Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive 10

message: I've noticed a user  not vandalizing, but adding succession boxes to certain articles, such as various Flash and Robin entries. I don't think those make much sense for something as fluid as fictional, comics continuity. Can we get a quick consensus "vote" so I can be justified in removing this stuff? Or do I stand corrected?No succession boxes, obviously. dfg 05:35, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. —Lesfer (talk/mail) 13:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Succession boxes make sense in certain instances, obviously -- editors of Marvel, presidents of the United States -- but they're getting out of hand. —Tenebrae 19:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: No. Agree with Tenebrae. Succession boxes don't make sense for fictional characters in general, not just in comics. --Pc13 20:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: No. So who's volunteering to remove them? - SoM 21:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Succession boxes 

message: I started to add a superherobox.  Apparently there have been two characters under this name.  Does it need two boxes?  (And can someone look and see if it seems right?) RJFJR 20:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Son of Vulcan]] 

message: Ok, I cleaned up the SHB, but the page is still clogged with lists of all the members from its incarnations, and needs a cleanup.  --DrBat 21:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help with [[Hellfire Club (comics)]] 

message: Re: X-Men:_The_198_Files#The_198_Files - isn't this a bit much to copy from the issue? - SoM 13:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which part?  Do you mean that huge table?  I'm behind on my X-Men reading, the last issue I read was when they assasinated Prof X, um, #293? If that huge table is what you mean, then that's blatant copyvio and should be removed.  Hiding  talk 20:33, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I meant the huge table, and just wanted a second opinion. Ta. - SoM 22:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  X-Men:_The_198_Files#The_198_Files 

message: Hi, all. Hiding has helped, but we sure could use more of y'all to take turns cut-and-pasting the Inkpot Award winners from that article's commented-out alphabetical list to the the Wikipedia year-by-year list. It's done so far through "I" (and "S" will be a bee-yatch), so any contributing hands would help those remaining pros get a little more deserved recognition linked. 
Also, on a separate topic, a St. John Publications article is now up for anyone wishing to help flesh it out. Thanks. -- Tenebrae 20:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Meant to mention earier ... thanks to the diverse hands of many hard-working editors, including not a small bit by Hiding, the Inkpot Award list is now fully done. Yay! -- Tenebrae 22:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inkpot redux

message: It seems like almost all the user's edits are inserting his own pov into the articles.  --DrBat 20:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Including unsourced criticism and speculation. --InShaneee 23:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dropped the guy a note about POV and weasel words; hopefully he takes note. dfg 23:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe 207.74.168.127 is the same user, also. --DrBat 01:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, WHOISing the two IPs says they might well be. - SoM 03:28, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's keep reverting his edits until he stops or an administrator do something about him. By the way, both IPs are registered to Merit Network Inc., so it's probably the same guy. Lesfer (talk) 03:38, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a plan, but I think we should wait at least a day for a response on either page; I hit the 207.x anon's talk page with the same warning as 198.x's. dfg 04:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  user 198.111.167.130 

message: One recurrent issue about Franco-Belgian comics article is its lack to point out specificities of the Flemish-side of the country. Hence some attemps to create a separated page for Belgian comics that would explain these regional specificities. It has already been discussed in both articles discussions whether it was a good idea or not, and there is a sort of consensus that it is not a good idea, but that the Flemish comics should deserve some increased attention. I have therefore created a temporary page here to gather facts and content about Flemish comics that could be later on added in Franco-Belgian comics article as a new section. 
This a call for colloaboration on this issue. If there are some experts around, feel free to contribute, add, reformat, rewrite, comment, ... Lvr 10:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Franco-)Belgian comics 

message: Pretty much all Spectre hosts have gotten their own pages, and I think Jim Corrigan should have one too. It should include the first Corrigan, which would mostly be focussed on the development he got in Ostrander's run (which I will be able to add onto later when I get access to my run again), but also the second one, which I'm sure some will be able to add onto.
I took the liberty of making the page already, adding a box and some info. Kusonaga 18:11, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jim Corrigan]] 

message: Recently I've come across these Chronological Reading Order pages, notably on the Phantom Stranger page and Spectre page. I've put the Stranger Order up for deletion already, and deleted the sections from the articles. If nobody else puts up the Spectre Reading page up for deletion, I probably will. They are unnecessary and copyvio to boot. Kusonaga 18:11, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chronogical Reading Order

message: Hi.  I'm running into commercial superhero art and cropped comic book covers tagged with :Template:Promotional.  Please don't do this.  :Template:Promotional is for material that comes from a press kit.  Commercial art is only covered under Wikipedia:Fair use when in an article discussing that artist's work.  Book / magazine / DVD covers that we are using should not be cropped to remove publishing information and trademarks.  I'd like to encourage everyone invovled in this project to be more cautious with copyright-infringing material that we are claiming "fair use" on.  See Wikipedia:Image use policy, and Wikipedia:Fair use criteria for more policy information.  Thanks for understanding.  Jkelly 03:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you link to an example, since what you may think are cropped comic book covers are actually promotional releases of the cover art, released digitally by the companies to promote their work, and thus would be promotional rather than comic book covers, since they are not the actual comic book cover in its physical existence. This has been discussed quite a few times, with Kelly Martin stating that If these are truly promotional images, then the fair use argument is quite good, actually better than for scanned images of the covers. Such images should be tagged as , however, not as "comic book covers", because they're not. And they must be sourced or they will be deleted. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive07. Hope that helps. Also, could you link to the discussion regarding commercial art only being used in articles dicussing that artist's work, ta? I'd quite like to contribute to that. Hiding The wikipedian meme 09:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/copyright guidelines look great.  User:Kelly Martin certainly knows what she's talking about, and when it comes down to what kind of unfree material is preferable to other kinds, I am likely to defer to her judgement.  But let me point you at an example that I found while going through FAs.  :Image:Cap.Marvel DC.jpg was tagged as :Template:Promotional.  It has no source information beyond the artist's name.  There is no indication anywhere that this image was released to the press as part of a press kit for wide distribution.  In fact, it looks like we are republishing commercial art that would be sold as part of an artist's gallery of works, or could potentially be transformed into a poster for re-sale, etc.   It has no Fair use rationale.  As for cropped covers, I don't know if :Image:Bzemo.png is one or not.  See "Counterexamples" in Wikipedia:Fair use criteria, specifically the example about cropping an album cover to use an image from it, as one mention of concern about using crops from art to illustrate the subject of the art instead of the artist's work.  I note that Wikipedia:Fair use isn't as clear as it could be why, for instance, a pastoral painting might be "fair use" in an article about the painter, but not in an article about picnics.  I hope the above helps explain my concern.  That said, your unfree-material use guidelines look very good, and should be used as a model for other WikiProjects.  Jkelly 18:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your comments on the guidelines, I hope they help and that they get used. Okay, I figure :Image:Cap.Marvel DC.jpg is from the DC website, that's the sort of thing people are likely to call a promotional image, since it's been released to promote the poster, and the image is released to the trade press.  :Image:Bzemo.png is a cropped version of an image from a news site, that's a solicitation version of the cover art of Thunderbolt's #104, as seen on this page.  The understanding is that cropping is allowed to better embed the image in the text in a transformative manner, which we thought allowed a better fair use.  There was a limited discussion with GMaxwell about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/copyright, which led to the insertion of In addition, the scan should be altered if necessary to focus upon the specific aspects of the image which are being discussed, rather than merely reproducing the original in digital form. into the guidance issued by the project.  But further discussion on any aspects of all this are welcome, it's a bloody tricky area to get right.  It'd be better if there were rationales added, I'll grant you. I get the point about pastoral scenes and picnic articles, and album covers and roses, that's because the work in question is not being commented upon but rather the image portrayed.  However, when you stray into illustrating articles on comic book characters, any image is going to be used on a fair use justification. Further, the art is produced specifically to illustrate the character in question, whereas a pastoral scene isn't produced solely to comment on a picnic, but, (some might say), purports to a higher ideal of art, and an album cover containing roses isn't being used, issued or sold as a depiction of roses, so couldn't be used in an article on roses in which the album didn't receive critical coverage, and certainly shouldn't be cropped to do so.  The argument is then, which image is the best one to use.  There's a current which argues that the most up to date image should be used; on that issue I remain ambivalent.  I'm not sure where the fair use argumnent lies there. Hiding The wikipedian meme 19:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Template:Promotional]] 

message: I've done some minor wikification on Century (comics), but I've seen that some of the other characters in Force Works have much better bios. I don't know much about the subject, so perhaps someone here might be able to have a look. Kevin 09:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Force Works 

message: So what exactly should be the response to this?  Near as I can tell QuintusCinna just copied several DC pages and added his name.
:That can't be fair use. Can one of the copyright gurus here take a look at this? --InShaneee 01:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The user is interested in creating a wikiproject for the DC Universe.  I'll invite him here to discuss concerns. Hiding The wikipedian meme 08:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did notice that. I'm worried that he's either trying to do it in his namespace, or is planning to copy/paste the articles to Wikia should the project be approved. And as I was trying to imply above, I don't think you can use fair use images in your namespace. --InShaneee 18:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Fair_use_criteria#Articlespaceonly - Yup - SoM 20:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  I'm hoping to get a response from the user on what's occurring.  Hiding The wikipedian meme 20:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:QuintusCinna/Batman]] 

message: WikiProject Arts 
Announcing the creation of WikiProject Arts, an effort to create a collaboration between all arts projects and artistically-minded Wikipedians in order to improve arts coverage. If you think you can help, please join us!
HAM  17:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: An invitation to all members of this project

message: I've redirected The Man of Steel to Man of Steel as they were informationally equivilent and Man of Steel was closer to the WP:MOSDAB standard.  Since The Man of Steel has your template on the talk page (and Man of Steel did not), I thought I'd let you know.  Feel free to adjust if you think me mis-guided, but let me know on a talk page somewhere why! John (Jwy) 05:31, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: (The) Man of Steel

message: Rather than nominate this article for WP:AfD I thought I'd shout here for some TLC. I've asserted both CLEAN and EXPERT templates as documented on that talk. Looks like Categories need attention too. Best regards, <B>Fra</B>nkB 11:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should be merged into Epic Comics in my opinion. --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Seems the best idea, although Epic Anthology Presents is a redlink on that page which suggests this is where the content might finally lie.  Hiding The wikipedian meme 13:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: See Lacks: [[Talk:Epic Anthology]]

message: What is the consensus on including articles on comics pencillers?  Do they pass the notability threshhold?  User:Zoe|(talk) 18:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's too general a question.  Generally, yes. Most comics creators garner enough press within the media covering the scene, all of which would qualify at the better end of reliable sources, to allow articles to be written.  What specific examples did you have in mind? Hiding The wikipedian meme 19:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tracy Yardley.  User:Zoe|(talk) 22:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, just seen your response.   A merge seems the best approach. Hiding The wikipedian meme 19:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pencillers

message: There's a discussion going on over at the Thor talk page about moving the bulk of Thor (comics) to Thor (Marvel Comics) and turning the former into a summary or disambig page. I thought I'd mention it here so people can join in if they wish. CovenantD 17:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Thor (comics)]] -> [[Thor (Marvel Comics)]] 

message: Fred Kida and Frank Springer, for you Golden/Silver Age fans. There's a lot there, but they can always be fleshed-out more. Stay well, all. -- Tenebrae 21:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Couple new articles

message: There's a semi-frequent vandal anon afflicting comics-related articles by removing all images from articles - rarely or never the same exact IP, but usually the IP address starts with 4.244
If you see one of these IPs editing an article on your watchlist, please check it AND, if it is the image-remover, please revert and add a note (including the relevant IP address) on Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse#4.244..2A..2A. Thanks. - SoM 23:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image-removing anon 

message: We need opinions and suggestions in here! —Lesfer (talk/@) 18:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hawkman

message: A few months back, an editor merged the former article on New Fun Comics into the article on More Fun Comics, the rationale being More Fun is the better known title. New Fun Comics became a redirect. I personally feel this isn't the way to go. New Fun Comics ran for a full year before changing its name, and under the name New Fun Comics it was historically significant as the first major DC Comic publication. On top of that, the image used to illustrate More Fun Comics now is the original image from New Fun Comics, so is no longer accurate. I would like to suggest that the two articles be essentially taken apart and recreate as separate articles, as they were before February. I considered simply reverting, but there has been additional edits done to More Fun Comics since the move. Now that there's a WikiProject on comic books and their history, what are people's thoughts on this? 23skidoo 21:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Fun Comics vs. More Fun Comics

message: A user is trying to change Huntress's current outfit to the one Jim Lee gave her that she only wore for a few months (the one where here her stomach is exposed and she has no pants). --DrBat 23:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Huntress (comics)|Huntress]] SHB image