Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive 24

message: Is there a certain reason it's only Marvel and DC characters?  I would think independents have had major people killed off (with no return). I don't read independents much, so I wouldn't know what to add. If anyone reads them, and has good knowledge... some should be added to the list. Otherwise, the list might as well be called List of dead Marvel and DC characters. Anyone have any thoughts on this? RobJ1981 21:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The main reason is that if you include characters from universes where everyone just stays dead (e.g. most fictional universes or the real world), then there's no point listing them.  It'd be endlessly long.  Returns from the dead are a convention of American superhero comics -- and almost always Marvel and DC -- more than anything else.  This list is essentially a list of exceptions to the list at comic book death, which lists characters who've returned.  Adding independent characters who returned to that list would be appropriate.  I have no particular objections to a title change. --HKMarks(T/C) 03:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I posted on the talk page of the list, and I'm hoping for some responses. A rename should happen, the article name makes it sound like it's all comics but it's not. RobJ1981 19:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment about [[List of dead comic book characters]]

message: Hi folks, as you maybe know, I have been sitting on my pet project Storm (comics) for quite a while now, trying to make it a good article as of WP:GOOD and WP:WIAGA. Before I make a request, I would like to ask if the article is already close (still needs some copyedit, and obviously "stability" is not there yet) or if not, what points need to be addressed. Thanks for reading. —Onomatopoeia 09:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to the people who have helped me, now Storm is officially a GA. Yeehaw!! —Onomatopoeia 15:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Storm (comics): already in "good" range or not yet? 

message: Does spy organizations and buisnesses count as alliances? 
Example Roy Harper alliance=Checkmate along with some others. Leave Checkamte as is? I deleted alliances of some businesses like Wayne Enterprises for Batman. Brian Boru is awesome 18:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure about the Wayne Enterprises part, but these should be things that someone can be a member of: Avengers, Damage Control, GCPD, Sentinels of Magic, etc. As long as that requirement is fulfilled, I think it's OK. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 18:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Wayne Enterprises should be listed under alliances, since it's a company. Same goes for things such as Daily Bugle and so on. If it's solely a place of business or a company, it's not an alliance. In my opinion, an alliance is an official team... such as Avengers, X-Men, Justice League and so on. S.H.I.E.L.D falls under the whole team aspect as well. RobJ1981 02:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that that only extra-normal associations should be listed under affiliations. In my opinion connections don't need to be specified in affliations if they are implicit by the character's employment or legal status. In those cases the organisation/employeer should be mentioned under occuptation. For example: Jarvis is employed by the Avengers, Jim Gordon is employed by the GCPD, Amanda Waller is employed by Checkmate, Nick Fury is employed by SHIELD, Aquaman is the King of Atlantis and in the Ultimate's universe Captain America is employed by the Ultimates.  --Jason Kirk 13:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Team affliations

message: Just wanted to point this out, as many here would likely be interested or excited by the possibilities in using comic art to communicate article information.  Postdlf 10:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have read about it on WP:AN, and I am not convinced that this would be to the benefit of the encyclopedia. The only examples I can imagine to be helpful are comics illustrating the workings of some machine (be it a real one, or a part of the human body or so). But apart from that, I see no use for it, and some disadvantages, like the problems in editing it (you can include or remove them, but to start editing comics someone else made is a lot harder than to do so with text). You already often have duplicate info in the text and the infoboxes, this would only increase this problem, I fear. For the moment, I oppose this idea on Wikipedia (as has been said, a Comikipedia may be a good idea  (the Comiclopedia already exists, as does Comixpedia). Fram 14:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These issues have been raised, and discussed somewhat on the talk page for that project.  Suffice to say, they should be viewed as a complement to, rather than part of, ordinary text articles, linked to perhaps but kept in their own space.  The editing problem is an important one, but that's also true of spoken word articles, and I think one of the main solutions is to have some way to allow multiple comics to coexist for the same topics.  Postdlf 14:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your comments about the WikiWorld comics. Here's my current thinking about the  most useful method of displaying them: They're probably most effective if they exist outside of the articles themselves, but instead are anchored somewhere that actually could be encountered by users other than hardcore editors. In that way, the comics might actually direct new readers to some deserving but obscure articles, and any editing that might be needed could be done within the articles themselves - hooray! This sort of promotional purpose would guarantee that each individual comic would have a short lifespan. I have no problem with that. I'd gladly correct any gross inaccuracies that might carry over from the original text, although it seems that this would become less important once the comics have disappeared from the live pages. Archived comics could carry a timestamp or tagline to indicate when they were created. Several people have suggested displaying the comics within The Wikipedia Signpost, which might make sense. That's not my call, however. I'll be happy to upload new images, as I produce them - but, from this point forward, I'll let others decide how (or whether) they should be used. --Greg Williams 07:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the things discussed on the talk page was using them for the main page and other portals (similar to "Did you know"), as well as various "in-house" publications (such as the signpost). I think that this is a great idea, personally : ) - jc37 08:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking the same thing. Great idea. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 20:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustrated Wikipedia]] 

message: There appears to be a problem with this user. He keeps moving Abe Jenkins to MACH-IV (Marvel Comics). The page has had to be moved back a couple of time now. I went to his talk page and it looks like he has been warned about this already. There is also a message about him doing the same thing to Erik Josten on his talk page as well. At this time it doesn't look like he understands why those pages are where they are nor does it seem like he wants to listen at all. Stephen Day 07:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind I just looked at the dates of those messages on his talk page. User:CovenantD seems to be handling it. I'm going to bed now as this incident has shown me that I'm not thinking straight right now. Sorry for any bit of trouble I've caused with this. Stephen Day 08:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Addendum: He also seems to be trying to circumvent a CfD on the :Category:Thunderbolts Members that he created by relocating all the affected articles to a new cat :Category:Thunderbolts (comics). Should the new cat be place on a CfD ASAP? — J Greb 08:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I didn't think he could move Abe Jenkins to MACH-IV (Marvel Comics) unless he was an admin. Unless the page wasn't a redirect before the move. Grey Shadow | Talk 08:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  User:Ksofen666 

message: I think some of the other editors might find this interesting/relevent to what we do here. It's a bit overdone for comedic effect, but there's a lot of truth there. It's too bad that this is a public perception of Wikipedia, but when I venture outside this project, I get a glimpse of this sort of thing. I really hope I am not that annoying when I offer to help new editors. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 00:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And speaking of public perception, don't miss this and this from The Onion. --Tenebrae 17:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Ahh but Penny Arcade did it best, I feel. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 18:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something Awful feature about Wikipedia 

message: Here Wiki-newbie 18:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superman up for Featured Article Review 

message: An article has been created aiming to summarise all issues of Silver Surfer, from what I can gather.  There is also a related category.  There is formative discussion here, although I have listed both the category and the article for deletion, and all comments are obviously welcome. Hiding Talk 20:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue summaries 

message: Of note to the comics-interested editors here: ComicSpace, a social network for comics fans and professionals. You can friend me at . Why I think this is relevent: I think a number of us would like to be social and talk about subjects other than Wikipedia. This is just starting, but it could develop into an appropriate place for such a thing. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 22:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ComicSpace 

message: I've created this as a resource: User:RobJ1981/ComicsPhotos. It has some listed, from what I found when I went through parts of various stub categories. I'm sure there is more, so feel free to add to the list. I didn't think a page like that existed yet, so I'm hoping it helps improve many articles. I don't know of places to find free source comics photos for Wikipedia, so others will need to do that part of it.  RobJ1981 00:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comic articles needing photos

message: Anybody remember when the Fictional deceased characters categories were deleted? This seems to be a re-creation and I want to link to the old CfD. CovenantD 23:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added  to it, it was marked as a speedy delete as recreation.  There seems clear precedent to keep this category type deleted. Syrthiss 20:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it just needs to be de-populated. RobJ1981 21:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: * Done. Grey Shadow | Talk 06:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to repeat my question from up page... Should the Stilt-Man II redirect page be deleted?  J Greb 23:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Marvel Comics deceased characters]] 

message: Noticed the creation of: Template:X-Men members - jc37 23:47, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interestingly the edit comment from the creation of the template, and only one the user bothered to fill in, was "recreated, don't mess this template again". When/why was the last appearance of this scrapped? — J Greb 23:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted it, salted it, and removed all usage of it. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 01:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Team Navbox

message: Moved discussion to Talk:List of comic book superpowers - jc37 08:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invulnerability - no such animal 

message: Captain Koma
It looks like a vanity page to me Stephen Day 22:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted it. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 22:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should this be deleted? 

message: 68.154.39.185  has been posting a list of Cosmic characters in a letterbox format on some pages (eg. Rom, Silver Surfer etc.). My question is was this ratified by the majority, or has this person just taken it upon themselves to do this? I ask because it was dropped into the Celestials article with no thought for what it did to the formatting of the text, and I had to do a reshuffle. If this is a Wiki-endorsed feature, can we possibly have it reduced to a small logo with a link? Surely there is no need for a list of over a dozen names running down the page in letterbox format. By that logic, every entry would have one and be part of a sub-group (eg. "Aqua", "Energy", "Sound" etc), which is already indicated by a link at the bottom of the page. I feel that it takes some of the focus away from the actual character(s) featured.
Thoughts?
Asgardian 07:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not even being inserted carefully. The same box appeared twice in the Silver Surfer article. I removed one while we check the origin of this thing. I can't imagine why there would have been a consensus to add such a box. Template:Cosmic_Marvel was created back in April but appears to have gone mostly unused until the user at 68.154.39.185 decided to spread it around. The template itself should be nominated for deletion. Thanks for bringing this up. Doczilla 09:16, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This Cosmic Marvel box keeps bugging me. I'd like to nominate the template for deletion, but I've generally stayed out of the superhero team membership list box debates, so I don't know the relevant precedents for making this nomination. Can anyone educate me on this? Thanks. Doczilla 09:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cosmic Marvel? 

message: ::This Cosmic Marvel box keeps bugging me. I'd like to nominate the template for deletion, but I've generally stayed out of the superhero team membership list box debates, so I don't know the relevant precedents for making this nomination. Can anyone educate me on this? Thanks. Doczilla 09:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cosmic Marvel: Help!

message: Just a general question: Is there any criteria for including, or not including, articles related to other media appearances of comics properties in this project?
Thanks for listening... — J Greb 14:10, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really, it's a case of deciding yourself. Generally, we include comic-related characters, series, creators, films, television shows, radio, musicals, lists, and probably much more. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamdav86 (talk • contribs) 10:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project inclusion 

message: I was wondering, would it be worthwhile to work with the Biography Project to come up with an Infobox specifically for comic book/strip professionals? -— J Greb 22:53, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's probably a main template that you could add optional fields into. What fields did you have in mind? --Jamdav86 10:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've cobbeled somthing to gether using the Biography project base here: User:J Greb/Comics professional. Aside from creating the related category it seems to cover most of the bases. If a second set of eyes thinks this will work, I'll create the cate and template page after I get home from work. — J Greb 12:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it, simple and streamlined.  DOB may occassionally be difficult to obtain for some creators with low profiles, but that said:  I'm sure DOB is out there for all of them, only reason they might not immediately be entered in an infobox would be editor laziness. -Markeer 12:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox thought. 

message: Hey. In case you weren't aware, the Dark Knight Universe article has been recreated. The talk page predates it by a few months, having been restarted in October. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 23:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hiding's faster than I thought. Nevermind. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 00:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Had you not mentioned it I would not be so fast at all. Hiding Talk 00:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just so you know 

message: Awesome Android (comics) is currently protected whilst discussion is held on the talk page as to how best to proceed with the article.  The debate centres on whether or not to include a section detailing the publication history of the character.  All opinions would be helpful in building a consensus. Hiding Talk 11:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Awesome Android (comics)]]