Talk:Girly

message: What the heck does "cutpaste" mean?
:A character that's cut-and-pasted, pretty much like the name says --SuperHappy 04:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering what that was too. And that definition still doesn't make any sense to me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.150.188 (talk) 11:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm pretty sure you're talking about Collete's dad. He's called Xerox (though i guess that's just his nickname since he was presented with anoter name) in the webcomic Cute-Wendy. It's just a character that's always copypasted, so he always features almost the same face (sometimes with little changes). You should just check Cute-Wendy's website. Here's his first appearance http://cutewendy.com/go/4 but a little bit later in the story he's officially acknowledged as a cut-paste character  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.16.4.88 (talk) 02:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

text: OK, I have for now added the appropriate cleanup tags - but if the lack of third-party sources and indications for notability is not addressed, this'll have to go to AfD at some time. Sandstein 05:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely all of these are addressed now - two separate important webcomics review sites, the news of its creator using the comic as a fulltime job, and the nomination for an award ought establish notability. Phil Sandifer 21:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What? 

message: There was a Deletion Review on this. The deletion was overturned. Let it go. --SuperHappy 19:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragonfiend... 

message: The AFD was clueless, an academic expert on comics has undeleted it as notable. It lives. - David Gerard 20:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Expert undeletion

message: What qualifies MMK as a main character? Just because "every webcomic needs a cute weird non-human pet main character lol" isnt much of a reason, MMK seems much less "main" than Policeguy, for example.
Yeah, I know it's listed like that on the girly page itself, and I'm just speaking from my own dislike of what seems to be the single "just like every other webcomic" element of an otherwise-unique comic, but still. Policeguy's had his own storylines, MMK doesnt even have her own color ;)
I realize this was a recent change (the deletion of the whole rest of the characters section), and while I agree the old one was too long, I'd suggest keeping everyone involved in the current "Mixed up" storyline, as the comic seems to have focused on them for a while now:
 * Otra
 * Winter
 * MMK (grumble grumble)
 * Officer Policeguy
 * Chuy
 * the time travelling fasion scout clone secret agent whose name I can't spell
 * Autumn (maybe)
 * Fortune Teller Lady (maybe)
74.224.88.186 14:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you mean Collette by "the time travelling fasion scout clone secret agent", perhaps Officer Hipbone could be included as well. --Aclapton 01:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MMK a main character? 

message: wendy.dreamhost.com was dead, so I replaced that text with "go-girly.com". However, I dont know if the dates were the same for that. I assume they are, since it's still dreamhost, but as for the time go-girly was registered (and wendy.dreamhost stopped working), I don't know.
:wendy.dreamhost.com is just the name of the server Girly and Slipshine are hosted on. It's not a website URL, which is why it's not linked. --SuperHappy 19:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then shouldnt .dreamhost.com be linked? --Vstarre 13:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah. --SuperHappy 20:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I just made the page inaccurate. 

message: On the page, it says
*Winter - Winter is Otra's girlfriend. She is 18 years old
But I don't remember this ever being mentioned in the comic. Does anyone know where this was said? Or is this something Josh Lesnick wrote himself? Fyrius 18:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I mentioned it in the character profiles a while back. I've since taken the info down from my site, as I do plan to bring it up within the comic itself soon, but it's become common knowledge among the readers anyway. --SuperHappy 21:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed the current ages to 26 and 19 and added the references from the comic.  I realise that the characters have aged during the progression of the story but current ages seems like the most sensible choice. --Peter Ballett (talk) 15:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winter's age 

message: This article is has a bit of unwarranted positivity. The Comixpedia review link is described here as "positive," but I have just read it and I would call it "critical but very forgiving." Seriously this review has many serious critiques of Girly, as well as some things the writer thinks are somewhat successful. The review comes to no particular conclusion, there is no score given.66.41.66.213 (talk) 05:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; I'm not sure how to encapsulate that, though, since most of the criticisms in the Comixpedia article amount to, "It's still new"--which, three years later, it's not. However, I did find a very negative (if hotly contested) review on Fleen to add balance to the section. I hesitated at including it, but since site owner Gary Tyrell hasn't retracted it since it was published, I figured it was fair game. I did attempt to word it in such a way to emphasize that she perceived the rape, not that it was necessarily there. Ig8887 (talk) 14:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Well, it looks like someone deleted the entire section anyway...I was considering restoring it, but I'm not sure they were wrong to do so. Yes, the article does need a Critical Response section in order to establish its context as a work of fiction (rather than just in-universe), but there wasn't really very much "meat" in that section to begin with. Two online reviews, one of which amounted to, "The jury is still out", doesn't amount to a critical response, I suppose. Does anyone have any more substantial reviews/criticism of the comic? Maybe from an LBGT publication, which would go a long way to establishing its context outside of webcomics? Ig8887 (talk) 12:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subjectivity 

message: An editor recently removed reference to the author's birthname (aka deadname) from this article. I think this is worth discussing and I'd like to see people's views. Here are my thoughts.
* The manual of style has guidance on handling name changes, and specifically on name changes by a living transgender or non-binary person. The specific guidance for living transgender people is:
::"In the case of a living transgender or non-binary person, the birth name should be included in the lead sentence only if the person was notable under that name. One can introduce the birth name with either 'born' or 'formerly'".
* This advice is in the context of an article on the subject of the person, but I think its guidance applies here, for the section in the article about the author.
* In this case, it appears to me that Jackie Lesnick was most notable at the time she was working under her birthname: 
** All non-primary sources in the Girly article predate her name change;
** Girly, which appears to me to be her most well-known work, was written under her birthname;
** I was not able to find any reliable sources covering Lesnick after her name change.
Based on all of this, when I apply MOS:DEADNAME, I consider that Jackie Lesnick was notable under her birthname and so it should be included in the article on Girly. That said, I think it should be brief; limited to a single "born" or "formerly" in the Author section of the article and used nowhere else. HenryCrun15 (talk) 01:07, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a different story, because the article never mentions this was created by Lesnick before her transition. (CC) Tbhotch™ 01:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, in that case I will restore the mention of the birthname. HenryCrun15 (talk) 02:19, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mentioning the author's birthname 

message: * I am concerned about conflict of interest in this articles edits. Lesnick has been undoing sections of her own page relating to her birthname under the username TimeForJackie, which is her Twitter handle. Additionally it also appears that she has commented in this very Talk page in the past under her former handle SuperHappy. This vandalizing and editing her own article against the decisions made in the discussion, combined with most of the links, websites, articles and social media posts connecting to her and the work itself being no longer available anywhere is making me consider whether this Article may need to be locked, or possibly even deleted outright. What is everyone's thoughts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:900:7910:C9CD:3B63:28ED:929C (talk) 20:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. And she never posts on here anymore. She did in the very early years, but now its only Wikipedia editors. This article is definitely notable enough to stay. --Historyday01 (talk) 02:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of Interest