Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive 18

message: How about we add sections on :Template:X-Men members devoted to X-Men teams such as add Excalibur, Generation X, New Mutants, X-Corps, X-Force, X-Factor and X-Statix? We can then keep the top section for those characters who have served in the main team. We can also list the members chronologically, like on :Template:Avengers members. Thoughts? --Jamdav86 16:28, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone who needs to use such navboxes will be unable to recall when an Avenger joined. Such items should be alphabetized. --Chris Griswold  (☏) 16:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't we have categories for that? --Fritz S. (Talk) 16:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

text: We do have categories, but they aren't as nice looking as infoboxes and are probably less-used. --Jamdav86 17:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh please don't add X-Corps, X-Force wat so ever X the template would just look confusing, crowded, and cluttered. I also dissagree with the alphabetising, it should be older to newest not a to z.--hottie 15:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Alphabetize. People need to be able to find a name. Chronological order will not be informative to those who already know the chronological order and won't be handy for those who don't. Plus, it will look like a disorganized mess to anyone who doesn't happen to recognize what the order means. Doczilla 15:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  X-Men members template development idea 

message: I have just greatly expanded the article (stub) for this Gary Larson book. People may want to check the formatting or offer other suggestions. marbeh raglaim 23:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Prehistory of the Far Side]] 

message: I'd like to come up with a guideline concerning the use of lists of appearances in character articles. For some, such as Professor X, it just seems like a little too much space used up for a list of appearances, many of which are inconsequential. But then, to cut such a list down to what is consequential is to apply POV, and of course, that is wrong. Finally, we have to consider that Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. Thoughts? --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 05:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Such as the Marvel Chronology Project.  I agree... it's unlikely that WP by its nature can keep up with this kind of thing for characters with many appearances.  On the other hand, I think bibliographies should be encouraged for characters with a limited number of appearances.  I also think issues that had a major effect on a character's status quo should be included-- but as references for the character biography, rather than a bibliography.  Any eponymous series, however, should be listed.  -HKMarks 02:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character bibliographies 

message: I'm trying to solve a sticky problem on Talk: Smallville (TV series)#Character basis where User:Bignole absolutely refuses to allow a neutral statement about what character Smallville is based on.  There is an ongoing legal dispute about whether the character is Superboy or Superman (Superboy has a different legal status than Superman and is not considered the same character).  Since the character is disputed, a statement that the series is based on one specific character should not be stated as a fact, but should be described in a NPOV manner which includes both claims.
I've variously tried:
* Wikipedia:Third Opinion (the third opinion agreed with me)
* Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Media,_art_and_literature (no responses to the RFC)
* WP:AMA (the AMA member suggested I post here).
Is anyone willing to look at and comment on the RFC? Ken Arromdee 20:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Character it is based on is Clark Kent.--Drvanthorp 02:32, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help please...  Smallville character basis 

message: I would like to start adding more detailed information to The Punisher (1987 series) but I don't know what the consensus is on how to do it.  Are there any good examples? - Peregrinefisher 06:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please  don't do it. See the WikiProject's guidelines on plit summary: WP:CMC/EG. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 06:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like I may want more from a page than it's allowed to contain.  Do you know where the centralized discussion for this issue is? - Peregrinefisher 07:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Could you point out a page with a table like that? - Peregrinefisher 07:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Detailed info for each issue

message: I urge everyone to acquaint themselves with the WP:CMC editorial guidelines, as well as the associated talk page. I proposed a number of new guidelines and would like some help in shaping them before they are included on the guideline page. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 07:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It says "Plot descriptions should be kept as brief as possible" so can I create a table for The Punisher (1987 series) with say a summary of 2 lines of text at a resolution of 1024x768? - Peregrinefisher 07:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just not on a per-issue basis. We've had this discussion recently on this page. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 07:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editorial Guidelines 

message: I would kind of like to see the superherobox and supersupportingbox (and maybe others, I don't know what all of them are) combined:
*to hide fields that are not filled in, so the box can be smaller if all fields aren't necessary,
*so superheroes who are also supporting characters can have a "supporting character of" field,
*so superheroes with no powers can have no "powers" field,
*so if a character changes status, it'd be easier to deal with.
Just a thought -HKMarks 19:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be interested. I am currently trying to figure out how to implement the changes arrived at by concensus that have not yet been taken care of, particularly the combining of the current and past team affiliations. I think I may be able to pull it off through find and replace with AWB. Combining the two infoboxes may be a bit more involved, but I think it's doable. I'll work on this with you. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 03:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually... yeah... maybe we should table this until some other things have been resolved. -HKMarks 03:08, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you sir :)  What do you guys think about adding a "Enemy of" field?  That might be too much but it might be useful for villains.  Maybe, maybe not. -HKMarks 05:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What we will then do is create separate examples for easy copy and paste that specialize in heroes and supporing characters so that editors aren't tempted to use every field just because it's there. No "villain of" field: It is redundant to ample categories for such a thing. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 05:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes to SHB?

message: Please take a look at Feedback (Matthew Atherton), a recent article about the wining character from Who Wants to be a Superhero?. Any references anyone can provide for this article are appreciated; currently, there is a lot of unreferenced info about a character who has not yet seen print. Oh, and I want to make clear that I am not bashing in any way the work editors have done on the article; I just know that some people from outside comics readership will be interested in the article, and if it's to be popular, I'd like it to also be as good as it can be. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 17:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Feedback (Matthew Atherton)]] 

message: At the moment the category seems limited to characters known primarily for their speed. Its parrallel categories, like for super strength, flight and telekinesis aren't limited to characters who possess solely those powers. Should various Kryptonians and Captain Marvel Family members be added, or would those additions be reverted?~ZytheTalk to me! 18:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those would be reverted and they have been before. "Speedster" means the character is known primarily for speed, just as words like "strongman" might indicate a focus on a talent like strength. I'm not the biggest fan of the "Characters with-" categories, but speedsters can be a subcat of characters with superspeed.--Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 18:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Like elasticists and shapeshifters? Sounds fair. ~ZytheTalk to me! 19:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh my god.  Elasticists???  *brain explodes* -HKMarks 23:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional speedsters 

message: I've created :Category:Fictional characters by secret identity and need help populating it. If a characters name is a redirect page use . Thanks! Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 12:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm helping. What about characters like Linda Danvers and Nathaniel Richards, same name, different superheroes? ~ZytheTalk to me! 14:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Link to disambiguation page? -HKMarks 00:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Instead of deleting them outright, I think they should be integrated to the article as a "Supporting cast" or "Relatives" section, if one doesn't exist already, or the information isn't already in the Char Bio section. -HKMarks 01:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree. The information is sometimes useful, nuut I think it should be gone from all infoboxes. Check the talkpages. That may already be the consensus. I need to go back through and make changes in some of those. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 08:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Fictional characters by secret identity 

message: Personally, I like the "grouping of nouns" navboxes. Though I think they should be much more "to the point". 
Let's use this as an example:
This nav box could be broken down into separate ones.  Obvious splits are:
* characters - What? no Batwoman? poor Kathy Kane...
** Rogues - Mr. Freeze is a notable enemy? And quite a few more notable ones have been left out. 
* comic book references (series and plots)
* cartoon/animated references
* Movies - well, there's this:
All that said, another option is to not list examples, but just to the source lists or articles.
Cut the navboxes down to size, and don't mass use them on every article, and I would presume they should be fine. - jc37 04:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think anyone has a problem with those navboxes.  Similarly the  one shows you all the relevant stuff without overloading things--if there's an aspect you're interested in, it leads you there (but note it's not on the creator pages, or the villain pages, and they're not listed in it--because in many cases Spider-Man is just a small aspect of their careers/histories, and choosing who's "notable" brings in POV).  Only ones causing problems are the team ones... not the ones that group an article series. -HKMarks 05:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mmulti-faceted Navboxes

message: There are several issues which I think need to be discussed/clarified.
* Topics for naming conventions/(talk)
- jc37 03:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming conventions (comics)

message: In examining OriginalSinner's recent  template, I found a number of articles detailing "Earths" depicted in Marvel Comics storylines (Earth-2122, Earth-120185, Earth-712, Earth-98125, Earth-1121). These should be deleted/merged into the appropriate storyline or universe-related article. Additionally, we need to discuss whether such a topic warrants it own article. I can't think of a single alternate Earth that deserves its own article. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 21:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't agree more. IMO the great work presented in Multiverse (DC Comics)#Catalogued Earths is an example to be followed. And I'm sorry, but an "alternateearth" box? I wonder where/when this templates-hype is going to stop. —Lesfer (t/c/@) 21:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree.  The notable ones already have their own articles (eg. Earth-982 is covered by MC2, likewise Age of Apocalypse, Ultimate, New Universe, whatever else) called by their common names, not nigh-meaningless numbers from a handbook.  They should all be merged and turned to redirects post haste.  Except Earth-616, I guess. -HKMarks 21:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That should be merged into Marvel Universe. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 02:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate Earth articles 

message: 1) Maria Hill is not a villain. I've removed that category from her article twice now.
2) All the Milligan X-Forcers who were killed off in the first issue have their own article. Seeing as how they only appeared in one issue (with the exception of Zeitgeist, appearing later in flashbacks, but he's still pretty minor), do they really need their own articles? --DrBat 22:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 2. Or X-Statix -HKMarks 23:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: For sure.  Merge and redirect -HKMarks 00:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To X-Statix, please. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 02:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, X-Statix! My mistake, sorry. —Lesfer (t/c/@) 04:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maria Hill and X-Force 

message: Hello all. I just wanted to bring up some discussion on the :Category:Marvel Comics characters with super strength. I think that there need to be more stringent criteria for who should populate this list. By the title, I inferred (as I'm sure other readers did) that the main people in this category would have superhuman strength as one of their primary or secondary mutations/abilities. I think that people such as Wolfsbane, Lady Deathstrike and TOAD!!! should be removed. Characters who have heightened strength due to some animalistic mutation or cybernetic adjustment shouldn't be on the list. Someone tried to put it on Feral but I removed it from that one...
Let me know what you think. Tullyman 00:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The current cut-off for :Category:Fictional characters with super strength is roughly one ton (2000 pounds, 907kg).  Real-world absolute limit is about 800-900 lbs (for bench-press, which is what OHOTMU "uses").  -HKMarks 02:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why Toad is so odd, he used to be listed as being to lift 1 ton and 3 tons with his leg (as also is mentioned in the article). And that was before his strength was even further enhanced in X-Men Forever. As the current cut-off is 1 ton, he should qualify. Dizzy D 08:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marvel Comics characters with super strength 

message: I've listed the superteam member-list templates (all that I could find) for deletion.  You all are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 September 14#Superteam member templates (multiple).  -HKMarks 00:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work as usual. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 02:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superteam templates listed for deletion 

message: I would like your help with one issue I can't seem to fix with this template I'm creating: it creates a white space of a few lines at the top of the article (or wherever you put the box of course). If you compare King Ottokar's Sceptre (the old box, no white space) with User talk:Fram/Sandbox (the new template, with white space), you'll see what I mean. You can use that last page to test it as well, if you like. I would be very grateful, as I've put quite some time in that template and think it would be useful, but I just can't get that last bit to work correctly, which is frsutrating. Thank you very much!Fram 08:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried fixing it, but I'm no template expert. You should seek help from someone who works more with templates. Try the help section or add the  template to your user talk page. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 17:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

text: There is already a template for european comics, or Graphic Novel this one: Template:GraphicNovelBox and a example of it  La Femme piège. --Goanookie 18:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, another template :-) I hadn't seen that one yet, I'll see if I can do anything with it (either expand it or incorporate some technical aspects from it in mine). It misses info on original publication (magazine/newspaper) and on the original title/translation aspect. As for the help seeking: I perhaps will try the help section, but I had it already posted at the Village pump:technical, where I got no response at all (which was a bit disappointing). I'll experiment a bit more, and if I don't find it (and no one else finds it in the meantime), I'll add the helpme template to my user page (we learn something new every day!). Fram 18:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do. But you can also add information to the existing template without it affecting the articles currently using it. Then we can update the pages on which the template is transcluded with the new information. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 19:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but my problem was that there are at least four different templates in use now (one made for Asterix, one made for Valerian, the graphicnovelone, and the booksesries one (used in Tintin comics)). So I can change one of these (the graphic novel one)) or create a new one (which I was trying, since I didn't know about the graphic novel one). I'll have to think about it! Fram 07:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Template:Eurocomicbox]]: help with one small issue please!

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.
Specifically, I notice that there is a lively two-sided discussion here, while the TfD page seems to run 100% Delete, therefore inspiring my attempt at due notice --Roninbk 09:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been noted above, and it's been added to the WP:CMC noticeboard, and to at least two of the user talk pages of people in favour.  So no worries : ) -HKMarks 12:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:Superteam member templates (multiple) }} 

message: :Category:Daredevil television series and :Category:Blade video games and :Category:The Punisher video games are up for CFD now. Daredevil has never had a series of his own, just cameo roles. Blade has appeared in one game as of now (and will be one of many to be in the upcoming Marvel Ultimate Alliance game). The same thing applies for Punisher, except he has been in two games.  RobJ1981 18:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please list these at the notice board. Thanks. There may be some editors who watch that page and not this, and the notice board helps us keep records of these events. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 19:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Several categories up for CFD

message: Based on recent discussions, I have proposed a new guidline concerning navboxes for WikiProject Comics. Please take a look at it and help me make it represent the concensus of the WikiProject. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 19:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it. --InShaneee 01:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Guideline: Navboxes 

message: I'm thinking of going through Amalgam pages and just putting redirects to List of Amalgam Comics characters] on pages that have characters that only appeared once and for lesser characters. I personally think this is the right thing to do. Lesser characters and one time characters don't need pages of their own. The list page can easily describe the character in a few sentences (I don't see why some Amalgam articles are so long, when at most..some characters in Amalgam appeared maybe a handful number of times). Anyone that knows alot about Amalgam can help me out. Also: any Amalgam character that was just mentioned in a comic, doesn't need a page. I remember in the Amalgam comics letter pages, there was several references to characters that never actually appeared in the comics. Red Vision is a good example of that. Useless characters like Red Vision don't even need to be mentioned on the list, in my opinion. RobJ1981 21:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now we're making articles for characters that didn't even appear!?  --NewtΨΦ 21:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I back this idea. Excelsior! --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 22:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Red Vision is the only never published/just mentioned Amalgam character I've seen so far... but I'm betting there is more. Experts are needed, to help with this task. RobJ1981 00:36, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge 'em all. All the ones I've seen have been fluff, anyway. --InShaneee 01:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

text: We should still list Red Vision. But I agree, no page. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 02:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think so.  In most cases, it was a one-panel appearance or a passing mention--sometimes only on the fake letter pages!  The creators were just trying to jam in as many merged characters as possible.  In some cases it's not even totally clear what characters were amalgamated.  Except perhaps the few characters who had their own books--and probably not even then--it's total trivia. -HKMarks 03:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ipstenu, why does it bother even to list them?  Characters mentioned just in a letters section aren't notable, or even worth it. Waste of space, in my opinion. RobJ1981 05:59, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm guessing to show who the amalgams were amalgams of. Useful for readers, low notability.--HKMarks 06:10, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also on the list of Amalgam characters page, I plan to make all red links either bolded names or just removed (if the character is one of the letter pages characters that never even appeared). I bolded names before (a while back), but people made them into red links. Red links just makes the article look bad. It also encourages people to create the articles for the red links (which really isn't needed in this case: since Amalgam was short lived, and new Amalgam articles aren't needed at this point). RobJ1981 19:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, what should be done about these 3 Amalgam pages: List of metafictional Amalgam imprints and Armageddon Agenda and Secret Crisis of the Infinity Hour. The metafictional list is pretty pointless: it's titles that were only mentioned in Amalgam comics, and they aren't Amalgam comics at all. AA is about an event that was mentioned in one Amalgam comic, and Secret Crisis appears to be just about the same thing. Should I AFD them or just redirect them to Amalgam Comics. To me, they are fancruft and aren't needed. RobJ1981 19:35, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Remove them. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 20:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Amalgam comics redirects

message: List of locations of the DC Universe reads almost like a todo list of articles that need to be cleaned up, merged, and/or presented from a real-world perspective. Check out Amertek, for instance. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 04:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is Amertek worth mentioning in an article or not? I'm not too familiar with Amertek and the Steel comics. I've heard of the character, but never read any of the comics. If it could be easily merged with the Steel article, that's what should be done. I'm up for this task, but I'm no expert. I will check for typos and clean up what I can. RobJ1981 06:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of locations of the DC Universe 

message: It seems a bit long to me. Take a look if you have the chance. The information seems to be fine (from what I've read at least), so that's not the problem. Would a split into other pages be reasonable somehow? From the looks of it, there is only 2 major things for Doom Patrol on Wikipedia: the main page and a category for all the character pages. Either a page of the different rosters, or some other page is certainly needed. RobJ1981 06:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say let the Cat speak for itself, and remove all Roster info from that page. --InShaneee 15:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The roster is important though. Just removing all of that isn't the best idea. All the character pages don't list the exact rosters: just what roster(s) the member was a part of. Other team pages don't list so much about rosters (that I've seen at least), but it could be at least cleaned up a bit. An ever changing roster is important, in my opinion. Also on the subject of Doom Patrol, I noticed a member is listed along with another of the same name: Robotman (comics). The article talks about the two characters in DC with the name Robotman. Is it worth splitting the article? The original Robotman appears to be a very short lived character, so I'm leaving the article alone for now at least. RobJ1981 15:35, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You caould also split it off into a membership page like the Justice League has. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 20:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like this approach, if it's still necessary after cleanup.  List of X-Men teams does it too. -HKMarks 02:50, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The 'roster' info is perhaps a misnomer, as it also includes the history of the comic, the characters, and the team.  Maybe we should rename the sections? -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 15:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Doom Patrol]] article help

message: I was thinking about starting a catagory called something like "Created by Chris Claremont" or "Fictional characters created by Chris Claremont" (b/c I think it's amazing how many places he's had his hands in over the years and how many monumental characters he thought up. If I were to do such a thing, would it be deleted? I don't want to spend hours of work on this to have it be deleted. Feedback much appreciated. Tullyman 18:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the idea of it. See what the accepted titles of similar categories are called before you start. And I know I don't have to tell you to be sure of Claremont's creation of the character (I'm saying it for the kids at home). Cool idea. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 20:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prospective catagory 

message: Everyone, meet , a template  and I cooked up last night, since a template was needed for European-style comic books (comic collections, not ongoing series/publications). It turns out that this template, based partially on  with a little of the more-mundane book templates thrown in, will (IMO) perfect for both the Asterix and Tintin collections that have a variety of inconsistent templates, as well as the American miniseries and graphic novels (e.g. Watchmen, DKR, etc.) that are crammed, somewhat ill-fitting, into Supercbbox.
This template has a TON of features for translated comics (handling alternate titles, a whole section for translation credits), which, if everyone likes them, I can add to Supercbbox, but they all disappear if you're not using them.
Any thoughts? Qualms? Ideas? Complaints? It's pretty well documented on its talk page. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:40, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ISBN number? That's all I can think of. Good work. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 02:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many many many thanks to A Man In Black, who has done most of the work (I have only given some ideas, basically). I like it a lot, but will only start implementing it in other comics when we have had some more comments. Fram 12:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meet {{tl|Graphicnovelbox}} 

message: Can anyone here understand Equipment of the Batmobile?--Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 05:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Either someone put a lot of work into that, or it's a massive copyvio from the sites given as reference, s'wot it looks like to me. -HKMarks 06:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The specs alone are a pretty good clue that it's a copyvio. CovenantD 06:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone explain this article to me? 

message: Can someone please update the collab as a matter of urgency, as it is half a month overdue. --Jamdav86 13:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on the votes, it looks like it's Frank Miller. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 19:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Matter of urgency 

message: Can someone make me a "suporting team" box using Supersupportingbox as a template? --Basique 16:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where would you use such a box? --Jamdav86 16:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ultimate Defenders? Excelsior?  I don't think it's near widespread enough nor do I think that superteambox couldn't handle them. --NewtΨΦ 16:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is fun! The Pantheon? How does superteambox not work for this? --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 19:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Pussycats? --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 19:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, yes, very amusing. Anyway I was thinking of using it on Red Trinity. But maybe i'll add a category instead. --Basique 23:11, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Supporting Team

message: I'm currently revamping the Xorn article and I'm wondering: how much should other articles acknowledge the real-world mess the character has become?  To me, the Xorn, Magneto (comics), and Planet X (comics) should definitely acknowledge this, but should other articles that reference the character still refer to events during New X-men as the actions of a "Magneto imposter" or other such phrases that utilize the current Marvel explanation of the situation?  WesleyDodds 21:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw the edit in Wolverine (comics), and I thought it was a really smart move. In an article ohter than the ones you mentioned, it is too complicated and will take up a disproportionate amount of space to try to explain to a reader the Xorn nonsense. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 00:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just tried to change these references based on the articles that link to Xorn, but unfortunately, those team members templates make that very very difficult. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 00:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's generally the characters tied to Xorn's appearances, ie. New X-men characters, the squad from Chuck Austen's X-Men, etc. WesleyDodds 02:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xorn 

message: Jamdav86 and I are having a fairly minor argument about how to order the items on  (he thinks it should be done alphabetically, while I think it should be done via the weight of the franchise and release date). Could people weigh in at Template talk:Marvel Comics films#Template overhaul? Thanks! EVula 19:33, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Input needed 

message: (I mis-placed this at a different talk page)
Though I tend to edit, organize, and clean up "all over". I tend to focus on lists, categories, grammar, and dealing with WP:OR.  (Did I mention that I like to organise? : )
Please feel free to drop off requests on my  requests talk page. - jc37 18:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Offer to help 

message: For the past few months, here and there, I've worked not only to improve articles but also to make editing comics-related articles better, doing things like drafting guidelines and creating and categorizing templates, and I'm not the only one. There are a number of editors here who are really dedicated to cleaning up articles, and for these editors, I've started Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics Cleanup. If you're interested, go and sign up. I've noticed that when an article gets a major makeover, it stays relatively clean for quite a while. The gist of the new project is that every so often we pick an article or a group of articles and then edit them as a group to get them into shape, copy editing, condensing summaries where needed, finding sources, that sort of thing. We can also make requests for comment and even try for Good status. This is similar to already existing comics collab, but we have a lot more articles near to being Good status than to Feature, and we have many more that could use a good scrubbing. Additionally, I will be starting a list of good, reliable sources that we can draw from - this is not to limit editors but to point out good, interesting sources like ["Comic Book Urban Legends Revealed". Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics Cleanup is not at all to detract from this WikiProject, but to supplement it, to focus editors on specific tasks and provide support for each other. I've seen some great articles come together out of everyday infoslop articles when editors agree to work together on an article and make it great. Come lend your efforts. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 23:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics Cleanup