Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Webcomics/Archive 5

message: Still on the busy side so can't come back from wikibreak just yet, but the following blog by Clay of Sexy Losers may amuse:
http://hardartist.livejournal.com/87700.html
Particularly item 8.  âAbe Dashiell (t/c) 09:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "10 Tips for Successful Webcomicking" 

message: Sometimes, I'd tag webcomics with a csd notice with a db and hope for an admin who applies A7 in a liberal manner.  Well the deletion of webcomics can now be aided as absolutely nn-comics can be tagged with the relatively new  and now properly falls under CSD criteria. - Hahnchen 03:17, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CSD now properly applies to nn-webcomics 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages: 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
*User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
*User:Badbilltucker/Science directory
and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory.
The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. 
It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now moved the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 14:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Directory 

message: On the 8 bit theatre talk there's been a short debate on whether or not a running gags section should be introduced (back into) the article. I was wondering if there's any consensus on such sections? - Bisected8 10:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally speaking, no, but I think there's a tendency for editors (myself included) to see them as trivia. Nifboy 17:05, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a consensus on running gags sections? 

message: From the Nowhere Girl article:
In 2003, Justine Shaw was the first webcomic artist to be nominated for an Eisner Award when she was nominated for "talent deserving of wider recognition" and her Nowhere Girl was nominated for "best new series."
This is not what I'm complaining about (not really, at least).  But Jason Shiga won that year in the "wider recognition" category (he won the Ignatz that year as well) and his Fleep comic is serialized online (originally in Asian Week and Modern Tales, but there's a link in the article).  He is currently not catted as a webcomic artist.
So what makes a webcomic artist?  Do they have to be serialized online?  If their comic gets printed, does that negate their "webcomicity"?  What if their comic was printed first?  Does being self-published count against them?  ColourBurst 18:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The original plan" matters less and less now that more webcomic artists want to get their comics out in print form as well as web form.  Shaenon Garrity's article about him seems to describe him as a multi-format artist (but that includes having webcomics, and other hybrid comic artists including Lea Hernandez, Kazu Kibuishi, Raina Telgemeier, and Svetlana Chmakova are catted as webcomic artists.).  ColourBurst 20:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What makes a webcomic artist? 

message: Since Twokinds was deleted and it's unlikely that it will ever be recreated (check the AfD log), it would be nice to replace all links to said article with the url to the comic. Shinobu 04:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twokinds 

message: I have put Reman Mythology up for deletion review here. Not mentioned in the AfD was the awards it was nominated for nor the awards it had won. Dread Lord CyberSkull ââ  00:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reman Mythology on DRV 

message: I have created The Cyantian Chronicles Wiki page.  I would appreciate it if people would look at it and tell me what they think about it.  Also, it wouldn't hurt if someone could add stuff.  I'm kinda good at reviewing, but not so much on writing.  And yes, Akaelae redirects there. Madd the sane 06:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Cyantian Chronicles]] wiki page is up 

message: Would it be better to have this as a taskforce of WikiProject Comics, rather than a separate Project?   Have a look at WP:MILHIST for how they have their taskforces set up to see what I mean. Hiding Talk 15:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taskforce 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: Why is [Misfile] up for deletion - it is a fairly popular webcomic, and the article is listed as "OK"? I think the notability criteria for webcomics should perhaps be reassessed? Lbarbs 03:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Blame John Seigenthaler, Sr., who made Wikipedia get its act together and demand reliable third-party sources of its articles. No reliable sources seem to exist on said comic, and therefore it is up for deletion. Nifboy 03:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD: Misfile 

message: where does the wiki community stand on sites awarded/nominated by major award sites like the WCCA (which ironically had it's article deleted and protected, even though it has been mentioned that winning an award there counted as "notability") and the Joe Shuster awards.
The Joe Shuster Awards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuster_Awards) is a fairly big-name (Joe Shuster, creator of superman, etc etc) awards site, which has recently expanded to a Canadian Webcomics category. Would a webcomic being nominated and listed on the Shuster Awards website be considered "Notable" enough to warrant a Wikipedia article? Please leave a note as to the answer of this in my personal talk.Cthon98 February 8, 2007
:For additional irony, consider that the WCCA had actually been listed as one of the example awards on the Web Notability page until the second half of 2006 or so. The AfD of it is also worth a read and should show why people still use it to prove notability despite the deletion.
:Normally an award is classified as notable when it has been covered by others (See WP:N for the exact rules). There have been rulings that go against this rule of thumb, but that's at least the official word from what I can see.  Keep in mind that I'm no Wiki Pro, so I may be wrong or maybe forgot something. --Sid 3050 12:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If being nominated for or winning any award results in being the topic of multiple non-trivial reputable sources, than winning the award meets Wikipedia:Notability. -- Dragonfiend 19:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Award sites 

message: I stumbled over this project and noitced that "ImaNewbie" isn't on the list. It's closed down since long, but was something every UO player used to know about. Unfortunatley, I don't have the link to the site anymore, and I'm not even sure if it is still up, although I know it was not too long ago. There was several hundred episodes, iirc, and it had a continuing story that ended in a "circle" with the last episode linking directly to the first one again. Not sure if it's notable enough, but thought I should raide the question. JKn-Sw 06:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old Webcomics 

message: I think that a short summary-style section should be included on each comic in the Blank Label Comics article - i've created section stubs for this purpose. --Random832(tc) 14:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blank Label 

message: is there any process to officially join the wikiproject? (btw, im in ur talkpage, archiving ur threadz - hope nobody minds that, it was getting a bit unwieldy.) --Random832(tc) 21:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just go to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Webcomics#Participants and click the "To add yourself click here!" link at the bottom of the list. Thanks for the archiving. -- Dragonfiend 21:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joining 

message: Secret of Mana Theater would like to join wiki project webcomics, we're currently in dire need for help as well as while the comic has a large following there are not many wikipedians in the active community surrounding it. The article is currently nominated for deletion a second time due to our struggles and we would love to enlist any help we can get. We do feel it suits the notability requirements as in part discussed on its deletion discussion page(2). However we'd need help getting that noted and help getting the aricle past stub class. See: Secret of Mana Theater
--69.180.162.212 18:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for help

message: Briefly - in the event that an article gets deleted that does not exist on comixpedia, just drop a not on my talk page and I'll make the material available.  "Content review" at deletion review would do the same thing, and there exists a category of admins who are also willing.  brenneman{T}{L}  00: 38, 27 February 20 06 (UTC)
*I'll do the same thing. âAbe Dashiell (t/c) 05: 13, 27 February 20 06 (UTC)
I can't help but think that articles ought to be replaced by links to their counterparts on comixpedia, instead of just being deleted (and leaving behind all those abominable broken links). SamB 03:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it is currently against Wikipedia policy to make Wikipedia:soft redirects to non-Wikimedia sites. — Gwalla | Talk 06:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted content 

message: The notability of webcomics has often been a heated debate. However, rather then just go around and try and get every webcomic article up for deletion, I propose some general guidelines for which webcomics make notable articles.
I've set out a basic outline for these guidelines, yet please feel free to share your feelings, and add changes to the guidelines, to put together some good guidelines. If you have any more examples you feel are good to add, please add extra exmaples in it's category.
Webcomic notability guidelines. Posted to front page on 20:31, 4 February 2007 by User:JackSparrow Ninja)
*WP:WEB was created from the webcomic guidelines. Hiding Talk 09:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Webcomic notability guidelines 

message: Not sure if everyone at this WikiProject got notice of this yet or not, but anyone who considers themselves quite involved will want to take a look:
http://www.halfpixel.com/2007/02/15/delete-wikipedia/
If that does not convince you that Wikipedia is basically out to get rid of webcomic articles, then you are quite frankly blind. Something needs to be done about this, or it won't just be the webcomic community that loses all respect for Wikipedia.Adolytsi 04:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I saw that about the failed prank. What is it supposed to show? That wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone edit? That silly deletion comments, whether made by new users or sock puppets get discounted? That an article on a non-notable topic with no non-trivial sources that is nominated for deletion for silly reasons by a silly person will be deleted for good reasons -- like being an article on a non-notable topic with no non-trivial sources? --Dragonfiend 04:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I find it slightly shocking that the White Ninja Comics article was deleted. 96T 14:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not Kristofer Straub's antics, but the numerous webcomics AFDs that have been brought up and carried, often against consensus, often closed improperly, often with evidence for notability, which indicate a persecution problem. Standards which would merit inclusion for an article on a print comic, weblog, website, or other topic have been deemed insufficient for webcomics related articles by a few particular users such as User:Dragonfiend above. I have trouble finding a single webcomics related article that Dragonfiend has voted to keep. Balancer 16:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia's Anti-Webcomic Stigma 

message: Our article on the webcomic The Parking Lot is Full was recently deleted because it lacked noteworthy references. By the same standard (and the standard used throughout the rest of Wikipedia), over 90% of Wikipedia's other webcomics articles should be deleted; speculation about the possibility that some of these articles might become noteworthy in the future is inappropriate because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and if they ever do reach that level of notability their articles can always be recreated. Therefore it seems reasonable to me to organize a more concerted, consistent effort to evaluate how well-referenced and notable Wikipedia's webcomic articles are, and delete all the ones that do not meet Wikipedia's high standards. I started a list of dubious webcomic articles on Talk:The Parking Lot is Full in the course of discussions, but since that page has been deleted I'll reproduce the discussion here so that the issues and articles involved can be further discussed. Hopefully, this will result in Wikipedia taking a more consistent, exacting, and active role in monitoring webcomics, rather than relying on the actions of a few lone editors to keep our webcomic inclusion standards acceptably high. The relevant portions of the discussion, moved from the Talk page, follow: -Silence 21:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As for the list I provided above, my argument isn't "we shouldn't delete this page, because we haven't deleted those pages"; rather it's "we should delete those pages if we delete this one". I'm fine with deleting all the articles I listed above, if this one doesn't meet Wikipedia's inclusion standards; I just want us to be consistent. The two main functions of my above list are to give us a starting point for nominating the rest of the unnoteworthy webcomics from Wikipedia, and to provide a broader view of how noteworthy typical Wikipedia webcomic articles are by the criterion which were used to nominate this one for deletion. -Silence 17:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: But, sadly, it is not. Wikipedia policy absolutely requires reliable sources. Wikipedia is not a primary source; that is exactly why Wikipedia:No original research doesn't include a provision saying "oh, but if you think it's really important, feel free to do original research!" -Silence 23:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Where the Buffalo Roam isn't the first webcomic, or comic on the internet. T.H.E. Fox was online well before Where the Buffalo Roam. Doctor Fun was on the Web before Where the Buffalo Roam. Whether any of these is the "first" of anything is, as far as I can tell, impossible to say -- all we can do so is cite the date and say "one of the first" or "early." There were at the least hundreds of webcomics online by the mid-90s, and we have little ability to tell what was going on in what order in every corner of the web over a decade ago. As far as what to do rith the article listed, I'd suggest tagging them as needing sources and notability, and then start looking for sources. --Dragonfiend 23:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can get behind that. Blanket AfDing would just start another round of "Wikipedia vs. the Webcomics Community" and nobody wants that. — Gwalla | Talk 04:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not proposing "blanket" AfDing, I'm proposing systematic AfDing. If we delete one article for reason X, we should delete all other articles for whom reason X applies equally. Our goal should be to increase the consistency of Wikipedia's webcomics coverage so as to not be equivocal in our standards; it should not be either to stir up or to hide away from controversy. Whether an action would be controversial has nothing to do with whether it is consistent or inconsistent with Wikipedia's policies, and WP:NOR and WP:V are very clear on this issue. The fact that the primacy of Where the Buffalo Roams is disputed illustrates exactly why using unreferenced statements and articles is absolutely unacceptable no matter how noteworthy the topic seems: because we could be saying inaccurate things if we don't back them up with references, no matter how "obvious" they seem to us. Right now we are simply trusting the author of Where the Buffalo Roams (and the others who have repeated his claim without factchecking it) on faith that his was the first webcomic; that this is inadequate is obvious, and is the reason why all webcomics need completely reliable sources to merit existence on Wikipedia at all. I agree with Dragonfiend that we should use "needs references" tags first, and I also noted above that we should make comments about this on the Talk pages of the articles (and perhaps even to the Talk pages of the articles' creators and/or regular editors) in order to drum up efforts to add reliable sources. But if, after having done all that, some of these articles are still completely unreferenced (which wouldn't surprise me, because I expect that the vast majority of articles on the above list will never have any reliable source talk about them!), then we should take appropriate action and nominate them for deletion. Simply waiting forever for them to accumulate references is senseless and contrary to Wikipedia policy and consensus. We should be systematic both in adding cleanup tags and talk-page notices to the above articles, and, after a few weeks of inaction, in proposing the stagnant ones for deletion. -Silence 13:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Be that as it may, it would definitely be perceived as blanket AfDing. Best to go slow. Dropping a big wad on AfD would scare people, and the webcomics community is already a little gunshy with regards to Wikipedia. — Gwalla | Talk 06:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, not all AFDs are carried for the correct reasons. By the standards of other AFDs closed as keep, The Parking Lot is Full and many other articles should be undeleted systematically. Most of the ones on that list meet WP:WEB standards quite directly, incidentally, some for reasons which have nothing to do with the case of The Parking Lot is Full.Balancer 16:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-noteworthy webcomics

message: Could someone transwiki SugarStars to Comixpedia? Thanks in advance. --Coredesat 20:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I've taken care of it. --Coredesat 09:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transwiki to Comixpedia requested 

message: I have been going trough webcomic articles and most of them do not seem to fit notability guidelines. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability 
Webcomic notability criteria thing seems to go against the first pillar of Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pillars) and to my personal opinion, it should be completely ignored. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WEB Isvaffel 12:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: A CfD has been called against :Category:Comixpedia sourced articles and most other "categories by source".  (The categories are proposed for deletion, not the articles within them). If this category is useful to you, and you would prefer it not to be deleted, please comment at :Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_24#"By-source_categories".  Jheald 16:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Category:Comixpedia sourced articles" proposed for deletion 

message: It is notoriously difficult to source a webcomic's notability, so I pass Felicity Flint, Agent from H.A.R.M. over to you to assess it's notability. I will have AfD it if it doesn't get improved, so I hope you can do something with it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 07:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Felicity Flint, Agent from H.A.R.M. 

message: Keenspot has published books for Sore Thumbs and Alien Dice, meeting the web criteria. Dread Lord CyberSkull ââ  05:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''[[Sore Thumbs]]'', ''[[Alien Dice]]'' and possibly others. 

message: I'm thinking of merging  and  as most of the information is covered by one or the other. Thoughts? Dread Lord CyberSkull ââ  11:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They seem similar, but to truly merge them some tweaks would have to be made, which affect hundreds of articles on the webcomics side and thousands on the general comics side. While I like the idea of a common comic infobox in theory, in practice both webcomic side and general comic side need to agree before this can even get started. Ambi Valent 03:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem seems mainly to be that the two templates use different parameter names for similar purposes. There should be a way to allow both names (to minimize the impact on existing articles). — Gwalla | Talk 06:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I can do that easily. And the comic strip template is used on less than 50 articles last time I checked. The webcomic template is used on many times more. Dread Lord CyberSkull ââ  12:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  template merge? 

message: I added the Town Called Dobson entry this evening. I know it is probably bad, but I am also the creator. I was interviewed at three comic cons in the last year for the Wiki entry and it never seemed to be published. I followed your guidelines and the guidelines for notability (as much as they apply). I have seen in the talk sections over the year, one test for notability for comics, movies or books is if there are more than 1000 hits in Google. I have 803,000. If you guys need to change something, please do. See the entry's talk page for more.  Stormbear 01:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Town Called Dobson

message: For purposes of centralized discussion, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Merge with WikiProject Webcomics. Thank you. John Carter 18:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger