually pride myself on my ability to source random topics, but I don't have the faintest clue where to look for reliable information about pre-Internet-era comic books. And if there are going to be articles on some of these titles, we're going to do them right.
So, does anyone have suggestions on where I'd look? I assume print periodicals are the go-to here, but I'm not sure which ones to start with (assuming I can even locate them! -- stuff I have a hope of finding is, of course, preferred). I'm most interested in quality sourcing for the major licensed runs: the 1987–1991 DC Comics titles, the 2001–2004 Kenzer & Company titles, and the 2004–2008 Devil's Due Publishing titles. The IDW stuff is recent enough to have web reporting, so that's just a matter of cleaning up the composite article we have now, sourcing things properly, and getting individual topics written where appropriate; I can do that. The earlier stuff... that's where I could use a hand! Squeamish Ossifrage ( talk) 03:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion here. My two cents is I feel like comic book related articles are now being ganged up by non comic book fans to be merged. As an mergist (when not notable) I am usually not bothered. But I feel they are quick to judge "not notable" just because an article is not perfect. Which should be a no-no. Jhenderson 777 15:28, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Was I wrong in thinking this is a notable topic? I personally thought so since it’s a major Wonder Woman location. But it could use more sources though. Jhenderson 777 04:43, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
The various lists of Marvel characters is pretty much just treated like a graveyard for non-notable characters. The DC lists are simply either tables or just lists of links. Should the Marvel lists be formatted to match DC? I feel like the characters currently in the lists should be redirected to relevant series articles in which they appear. It makes much more sense than having X amount of articles redirected to the lists, and then culled when the lists get too large. TTN ( talk) 17:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
I Agree that neither the DC or Marvel character lists are suit for purpose, the DC lists having no information, and Marvel too much. The Marvel lists in particular are being used to store non-notable information, and they both seem to fail every guideline of WP:LISTN and WP:LSC. In particular: "For example, all known species within a taxonomic family are relevant enough to include in a list of them; but List of Norwegian musicians would not be encyclopedically useful if it indiscriminately included every garage band mentioned in a local Norwegian newspaper." Similarly, we should not list every Marvel character, and certainly not provide in-depth bios. What I may be okay with is a much reduced table, providing character name, first appearance, creators, and a few sentences at most describing them and their powers. Think the back of a trading card. -- Killer Moff- ill advisedly sticking his nose in since 2011 ( talk) 11:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Just a heads up. That this relevant draft exists. It is in need of constructive copy edits as I take a much needed Wikbreak. Jhenderson 777 01:13, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
There has been some disagreement at the Bucky Barnes page as to whether the page should include villain categories. One argument is that since he was depicted as an antagonist in some story lines so he should be considered a villain, and the argument on the other hand is that since he was brainwashed he did not do these actions of his own volition so should not be considered a villain. What is the consensus for whether these categories should be included on this article? 2601:249:8A00:2500:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 04:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Is there somewhere this could be merged? It definitely has enough sources to stand alone, but it feels like it would be better placed as a section of an article rather than left as an eternal stub. It's more of a charitable publicity stunt than an actual character. TTN ( talk) 14:30, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
This has been discussed here numerous times before, but new user Classifiedleague has been adding the labels "superhero" and "supervillain" to the lead sentence of many character articles, including to those for whom such labels are not very clear (like Magneto and Loki, for example). I reverted some of them, but I think it would be a good idea to discuss, or at least remind ourselves why we use the neutral term "character" in many cases? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 01:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Argento Surfer, here's one - trivial non-appearances, should they be included? [9] Answer: almost never. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 07:08, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Batman in film, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 21:18, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
It has been suggested that Mr. A be merged with Question (character). See Talk:Mr. A#Merge?. Dark Knight 2149 00:09, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
I just contested a prod of these two article ( Corsair (comics) and Starjammers) If anyone can improve these articles I do much appreciate it. I would but I have other projects for now. Jhenderson 777 16:05, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello! I have recently created a bot to remove completed infobox requests and am sending this message to WikiProject Comics since the project currently has a backlogged infobox request category. Details about the task can be found at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PearBOT 2, but in short it removes all infobox requests from articles with an infobox, once a week. To sign up, reply with {{ ping|Trialpears}} and tell me if any special considerations are required for the Wikiproject. For example: if only a specific infobox should be detected, such as {{ infobox journal}} for WikiProject Academic Journals; or if an irregularly named infobox such as {{ starbox begin}} should be detected. Feel free to ask if you have any questions!
Sent on behalf of Trialpears ( talk) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
There is a noticeboard discussion on the reliability of We Got This Covered ( wegotthiscovered.com). If you are interested, please participate at WP:RSN § Omigosh, are Cheatsheet.com and WeGotThisCovered.com reliable?. — Newslinger talk 11:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
A relevant comic book character is nominated for deletion. You are welcome to share your opinion here. Jhenderson 777 21:00, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 08:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
The third sentence says he's ex-Special Operations Executive but there is no other mention of the SOE in the entire article; however there is mention of him being in the SAS–twice in both the infobox and article–which is a separate UK military organisation. This looks like a misunderstanding but I'm no DC expert and it is possible he was in both, so any input from someone knowledgeable on the Batman comics would be appreciated! (also the sentence in question is confusing in and of itself so would benefit from an edit anyway, even if it is factually correct) Snizzbut ( talk) 16:40, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Is this speculation on whether she will appear in the show? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:11, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
I have written a missing article, Age of X-Man, the crossover that took place this year before Hickman's relaunch. It has the editorial history, a pair of controversies, references, list of involved comics, etc; but I have not included yet a plot section, as I don't remember it well enough. Does someone else wants to help with it? It should be the easiest part of the article. Ultimate someone ( talk) 17:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Does this article serve any purpose outside of just being a massive plot dump? It seems like it hasn't really had any major discussion for over 11 years at this point. Arguments back in 2008 state that the identity in itself has enough discussion to be its own topic, but nothing like that is in the actual article currently. Something like Batman#Bruce Wayne seems like it should be completely sufficient to discuss the topic. I'm sure there are certainly sources discussing things like the breakdown of real identity vs the mask/suit and all that, but that would likely be something that could be an article in itself using examples from major heroes. I can't see a hero by hero breakdown being particularly viable. TTN ( talk) 12:24, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello to the members of this project. The Smurfs (comics) has an infobox that seems to be created from scratch. It takes up about a third pf the width of the article. I am guessing that the "Infobox comics meta series" is the one that should be used but I could be wrong. If anyone can fix things that would be most appreciated. MarnetteD| Talk 09:59, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Please can someone with a clue look at Template:Justice League characters? There seems to be a difference of opinion between IP editors as to what should be included. Thanks, Certes ( talk) 11:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
This is a neutral notice of discussion regarding an edit war at Wonder Woman. All comments are welcomed. Thank you.— TriiipleThreat ( talk) 19:34, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
I am reaching out to your project because your project may have an interest in this discussion: Template talk:Infobox character § Removing parameters regarding WP:WAF. Izno ( talk) 16:18, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Just a heads up that I contested an Batarang prod. So an AFD is probably next. If improvements can be done. Feel free. An major weapon of Batman that I would think everyone had heard of. Jhenderson 777 16:28, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Author Marjorie Liu who's well know for having written several of the characters solo books has stated that wrote the character with the intention to be of Asian descent, this is stated in the article itself. Ambaryer claims that here that the characters mother is "explicitly defined as Caucasian" despite that not being said anywhere on the page. When I asked for a citation to this Ambaryer changed the argument to "Liu's intent is meaningless if it didn't happen in the books" which to me seems a little odd, are we to assume every character is "explicitly Caucasian" unless it's stated explicitly by the character in the book? ★Trekker ( talk) 14:45, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a dispute regarding the wording in the first sentence at the Vertigo Comics article that could use some more eyes. The discussion is here. JOE BRO 64 21:17, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello all. There are currently deletion discussions ongoing for the characters Betty Clawman and Deathbolt. I've added a few sources to the topics but I believe there is potential for the articles to be expanded further. Unfortunately due to the AFDs, I'm now on a deadline to do so. lol Any input at the AFDs themselves is of course welcome, but if any of you guys have any additional reliable sources for these two characters that could either 1) be added to the articles or 2) be passed along to me so I can add them, it would be much appreciated. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 18:49, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
We probably need an article at Heroic Publishing (and a redir from its original name Hero Comics. It's a redlink from Sparkplug (comics), League of Champions, List of Eclipse Comics publications#C, Flare (comics), Huntsman (Heroic Publishing), etc. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:43, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I would like to create some kind of collaborative workspace where coordinators or members of various WikiProjects would gather and provide updates and information on what is going on at each wikiproject, i.e. regarding their latest efforts, projects, and where interested editors can get involved.
For those of you at this very active WikiProject, your input would be very helpful, so I wanted to get your input on whether you'd be interested in helping me to make this happen.
we are discussing this proposal right now at:
* Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Idea for new community workspace
Please feel free to let me know what you think of this idea, and please let me know your preference, regarding the options above. if you do not see any need for this idea, that is totally fine. However, I think that the majority of editors lack awareness of where the truly active editing is taking place and at which WikiProjects, and I would like to do whatever I can to help make people more aware of where the activity is, what they can do to help, and also which areas of Wikipedia offer ideas and efforts that might help them in their own editing activities. Please feel free to let me know.
thanks. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 18:51, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Is this something we want to include in the Morbius, the Living Vampire article? 208.47.202.254 ( talk) 15:26, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Is this something we should be including in the article? 208.47.202.254 ( talk) 20:18, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Here, again, we have someone reinserting this in the article: [12] 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 00:09, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure why, but it looks like in the last few days, User:NeoBatfreak has been removing normal comics character images and replacing them with images of the characters on white backgrounds. It looks like there are a lot of these. Any idea if this is OK? 2601:249:8A00:2500:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 05:14, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I have nominated The Adventures of Tintin for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKay ( talk) 15:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Is the Moon Knight article better off with a huge rogues gallery section as added by User:PopCultureSuperHero here: [13]? Or does the article even need such a section at all, or is it better off with the more concise list that it had yesterday? 73.110.45.100 ( talk) 14:04, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
I just thought it could help the writers of the new show. I plan on making articles for everybody...kind of like a "Moon Knight" project. But in reality I just always revert changes done by non-registered accounts. PopCultureSuperHero ( talk) 07:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I made a new discussion in WT:Notability (fiction) regarding adding more restrictions on lists regarding fictional elements such as swords, animals, profession, and so on. if anyone is interested in bringing their opinion on the topic. here. Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 19:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I did an update of the plot synopsis of Gunnerkrigg Court, which had not been updated for the best part of a decade according to some notes there, but before removing the outdated mark, I'd like to request some help cleaning up the text. Anyone here who follows the comic and can help with this task? Not A Superhero ( talk) 03:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
I only glanced at the history of Atlantis (Marvel Comics). My question regarding his reverting is did anyone (including myself) violate the three revert rule. Also was the non-admin closure really a keep consensus as claimed? It seemed more on keep. Jhenderson 777 13:03, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Also can these select few warrant notability?:
Jhenderson 777 13:15, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Relevant discussion regarding comic book weapon here. Jhenderson 777 13:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Is there a general consensus on categories such as Category:X-Men supporting characters, created by new user User:7p12e? 2601:249:8A00:2500:F9DF:DD4C:83B5:E6EC ( talk) 16:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Just saw that Beautie from Astro City is up for deletion. I honestly don't know whether this subject is worth an article or not, so throwing it out here in case any of you guys know? — Hunter Kahn 15:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
This article used the neutral term "character", but User:MacCready is asserting without a source [14] that the character should be considered a supervillain. The character was depicted as an antagonist in the 2006 Neil Gaiman mini-series, but in the preceding 30 years of the character's existence I am not seeing anything that would indicate that "supervillain" is an appropriate term for this character. It is probably better to discuss here than edit-warring, though. 73.110.46.39 ( talk) 10:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
All these characters were planned to be merged but were reverted by the Toughpigs user saying I should discuss it. Sorry I can’t ping right now. So should some / all should be merged or should be left alone and this article idea be scrapped. The list is planned to replace the fancruft list article before then. It also reduces the fancruft of all the articles. Jhenderson 777 01:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Just curious, but is this citation format by Orenburg1 here, which I have only ever seen used in this one instance, preferable to this one here which I have seen used on many, many articles, including the rest of the same article? (Excepting, of course, that the "cite comic" template is really the one to use by editors not being lazy, guilty as charged, but here I am speaking of which of the two above are to be used in lieu of that.) 73.110.46.36 ( talk) 16:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
Adding a note here about a merge discussion that's just started at Talk:Fatal Five#Merge discussion. The discussion involves whether to merge the five individual character articles from this group ( Mano (character), Emerald Empress, Persuader (comics), Tharok, and Validus) into the Fatal Five page. Any input there would be appreciated. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 19:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Did she portray Mar-Vell as all the sources seem to say, or was she playing the Ultimate Marvel character Mahr Vehl as this IP is stating without any sources except their own honest-to-god-know-how? [15] 2601:249:8B80:4050:89AC:6152:E1C7:AC47 ( talk) 23:43, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
There's currently a discussion @ Talk:Rat_Queens#Rat_Queens_Vol.1_#11 on whether an editors own commentary of a comic book is considered a reliable source. Thoughts on the matter is requested. Jerm ( talk) 01:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Is it me, or is Category:Marvel Comics American superheroes kind of a weird category with no recognizable definition? Several of the characters in this new category created by User:Atvica aren't even remotely "American", unless you mean created by an American company, in which case we would have to include all superhero characters created by Marvel. 2601:249:8B80:4050:151F:16A8:DF8:8B0D ( talk) 13:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Editors may be interested in discussing my proposed merger at the Deadpool talk page. Etzedek24 ( I'll talk at ya) ( Check my track record) 03:01, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
In the past I merged some articles like Jack Frost (Marvel Comics) and Blue Diamond (comics) among other Golden Age characters. But of lately ToughPigs has gotten back to to restoring them claiming they have passed Wp:GNG. If they did...great. But in my opinion they haven't and I feel that ToughPigs doesn't understand that sources like what he put out is not enough for the criteria of notability. He did nothing but add a few sources to improve and when I tag one article with GNG tag he just removes them. I have high respect for the editor though. Nothing but good faith I believe. I just bring it up because I want to know the community thoughts on it. Jhenderson 777 14:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
I am on the same page as
Toughpigs,
Hullaballoo Wolfowitz and
Argento Surfer here and want to add:
1) Secondary sources should not need to be recent, and I have seen nothing to that regard in
WP:GNG. It does not make much sense to require a topic to be discussed in secondary sources over and over again, on many topics there is simply a point where everything relevant is said.
2) Yes, a tertiary source should ideally quote the secondary (and primary) sources it uses. But if the absence of stated sources let's one suspect that a work is based only on primary sources, it becomes a secondary source itself. The definition of a tertiary source is that it's based on secondary sources, not that it may be called an encyclopedia.
So I see no reason why the discussed sources may not be used to establish notability as long as they are independent. The only remaining relevant question to me is, if works encompassing many fictional characters have enough content to (collectively) provide "significant coverage" for each.
Daranios (
talk) 13:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
I wasnt upset. But I am annoyed now. Why? Because this is the second time you assumed I am upset. Please quit thinking I am upset every time I bring issues up. I am not that kind editor. Jhenderson 777 23:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
OK. So, maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but I am extremely skeptical of the accusations leveled against Scott Lobdell by the website BleedingCool and their supposed "outcome." As far as I can tell, there have been no other sources backing up the claims that Lobdell supposedly did what the article claims he did, no official word from DC and no official word from Lobdell himself regarding the supposed "Sensitivity Training.". That and considering the post they linked to was made in 2016 but is only now being linked to Lobdell raises more questions than it does answers. As a result, I think that the portion of the page relating to that article should be removed until such a time it can be confirmed via an official statement from Warner or DC.
Georgemiser ( talk) 12:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
In that case, might I kindly request the removal of that portion of the article untill such a time it can actually be proven to be factual? Georgemiser ( talk) 12:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
With all due respect, I think there is, indeed, a misunderstanding. Unless there is a source from DC or from one of Lobdell's social media accounts actually confirming this claim, the burden of proof is entirely on BleedingCool. They can claim that Lobdell said this to their reporter, but unless Lobdell or DC confirms it themselves, the information, in my mind, cannot and should not be treated as factual. Lobdell himself, to the best of my knowledge, has not once stated, through either Instagram or Twitter, that he has "enrolled" in anything. Unless multiple sources can back up the claim of this so-called enrollment, coupled with the fact that Lobdell is continuing to find work outside of DC, (See the recent news regarding his Green Hornet run for Dynamite Comics), then the site's claims, all of them from the linking the accusations to Lobdell to the claims of "Gender Sensitivity Courses", should rightfully be treated as suspect. Plus there is the likelihood that if this article is false, that this man is indeed being accused of a crime he didn't commit. Wikipedia is well above perpetuating that kind of misinformation. Georgemiser ( talk) 14:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Stucky (fandom) is currently a featured article nominee. The article is (in my biased assessment) in fairly good shape by FA requirement standards, but the reviews thus far have been from editors without knowledge of comic book subject material, and I would appreciate the perspective of editors who have familiarity with the characters/comics more broadly. Please feel free to leave comments at the article's review page. Thank you! Morgan695 ( talk) 21:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Do the sources added here support the claim for Selene (comics) (aka the Black Queen of the Hellfire Club) that "A version of the character appeared in the Underworld film series played by Kate Beckinsale"? 2601:249:8B80:4050:C1EC:F7AC:76F2:13B6 ( talk) 23:34, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
I'm assuming that this and this are the basic definition of trivial non-appearances that have no good reason to be mentioned in an article, unless I am somehow wrong? 2601:249:8B80:4050:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 03:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Please opine about whether the original creators of the comic book work should be cited/credited in the infobox of the film. Thanks. Gotitbro ( talk) 01:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
For some reason, FocoCasti is insisting that we need to include this comment in an article about a character who, by the user's own insistence is merely "briefly mentioned in a conversation" and does not actually appear in the film. I don't believe there is anything wrong with removing that, but rather than edit-warring I will ask, is it wrong for me to remove this mention? The user did note that there are similar articles with brief mentions, so hopefully they can identify these articles so we can remove the rest of the trivial non-appearances. 2601:249:8B80:4050:452F:2FDB:4E19:AA68 ( talk) 19:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
An editor with, I'm certain, good intentions, is nonetheless proposing wholesale deletion of between 200-300 WikiProject Comics images for reasons that, in the majority of cases in which I've looked, appear to be incorrect. A few images do appear to be overkill in articles and could be removed, but the majority of the sampling I've seen have, in my view, legitimate FURs and are being wrongly proposed for deletion.
Interested editors may want to comment on any of a number of images being proposed for deletion at:
@ Tenebrae:, User:The Squirrel Conspiracy notified the project a few sections above this one. Argento Surfer ( talk) 17:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
I am just curious and wondering if User:Mark Rhodes 12 is a sock of User:Banana Mutant or otherwise somehow connected? The new account seems to do a very similar type of editing, and was registered just a few days after the old account was blocked, and its first edit is very suspicious. BOZ ( talk) 02:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Just leaving the WikiProject a courtesy notice that I've nominated about 30 images from episodes of the SHIELD TV series for deletion. All of the nominations are per WP:NFCC 8 (with two also for 3a), and can be found at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 May 15. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 05:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello all. The Young Protectors is a superhero and LGBTQ-themed webcomic created by Alex Woolfson, started in 2012 and currently ongoing. Right now it's mentioned in the creator's page, but I've been wondering what criteria can be used to determine whether the comic merits a page of its own and to what depth describe it. Before I start creating a page that may get deleted, I thought I'd ask. Not A Superhero ( talk) 05:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi there. I've been asked to post a message here letting you know that I've been nominating a large number of non-free files from comic book articles for deletion.
Images that are not under a free license are required to follow the non-free content criteria (NFCC), which is a "policy with legal considerations" (which means that if the NFCC comes into conflict with any manual, guideline, or policy without legal considerations, the NFCC has overrules the other manual/guideline/policy). Most of the files I'm nominating for deletion are being nominated as violations of one of two sub-points to that policy: 3a and 8.
An image must meet all 10 criteria; failing any one criteria means that the image must be deleted.
I'd like to note that I'm not targeting comics specifically; I've already nominated some excessive non-free files in other areas. However, comic articles are a place with a large concentration of violations, owing to the large number of articles and the general lack of free replacements.
Criteria 3a is: "Minimal number of items. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information."
Most of the images I'm nominating are the second, third, fourth, etc. non-free depictions of a character on a page. For example, Rogue (Marvel Comics) has eight, which is the highest I've seen in an article thus far. When the depictions are substantially similar to one another, NFCC 3a boils down to "pick one". In such cases, I am nominating all of the substantially similar images except for the one in the infobox, so one image remains. When a character has a major redesign that I, as someone not familiar with comic books, can immediately recognize is a substantially different, I usually that image alone (unless it fails NFCC 8, below).
Criteria 8 is: Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
A lot of people misinterpret what this means. I recommend reading this section in Wikipedia:Non-free content as a starting point. This is actually a very high bar; it has generally been held in file deletion discussions that the existence of a subject/object/style/behavior/etc. is not enough to justify the use of a non-free image depicting it; the contents of the non-free must be directly discussed in a non-trivial fashion using properly referenced prose. To put it another way, the image supports the prose. If there's not text describing the subject that the image is supposed to illustrate, the image can't be critical to readers' understanding of the topic.
This also means that non-free images have to be closely related to the subject of the article. In an article on Thanos, it would be inappropriate to have non-free images of all of his henchmen, however those same images would likely be acceptable in the articles on those henchmen themselves.
This also means that a depiction of a character that only lasts for a minor arc (someone gets possessed and turns green, for example) do not meet NFCC 8, because the reader is able to understand the subject of the article as a whole (the character), without needing to see an image of how the looked in one specific book. However, if that brief depiction was the subject of substantial critical coverage by third party sources, and that prose is in the article, the image would be fine.
The answer to both of these is the same:
If you clean up the articles, you get to choose which depiction(s) remain. I generally pass over articles with only one or two images without nominating anything, and focus most of my attention on articles with larger numbers of non-free files, because that's where the need is greatest.
Anyone is able to participate in files for deletion discussions, however it's important to note that - if you want your comments to be taken into account by the closing admin - you need to make specific arguments as to why the file in question meets the NFCC. Point to the prose that justifies it. The admins in the file namespace will ignore WP:ILIKEIT comments. Because this is a policy with legal considerations, even if a majority of comments are for keeping the file, if none of them discuss why the file meets the NFCC, the file will likely still be deleted.
If there's non-trivial coverage of an image and I missed it, note it in the FfD. I am quite willing to withdraw nominations if either a good argument for keeping a specific image comes forward, or if prose is added to justify an image after the nomination.
I do not watch this page, so please ping me if you reply.
Sincerely, The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 08:04, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Bumping so archive bot doesn't eat this while I'm still nominating files. The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk) 07:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
There is a MoS RfC that editors here may be interested in, about whether to use "is" or "was" to describe periodicals that are no longer being published. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 15:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
User:Josiahkester has been adding a long list of abilities on the Gladiator (Kallark) article (and was previously doing this on Hyperion (comics) as well), so I am wondering if we should be including a long list of abilities like that? 98.32.192.121 ( talk) 20:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
I completed a thorough GA review for Free Comic Book Day on 11 May but the nominator hasn't made a registered edit since 6 May, and I was hoping someone here might be willing to take up the nominator's role in the review process. I believe that the article can meet the GA criteria and have made specific suggestions on the nomination page. If you do decide to take up this task, please leave a note here to inform others. – Reidgreg ( talk) 14:46, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
In light of the protests in the US: Punisher#In politics and popular culture. 2601:240:102:EC27:4AF1:7FFF:FEE5:C031 ( talk) 23:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
There is discussion on whether the new article Characters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe should be name changed. Feel free to discuss on talk page. Jhenderson 777 17:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Just asking here, because new user User:Rickyar rewrote the publication history section and I think it would be good to get comments from other editors on whether this was an improvement to the article. The user has been warned for edit-warring, so hopefully discussing here will be more productive. 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 18:14, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I've authored many articles so I disagree with the characterization that I am "new." Also, I'm the one who requested help from someone continually reverting, and I get warned by this editor. Argento, that's how comic history is categorized. Golden age to modern. These subheaders are on all comic villains and heroes in wikipedia. Rickyar ( talk) 20:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I created Dan Danglo from the RD list. It was just tagged for notability. Feel free to expand it if you have access to more RS. Thanks! Zigzig20s ( talk) 14:09, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
New user User:HyprMarc has been changing the lead sentence of characters who died in MCU films to say that So-and-so "was" a fictional character. Am I mistaken, or does the death of a character (in just one medium, not all media) mean that a character is no longer fictional? Even if a character's death in a film somehow makes that character non-fictional, if the character is alive in another medium (comics, television, etc), should we want to declare that character dead in all media? I will revert all of these edits, but this may be worth discussing. 2601:249:8B80:4050:D4DF:BB92:DF00:334C ( talk) 12:34, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
User:HyprMarc continues to make this change to articles, and has not replied to any attempt at discussion. User:TriiipleThreat and User:CarciaNullius reverted some of their edits, so I am going to go back and see if any others need to be undone. 2601:249:8B80:4050:6CB1:1540:EE61:E251 ( talk) 12:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Haven't variations of Category:Marvel Cinematic Universe film characters been deleted over and over again? 2601:240:10C:AB84:B4C2:8DE1:65FC:69F6 ( talk) 00:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I contend that Brother Voodoo has only recently been portrayed as a more traditional superhero, with his association with the Avengers and such. Previously, he could at best be argued as a very non-traditional superhero. In any case of ambiguity we typically use "character" in the lead sentence, rather than "superhero", although it was reverted by User:Jmgwilson as seen here: [16]. What is the general consensus to do in this case? 2601:249:8B80:4050:114A:BE09:1E2C:5ADB ( talk) 12:52, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Brother Voodoo has the same origin as Dr. Stange. A former Doctor who picked up the mystic arts. However, unlike the selfish Dr Stange brother Voodoo did it to help his own brother and stop an evil cult from taking over Haiti, his home. After stopping the cult he continued on as hero specifically to help protect the people of Haiti. His origin is the definition of a hero. This is all clearly stated in the article. If Swamp Thing who has been portrayed as an antihero on multiple occasions and gets the title superhero, so does Brother Voodoo. To do anything else is blatantly against a black character.
User:Jmgwilson
There is currently a discussion regarding whether the category Category:Time travelers should be included on Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe). Editors are welcomed to join the discussion at Talk:Steve Rogers (Marvel Cinematic Universe)#Time travel category. - Favre1fan93 ( talk) 20:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Some examples include Galactus ([ [17]]), Big Barda ([ [18]]) and Infinity-Man ([ [19]]). Despite being advised that said characters are not demons, the user has reverted. I've advised them to take it to the relevant Talk Page for a discussion. I note that there is some duplication in the linked categories, but I think first order of business is stopping the insertion of blatantly incorrect information. The user might take my advice but I doubt it. They will probably press on (unless they concede defeat and disappear, but I don't wish to scare off a new user). Bears watching. Asgardian ( talk) 18:39, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Regards Asgardian ( talk) 13:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Is the new Category:Marvel Comics video game characters appropriate? If we keep it, there may be many characters that need to be added to it. 2601:249:8B80:4050:4036:4D18:4D94:789C ( talk) 23:38, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@ Vinny Weasel: I recommend discussing your recent mass removals here. Removing them again without replying here will be considered edit-warring. -- / Alex/ 21 00:28, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
identify key facts at a glance. Looking at his edit history, some of these things were up to 1,400 bytes just for voices! That's way too much for an infobox, and definitely not readable at a glance. As pointed out by TheJoebro64 in the Wonder Woman edit posted above, these pages are for comics characters primarily, and voice adaptations are secondary. The voice actors can be captured in the "Adaptations" or "In other media" sections.
There may be exceptions, Harley Quinn is the one that immediately jumps to mind, where a character was actually introduced in a format that includes a voice actor, and the voice becomes closely associated with the character. Those might warrant an infobox mention. The problem there is that voice actors come and go, and even Harley has a long list of people that have portrayed her at this point. A case might also be made for a performer that is predominantly associated with the character such as Kevin Conroy as Batman or Mark Hamill as Joker, but you run into the same problem, and it can quickly stop being an objective and become personal preference: " Will Arnett is just as good a Batman voice!" So even in the Harley example, if Arleen Sorkin is mentioned, it should be qualified with (originally) and probably commented that any other voices should be noted elsewhere.
Bottom line: In my view, this parameter is best reserved for somebody that was voiced in a 1-2 season adaptation that runs to completion with only 1-2 VAs as opposed to a character in a long-running serial. If any exceptions are made they need to be objectively bounded somehow. - 2pou ( talk) 18:08, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
I forget if this has come up before, but is this a good inclusion? 2601:240:10F:4F35:D503:FB4F:B425:C6D ( talk) 04:42, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
An article I translated about the French comics artist Cyril Pedrosa was moved to draftspace, due some issue about a mass input of badly translated articles using the Content Translation tool back in 2017. I checked the translation and the sources again, but I want a second opinion. Could someone in the project verify the sources and grammar to bring the article back to mainspace? (It passes WP:NBIO, the subject having won several comics awards)
Thank you. DanGFSouza ( talk) 17:04, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
I would appreciate input from other editors here. Argento Surfer ( talk) 21:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
I think it'd be great if someone added an article for The Old Guard (comics) series the movie is based on. Thematthewmurray ( talk) 14:51, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Several comics Navbox templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at this section of the Templates for discussion page. (Only four of them have Talk pages in order to show up on the Alerts page.)
I certainly have my opinion on this subject and will weigh in, but additional input either way may help develop a true consensus and potentially influence future Navbox use. Clearly people have opinions on both sides of the matter. - 2pou ( talk) 05:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
What is the opinion of making a special separation on a character page between "Spider-Man games" and "Other games" as seen at Doctor Octopus#Video games, and as argued for in this edit summary? As noted in that edit summary, the same thing is being done at Eddie Brock#Video games and Green Goblin in other media#Video games. 98.32.192.121 ( talk) 23:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
There are a couple of IPs and a registered user ( 2A00:23C7:46DD:2F01:255A:75A0:A208:F2F3 ( talk · contribs), 2A00:23C7:46DD:2F01:89A4:7002:E433:6C67 ( talk · contribs), Paulharv2 ( talk · contribs)) indiscriminately expanding character navboxes to include loosely associated characters and teammates.-- TriiipleThreat ( talk) 20:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Isn't Category:Antihero subjective by its very definition? 8.37.179.254 ( talk) 20:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello, there is an article at AfD that needs input: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Tolibao (2nd nomination). It's been open since July 24, due to a lack of participation/consensus. Anyone interested is welcome to join the discussion. Thanks, // Timothy :: talk 17:27, 20 August 2020 (UTC)