Talk:Comics Code Authority

message: I remember reading that the words "FLICK" and "CLINT" were not used in comics as there was a high chance in strip text that the L and I would merge thus forming a naughty word in each case.  I don't recall if this was an enforced regualtion or just something marvel and other groups had as internal policies.  Does anyone know?
::This must have been a problem for Clint Barton... -leigh (φθόγγος) 09:15, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
Incidently what is the code the prescribes that all US telephone numbers in TV/film/comis should have the ficticious area code 555?
Dainamo 08:08, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I bet there is probably an article referencing this somewhere, but I believe the 555 phone number was mandated, possibly by government, in the 1970s because of people being harassed when their phone numbers were used in a TV show or movie. Incidentally, it isn't a 555 area code, but rather a 555 exchange, as in 555-1234. The only real-life use of the 555 exchange that I know if is for directory assistance. 23skidoo 18:29, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Banning of innocent words for fear of ink run

message: Can we get a copy of the CCA logo to put here? Is that fair use? DS 18:57, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo?

message: I wonder if we can actually quote the code and it's revs on this page. The given likes are on a Geocities page that allows the host so many hits. --Discordian 20:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The Code

message: Hi, all. The reason I've changed "External links" to "References" comes from these sections of Wikipedia:Cite_sources, quoted verbatim below. (Please note in Item 2 below that the italics are theirs, and not inserted by me.) Thanks!
1)
:Complete citations in a "References" section
:Complete citations, also called "references," are collected at the end of the article under a ==References== heading. Under this heading, list the comprehensive reference information as a bulleted (*) list, one bullet per reference work.
2) 
:External links/Further reading
:The ==External links== or ==Further reading== section is placed after the references section, and offers books, articles, and links to websites related to the topic that might be of interest to the reader, but which have not been used as sources for the article. Where there is a references section, editors may prefer to call the external links section "further reading," because the references section may also contain external links, and the further reading section may contain items that are not online.
So sources used to write an article go under "References", and other helpful citations go under "External links" if they're linkable and "Further reading" if they're not online. — Tenebrae 15:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "References" vs. "External links"

message: While reading the 1954 Code highlights the word werewolfism sorta jumped out at me.  "Sounds like a political party for candidate Larry Talbot -- which Wikipedia editor coined that neologism?", I sneered, having assumed one of us wanted an ad hoc English synonym for lycanthropy.  Mistakenly assumed: it turns out werewolfism  is actually in the 1954 Code.  
The current style of formatting for those highlights leaves it visually uncertain whether that text is an editors summary, (with recent paraphrasing and condensing), or actual quotations.  The bullet listing format omits the section headings and numbering of the original text, which might add context if included.  Either the 1954 text should be put in quotation marks, or formatted to better distinguish it from the article text proper.  Is there a standard better way of formatting such quotes?
--AC 06:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it would be very helpful to clarify that the text is actually excerpted from the code, in such a way that it is also clear that what is presented is a selection rather than the entired text of the code. Whatever formatting is done should probably also be applied to the Production Code article, which presents a very similar case. The articles for Magna Carta and the Ten Commandments suggest some formatting approaches. -- Shunpiker 12:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good hints, I added the Magna Carta style formatting as per your advice.  The pink background seems a bit upbeat though -- perhaps a more neutral background color would be apropriate?  --AC (talk) 06:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''1954 Code highlights''' quote style 

message: Lawrence Watt-Evans writes:
And when people suggest that the Comics Code was written specifically
to kill E.C. by banning the words horror, terror, crime,
and weird from comic-book titles, I sometimes wonder whether 
they're really thinking about what they're saying. E.C. didn't have
a comic book with terror in the title in 1954; Crypt of Terror
had been changed to Tales from the Crypt back in '50.
But Harvey was still publishing Tomb of Terror. The Code was 
aimed at Harvey and others as well as E.C.
 
The current article reads (mostly my own text):
Publisher William Gaines believed[1][2] that clauses forbidding the words "crime", "horror" and "terror" in comic book titles had been deliberately aimed at his own best-selling titles Crime SuspenStories, The Vault of Horror and The Crypt of Terror.
 
So if LWE is correct, then the article is wrong about 'Crypt of Terror'.
I looked up on GCD comics up to 1955 with "Terror" in the title:
Title                  Series Issues  Publisher      Published
Black Terror, The      1942    27     Better
Adventures Into Terror 1950     2     Marvel         November
                                                     1950 -
                                                     February
                                                     1950
Crypt of Terror, The   1950     3     EC
Adventures Into Terror 1951    29     Marvel         April 1951
                                                     - May 1954
Blue Bolt Weird Tales  1951     9     Star           November
of Terror                             Publications   1951 -
                                      [1949-1954]    May-June
                                                     1953
Tales of Terror Annual 1951     3     EC             1951 -
                                                     1953
Strange Terrors        1952     7     St. John       June 1952
                                                     - March
                                                     1953
Terrors of the Jungle  1952     5     Star
                                      Publications
                                      [1949-1954]
Weird Terror           1952    13     Comic Media
Startling Terror Tales 1952     6     Star           May 1952 -
                                      Publications   February
                                      [1949-1954]    1953
Tomb of Terror         1952    16     Harvey
Beware! Terror Tales   1952     8     Fawcett
Tales of Terror        1953     1     Toby
Terrors of the Jungle  1953     7     Star
                                      Publications
                                      [1949-1954]
Startling Terror Tales 1953     8     Star           April 1953
                                      Publications   - 1954
                                      [1949-1954]
House of Terror, The   1953     1     St. John
Terror Illustrated     1955     2     EC
Clearly there were several relatively long-running series that fit the bill.  The longest being Marvel's Adventures Into Terror.  Gaines  also published Tales of Terror Annual (4 rebound comics) as late as 1953, so he still might have been publishing at least one 'Terror' title.  Revision pending further thought, unless somebody does it first... --AC 05:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comics with "Terror" in title circa 1954 

message: I haven't seen the seal on any recent DC Comics.  It was on Archie Comics last I can recall, but the claim says "As of 2007"--and I simply have not seen the seal on any 2007 DC covers.  Can someone show an example, particularly from one not as part of a younger readers line? --Scottandrewhutchins 21:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DC still using Code?

message: The image :Image:Astonishing30.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: FUR added --Tenebrae (talk) 03:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Astonishing30.jpg

message: This recent description seems a bit roundabout:
The Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency hearings in 1954, which focused specifically on comic books...
The article United States Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency refers to "1954 Comic Book Hearings", which is short and descriptive.  The same article cites an OCL reference to Juvenile Delinquency (Comic Books) hearings before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency in the U.S., Eighty-Third Congress, second session, on Apr. 21, 22, June 4, 1954, which agrees with Coville's online edition .   Is there an 'encyclopedic' way to construct or choose between such titles?  --AC (talk) 07:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know of know authoritative rules, rather, there are myriads of conventions used by different encyclopedias. Seems like an area to use various re-directs? The idea would be to ensure that someone typing in something like "1954 Comic Book Hearings" or even just "Comic Book Hearings" would retrieve the appropriate entry. -- Quartermaster (talk) 13:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of 1954 JD hearings? 

message: This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject.  If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class.  The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject.  Comics-awb (talk) 16:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done - needs a lot more references, the founding section in particular has none (and neither does the 21st century section) and there needs to be more scattered throughout the article. I'm also pretty sure there must be an infobox that could work here. (Emperor (talk) 17:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

message: I have a collection of Gold Key comics going all the way back into the late 1960s and the one thing I noticed is there is no Comics Code Authority logo on any of them, even the stuff with Disney characters.  If the code was supposedly so powerful how was Gold Key able to sale comics in general distribution outlets without the Code logo?--BruceGrubb (talk) 07:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Gold Key was even MORE powerful. They published adaptations of basically EVERYTHING: TV, movies, literature. They had comics, books, puzzles, etc. They were Disney before Disney was Disney. They had their own standards and the comics buying public knew what to expect from a Gold Key book. So, no code seal needed. Khajidha (talk) 17:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other non code comics 

message: Clearly Iron Man does not seem to meet the codes original format (due to Tony's Alcoholic trait before and most likely after becoming Iron Man not sure I never read the comic or saw that movie)... Was it a non-code comic? Or was it a code comic as the subject was most likely not brought up again? 71.165.9.55 (talk) 06:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Though Iron Man debuted in 1963, Tony Stark's alcoholism wasn't established until 1979, well after the Code had been revised. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_in_a_Bottle WaxTadpole (talk) 16:22, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tony Stark? 

message: I deleted text which says that MAD "was changed to magazine format to circumvent the code".  There is no source for that claim and http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2006/04/06/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-45/ not only says that it's not true, but quotes an interview with William Gaines to back this up. Ken Arromdee (talk) 19:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  MAD 

message: it's all bullshit, i mean i respect the story with spidey for what it is, but the statement by the DC guy is taken out of the companys context, because in august 71 they started the influential snowbirds don't fly story in green lantern / green arrow, and the big difference between the two storys is, and that's also why the DC story is more relevant overall, in thw words of dennis o neal:
"I went home and decided I really wanted to do the drug story," the artist recalls, "so I pencilled and inked the cover, and it's exactly as you've seen it, with Speedy and his works on the table. I took it into [editor] Julie Schwartz's office, put it on his desk, and he dropped it like a hot potato. "He was very clear that if we did the story, we would have to make Speedy into a heroin junkie. Not a pot smoker, not a pill popper like they did at Marvel; he would have to be a hard drug user. It was an interesting situation. Denny wanted to write the story, I wanted to draw it, Julie came around after he had calmed himself down. And then, Stan Lee did his Spider-Man story...
Within a few weeks, remembers Adams, while DC staffers debated the prospects of doing the drug story, Lee got the jump on them by publishing a drug abuse story in Spider-Man #96-98 (illustrated by Gil Kane) that was a first; originally rejected by the Comics Code Authority, Marvel published the story anyway without the seal of approval.
"We could have done it first and been the ones to make a big move. Popping a pill and walking off a roof isn't the sort of thing that really happens, but heroin addiction is; to have it happen to one of our heroes was potentially devastating. Anyway, the publishers at DC, Marvel and the rest called a meeting, and in three weeks, the Comics Code was completely rewritten. And we did our story."
here's the link for reference in the rewriting of this article, i hope somebody with better englich than me does it:
http://titanstower.com/source/libearly/drugsroy.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.173.175.67 (talk) 21:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  the spider-man section and DC overall 

message: In light of the Tipper Gore putting lables on CDs and such and the TV rating system, would the code have to change again, or fold up?DLN7762 (talk) 23:30, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is The Code Dead? 

message: In the Updating the Code section: 
:"Lee and Marvel drew criticism from DC head Carmine Infantino "for defying the code", stating that DC will not "do any drug stories unless the code is changed"."
Who is doing the "stating" - Lee and Marvel or Infantino?  Could this be clarified?    Heavenlyblue (talk) 22:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  for defying the code 

message: This article could use a section explicitly dealing in detail with the larger social context of the CCA's inception.  The Founding section has only the overly vague "...was formed in September 1954 in response to a widespread public concern...".  Who organised, motivated, and expressed this "widespread public concern"?  There is no mention here of right-wing populism, the Red Scare, or any other movements, organisations, or social currents.  This very much needs to be remedied.  I suggest a section entitled Social and Political Context.    Heavenlyblue (talk) 22:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole thing definitely has aspects of a Moral panic.    Heavenlyblue (talk) 23:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Larger Social Context 

message: There's a discussion on which comic-related articles should be listed as "Top Importance" on the importance scale, and I feel this article should not be included. If any user disagrees or wishes to contribute, please do so there. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top Importance? 

message: One section says distributors were the de facto enforcement arm of the CCA, refusing to carry comics without the seal. Yet the section immediately above says distributors carried Dell and Gold Key Comics without it. This needs to be explained, with citing. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been addressed. Argento Surfer (talk) 17:30, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction

message: I found this article from July 28, 1973 on the Chicago Tribune archives site. It may be of some use to this article. Both Steve Englehart and Mike Royer are quoted in it. http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1973/07/29/page/45/article/peoples-fine-art-or-porn  
Mtminchi08 (talk) 18:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  A  1973 Chicago Tribune article that may be useful here 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Comics Code Authority. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,820350-1,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719015214/http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2007/09/06/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-119/ to http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2007/09/06/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed-119/
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/648Tt2H5e?url=http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2009/09/24/comic-book-legends-revealed-226/ to http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2009/09/24/comic-book-legends-revealed-226/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://twomorrows.com/comicbookartist/articles/02stanroy.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsarama.com/comics/comics-code-authority-defunct-since-2009-110124.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsarama.com/comics/archie-drops-CCA-in-february-110121.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:55, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Comics Code Authority. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C820350-1%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001032230/http://cbldf.org/comics-code-history-the-seal-of-approval/ to http://cbldf.org/comics-code-history-the-seal-of-approval/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:46, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "He established the Comics Code Authority (CCA), basing its code upon the largely unenforced code drafted by the Association of Comics Magazine Publishers in 1976, which in turn had been modeled loosely after the 1940 Hollywood Production Code."
The date 1976 in this context must be wrong. Whatever date is intended must be prior to 1954, does anybody know the actual date of this earlier, unenforced code? 
J Edward Malone (talk) 20:54, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. The correct date is 1948. I've fixed it in the article. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  1976?? 

message: I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:CS, WP:NOR, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 18:05, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations

message: There was a period of winding down and the CCA being more and more irrelevant over the 80s and 90s before people fully pulled out. The entire Vertigo imprint was without the Comics Code stamp, and this was a pattern that had started in the 80s (it's easy to see from the covers which comics weren't CCA approved). Swamp Thing 29 is a good example when 28 had been; this is already mentioned on the Swamp Thing page. 
Neonchameleon (talk) 01:09, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  1980s and 1990s 

message: — Assignment last updated by DBowie (talk) 19:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: ENGL A120 Critical Thinking