Talk:"Omaha" the Cat Dancer

message: I think it's a little misleading to categorize Maus as a furry comic, but this is being discussed currently on that wikipedia entry's talk page.  I however strongly think that if there is a reference to Maus on the page, it should not refer to it as a 'slice of life' comic - such a designation diminishes the scope and horror of the Holocaust as well as the tragedy of dealing with the aftermath of it.  A reference to Maus as being a similar text that uses anthromporphic animals to approach a 'serious' subject while simultaniously putting some distance between the reader and that subject itself, however, would not be wholely innapropriate. -- Stiv 07:25, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maus & Furry Comics 

message: This article is for a comic title and dosn't mention any gay, lesbian, trans or bi charcters. So I'm taking it of the LGBT comic book characters catagory. --60.226.54.29 16:02, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Omaha had sex with a woman in an early comic, (she was drunk, though...) 81.232.72.53 14:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: By contrast, the New Zealand Office of Film and Literature Classification ruled that the series 
 was suitable for all ages because of its mature depiction of relationships and sexuality.
:What does this section mean, is it a typo, or does it mean that a mature depiction of sexuality is more suitable than an immature one? =S 惑乱 分からん 21:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the latter, not a typo. The point is that it depicts more than just raw sex (and indeed sometimes I wonder if they actually wanted to just write a story about a strip dancer and only had to throw in the actual sex to sell the comic). There's a lot of the feelings surrounding it in the comic. GreenReaper 23:14, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, so since it's more story-oriented, it's better aimed at a younger audience? I think the reasoning probably needs to be clearer... 惑乱 分からん 23:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, here's what someone else had to say about it. The source of the statement appears to be Omaha #16, but I don't have that comic. GreenReaper 23:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a few changes. How's the current wording sound to you? GreenReaper 23:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did some rewriting. 惑乱 分からん 00:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Found the entry in the list of rulings - it covered both Omaha, the Cat Dancer Vols 1 & 2 and Nos 7, 8, 9 and 10. The official ruling was "Not Indecent", the best possible decision for that court (though that might still not mean that it was not "suitable for all ages"). GreenReaper 00:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age rating

message: Needs coverage of the reception and inline references thereof. Right now, the only bit that seems to pertain to critical reception is the ruling in its favour in the history section and a short list of awards - what about its target audience? Once those are added, I think this is ready for class C. GreenReaper (talk) 02:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: I removed the Pornography WikiProject from this page on the basis that there are no sources referring to Omaha as a pornographic comic, and in Graphic Novels: A Bibliographic Guide to Book-length Comics, D. Aviva Rothschild states that Omaha is not pornography. (Sugar Bear (talk) 23:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pornography 

message: According to Dez Skinn's Comix: The Underground Revolution, Omaha the Cat Dancer was inspired/influenced by Robert Crumb's Fritz the Cat. Does anyone know of any other influences? This kind of information should be added to the article. (Sugar Bear (talk) 23:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influences 

message: Virtually every reference in this article comes either from the introduction to The Collected "Omaha" the Cat Dancer, CatDancer Corp. or the collected volumes themselves. Undue weight is being given to the official site and what the series creators say about themselves. While there is a smattering of information from two or three books, there is a distinct lack of objective journalistic material from contemporaneous newspapers and magazines. The piece is well written and exhibits encyclopedic tone, but these cite issues need to be addressed in general and in order for this to be submitted for Good Article consideration. Having virtually nothing but the official story makes this largely redundant with the official page. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:43, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Sourcing