Talk:Papyrus (typeface)

message: "Papyrus is often criticized by graphic designers and others for being overused or used incorrectly in various media"
I'll (mostly) ignore the detail that "in media" is redundant when talking about something that requires a medium to exist. But I am at a loss to understand how a typeface—especially a relatively simple one—can be used incorrectly (outside of, perhap, layout problems). It's a bit like saying that a certain person's handwriting style is appropriate only for certain contexts. If this is meant to describe something less absurd, someone please clarify.—überRegenbogen (talk) 22:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  used incorrectly? 

message: Papyrus was used quite extensively in the Dark Sun setting books for Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition, especially the interior titles and chapter headings.  I don't actually have any references to cite, just the books sitting in front of me.    RyokoMocha (talk) 04:15, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dark Sun 

message: I recently edited the page with removing this line:
As has been the case with Comic Sans, graphic designers, including Costello himself, often criticize Papyrus for being overused. See undertale
Is this vandalism?
--ShintoCoffee (talk) 05:57, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism? 

message: Costello's reaction to the typeface's references in popular culture don't belong in the article. While the popular culture references themselves are fine for inclusion since they're about the subject itself, the designer's reaction to them simply isn't encylopedic. I therefore removed his feeback about the Saturday Night Live sketch. The fact that he and his wife thought the bit was very funny is quite trivial. It's acceptable for a magazine or newspaper article, but certainly not for an encylopedia. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:D8E:D6F3:A7EA:C247 (talk) 15:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You're contradicting yourself. If you honestly didn't believe the sketch itself was encylopedic, then you wouldn't have expanded that content to include that Costello and his wife thought it was funny. Your "none or both" argument is illogical. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:D8E:D6F3:A7EA:C247 (talk) 05:06, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. If SNL does a sketch about Post-it notes and Spencer Silver thinks it's funny, are we going to include that in his article? No, of course not. And we most certainly wouldn't care that Silver's wife thought it was funny too. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:D8E:D6F3:A7EA:C247 (talk) 04:43, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: "No, of course not"? Your opinion of the encyclopedic is not law. ATS (talk) 18:57, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

text: Stop virtue signaling; my actions are no more or less "tantrum" than are yours. Your insistence on removing/restoring your version of this article is in violation of both EW and OWN. ATS (talk) 18:57, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Costello's feelings on popular culture references 

message: The sample font shown on the article is Papyrus (EF) not Papyrus. Also, the section on the 'variant' states Papyrus (EF) has a capital E with the top bar longer than the middle one. This is the case and the original Papyrus has a longer middle bar. The source of confusion may be that version of Papyrus on Windows machines is actually Papyrus (EF) although it is listed as Papyrus.  Stub Mandrel (talk) 17:31, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The sample of the font is wrong and other errors