Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive 15

message: Why was the page moved to "Titans (comics)", since in almost all of their incarnations (including their current one) they're known as the Teen Titans?  --DrBat 23:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasnt involved in the move, but I imagine it was because, although "Teen Titans" is by far the most common title for the team, they have gone without the "Teen" for a large proportion of their appearances as well as for significant stretches of time at various points through the years. IIRC the sequence has been chronologically "Teen Titans" - "New Teen Titans" - "New Titans" - "Teen Titans" - "Titans" and then back to "Teen Titans" again, with "Team Titans" fitting in the middle somewhere. The "New Titans" period was between 1988 and 1994 and the "Titans" one was between 1999 and 2002 which means that for a little less than a quarter of their 42 year existence the "Teen" has been missing. If you look at it from the perspective of a proportion of the number of actual "Titans" comics published I'd guess that the percentage is even higher given Team Titans and the fact that two of the longest running series so far have been New Titans (81 issues) and Titans (50 issues). On the other hand "Teen Titans" is not only their current title its also definitely the best known name for the team, especially after the animated series, so I can see your point too. Hueysheridan 05:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teen Titans/Titans 

message: I've been working on several story arcs of popular comics, and using the comic series templates, but is there ore should there be one for important story arcs? Bradtcordeiro 21:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story Arc Template? 

message: I recently recreated Phyla-Vell's page (which was deleted before for having a copyvio biography). Would anyone mind filling it up? --DrBat 17:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phyla-Vell 

message: I was just reading the Superman article today and it struck me that his comic book history is given far too much space and prominence. Certainly the emphasis on comic book history is appropriate and necessary in most comic book characters pages, but characters like Supes, Batman, Spider-Man and an arguable number of others, have long outgrown their comic book origins to become multi-media phenomenons. At the moment the articles are very bitty - each character's history is broken up into separate media sections which fail to adequately depict how the different interpretations may have influenced the concept's development.
Shouldnt a general history section be the most prominent history section for each of these characters?  one which would summarise all the major events in the characters multimedia history in the proper context with one another. For instance, Superman's history would mention Action Comics #1 and subsequent comics which introduced key Superman concepts, then mention how his first media adaptation was the radio serial which also introduced important concepts, then mention the first physical depiction of the character at the 1940 Worlds Fair and then on to a mention of the movie serials etc.
Though I understand and share an attachment to the trivia of these character's comic book histories I think that we should acknowledge that comics are no longer the only influence on their development (if they ever were). Their comic book history could then be briefly summarised on the main page and expanded on in a spin-off page as is usually the practice with the details of other media adaptations. Hueysheridan 18:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Too much emphasis on comics in some major character articles? 

message: *X-Men
*Comics
*Spider-Man
*History of the British comic
*Superhero
*Alan Moore
*Manga
*Maus
Here are the past collaborations. Can the project please put them up for featured article nomination, then cross the off and sign them. Thanks. --Jamdav86 14:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hold on. Not all of those are ready for Featured Article, most haven't even been marked as Good Articles yet (basically all of them but Alan Moore). Maus isn't quite there yet either. Also, the proper process is taking them to Wikipedia:Peer review before putting them up for FA. Not to mention Alan Moore has failed FA three times already, and besides Comics, it is closest to FA-status. --SevereTireDamage 14:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text: All of the project's members? I've never delved into a collab, to be honest. Also, just because collabs don't make the article into a featured article is no reason not to continue with the collab. An improvement is still an improvement. That improvement may not be enough to be a feature article, but it is an improvement. Kusonaga 22:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, Alan Moore and Superhero are the only pages on the list that look worthy of nomination to featured article. If you want History of the British Comic, and Comics to qualify, then get rid of the redlinks. --Basique 19:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Kusonaga, why get so hung up on the FA thing? As long as the collaboration generally improves articles then I say we stick with it. Hueysheridan 19:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article nominations

message: Why was this changed?  I fail to see the benefit from removing the notable relatives part of the box.D1Puck1T 20:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I believe the reasoning was that it was getting too convoluted. --DrBat 02:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Template:superherobox

message: I noticed that after Ultimate Nightcrawler was merged with consensus, it re-emerged and is back as its own page again.  I fear this is going to be a trend with all the other Ultimate versions of characters that were voted to be  merged and that people put time and effort into merging them and making the main pages better.  I think if we are gonna put the effort into setting up guidelines and voting for consensus we should probably back up what we say should happen.  Any ideas of what we could do to prevent them all from re-proliferating wikipedia?  Or should we just let them all come back? --Silver lode 21:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely should not let them all come back.  It's User:Miharakamikazi who created the article originally and doesn't seem to want to let it go, despite consensus.  I rv'd it back to the redirect and dropped him a note.  --Newt ΨΦ 21:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that you've drawn attention to Nightcrawler (comics), it's in need of some serious rewrite to get it in conformity with Wikipedia:Writing about fiction; most of it is written in-universe and is organized by in-universe chronology.  Postdlf 23:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultimate Reverts 

message: This article says that the Night Nurse appearing now is a new character. I thought she was the same character from the older comics? Has it ever been stated that these are two separate people? --DrBat 00:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing is, they seem to have nothing in common besides their name, profession, and that they're both created by Marvel Comics. It's not quite enough to call the current Night Nurse "II". The original comic should probably be mentioned in the lead and have its own section, though. --SevereTireDamage 11:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Night Nurse (comics) 

message: I have just created an article for Quicken Forbidden, a series published by Cryptic Press and AiT/PlanetLar. In order to flesh it out and make it not a stub, I am tempted to supply issue summaries (there are only 13 issues) and/or a list of minor characters. But I do not want there to be too much fancruft or fluff. I'd like some advice as to what to do with this article, please, and if anyone has anything to add to the main content, please do. Thank you. LordAmeth 12:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both of those sections would be good, but in the case of issue summaries and minor characters, you need to keep in mind that they should be condensed. When the issue summaries become too long, they are often seen as a 'competing product', as in that the minute detail of the issue itself is also represented, giving it a little copyright trouble. Do it, but keep it bare bones is my advice. Kusonaga 12:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quicken Forbidden 

message: Hi to you all, I recently joined the Portal: comics, and I did a major edit to the Eshu (comics). I would like for someone here to have a look at the article, tell me what's missing and how to improve that, so I can complete it and devote my self to other comic book articles.--Captain ginyu 17:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi and welcome! to improve the article, take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars and see what is missing from the article. Happy editing! --Jamdav86 13:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome. The move you made from Master (comics) to Eshu (comics) I'm about to revert, because we go by code-names, and not their real names in most cases (some characters are known more by their real names though and thus, their article is named after their real name). When naming an article, it's always so that it can be most easily found. Therefore, it will need to be moved back to Master, and not Eshu (because few people will know the Master's real name).
*The superhero/villain box is set up so that when nothing is added, it won't show up. Therefore, unless it's in the powers section, do not add none to any of the sections (such as affiliation).
*It's usual to add the volume number before the issue number, so: Blabla (vol. 57) #9 instead of Blabla #9 (vol. 57)
*Write in the literary present tense, not the past tense. In-universe writing is to be avoided, because in essence, Blabla (vol. 57) #9 is still current, even though we're on Blabla (vol. 89) #11. The character might be dead, crippled etc. in one story, while being fine in the other. Both exist however. Therefore, it's not: "Barbara Gordon was crippled in the Killing Joke, and moved on to become the weelchair bound hero Oracle." but "Barbara Gordon is crippled in the Killing Joke, and then becomes the weelchair bound hero Oracle."
*References are good (and make sure to cite just about everything), but do not copy word for word (or even take pieces here and there and just change words). That's considered a copyright violation, and is not allowed.
*I think that was it, mostly. Kusonaga 14:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Master

message: Does someone have a copy of Dark Knight Returns they can dig out and scan? We need an image of the shrine with Jason Todd's uniform in the Batcave for the Jason Todd article, and the most logical place to get it would be its first appearance.
As for the image we have now, it's really low-quality and unsourced. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just uploaded :Image:Robin shrine.jpg, is it okay? --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perfect. Thank you very much. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Robin shrine in DKR