Talk:From Hell

message: Someone split the film content out into a separate article, then someone else reverted it.  Before we get into a rv war here, let's discuss it.  Should the articles be split? Lord Bodak 14:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be interested in hearing the argument for why it shouldn't. It was already arranged in such a way as to make a split easy, and they're different enough topics to have separate articles. It's also a courtesy to Alan Moore, who hates seeing his fiction confused with films created outside of his control. Sarge Baldy 15:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "A courtesy to Alan Moore"?? You've got to be kidding me, what a totally screwed up rationale. That's clear bias there, so based upon that alone you clearly cannot split the article. The argument against splitting is exactly as put in the edit comments: splitting the article into two creates an unnecessary WP:FORK file where information is duplicated and the two hings discussing the same basic background split off and get competing (and eventually contradictory) information. DreamGuy 22:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What information is "duplicated"? At present the article is a clean split. The graphic novel and film are two separate pieces of work. Why keep them in a single article? Your claim about my (open) "bias" is irrelevant, because splitting articles about books and films is standard practice on Wikipedia. This article at present is deviant. Sarge Baldy 22:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

text: DreamGuy, first off, your edit summary says 'rv splitting of the movie into separate article' which does not explain your rationale at all.  Second, WP:FORK is an article about sites mirroring Wikipedia.  Considering the movie alters significant details of the story, and even the creators comment on how disconnected they are, I see no logic in keeping the two in one article.  As Sarge Baldy says above, splitting articles about books and films is SOP here.  Why should this be different? Lord Bodak 02:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Does anyone else have an opinion on the matter, or should I just go ahead and split it again? Sarge Baldy 22:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I posted a question over at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films) to see if there is a guideline on this issue.  Assuming no clear dissent there, I would say go ahead and split it.  This is the only book I've seen where the film isn't in its own article. Lord Bodak 03:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be split. Cvene64 03:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, again. Sarge Baldy 04:10, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Splitting the Article

message: Shouldn't 'From Hell' redirect to Jack's letter, since even this 'from hell' is based on that one? If not, shouldn't it at least have a 'For the letter from Jack,the ripper, see ___' in the begining? 201.31.229.110 17:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a link to the letter from the start of the page. Alternatively this could be made into a disambig page, with its current contents being moved to From Hell (graphic novel). However, that sort of change would need to be discussed here first. Owen 03:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: redirect

message: The plot should be written so that there is no spoiler about who was Gull's final victim. Moore didn't make it plain so that the reader would have to work at it. I believe the fact that the movie made it plain was the worst part of it from Moore's viewpoint.
A similar point is that for those who have not heard of the story beforehand, it is not obvious for the first hundred or two pages that the story is about Jack the Ripper. --Leocomix 17:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler in plot 

message: This article is the current focus of the Comics Project Improvement Drive. The aim is to focus the eyes of the project here and help bring the article up in quality.
The first step is to run through the article and throw and see if there are any minor fixes that can be done and then throw in thoughts on areas to address. There is also a sub-section below for people to add useful resources that can be added to the article to help flesh out the real world aspects. (Emperor 23:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comics Project Improvement Drive

message: If you know of any useful articles, interviews, studies, etc. then add then in here and we can work on integrating them into this entry. NB if they aren't easily accessible then drop in a note if you have it and a precis of the important and relevant bits would be a great help. It'd also be best if the references are templated before being put in the article. (Emperor 23:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Resources

message: This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject.  If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class.  The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject.  Comics-awb (talk) 16:33, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

message: As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T  14:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: C-Class rated for Comics Project