Talk:The First (comics)

message: :Image:CrossGenTheFirst-1cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:CrossGenTheFirst-1cover.jpg

message: I see that User:Tutwakhamoe proposed this article be deleted on 19 May 2023. I have stepped away from Wikipedia, and have not contributed in many years; I'm afraid I am not up to date on current best practices for editing style, or templates, or anything else, and I'm afraid I also don't have the time or sources right now to make contributions. But, while the article could certainly benefit from expansion, I don't see why that means it should be deleted. It should be improved, expanded, not deleted. This is not a stub article - it already has some significant amount of content in it, including the number of issues and their dates of publication, summaries of the key characters, and so forth. I hope someone else will come along and improve the article. Server space or whatever is not exactly at a premium - I think Wikipedia can spare the X Kb it takes to keep this article in existence. Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 01:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your contribution. I nominated it for deletion because it is an unsourced article, and I was not able to find significant secondary sources to prove its notability. Regardless of the quality of the comic, in order to have an entry in Wikipedia under the current policy, the comic would need to pass WP:GNG, or in this case, WP:BKCRIT. I will try search for an adequate source tomorrow, and if nothing can be found, I will nominate it for AfD to see if other editors can locate any useful sources. Please forgive me if my action has made you uncomfortable, but we do need trustworthy sources for our contents if Wikipedia wants to be taken as a somewhat reliable online encyclopedia. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 02:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

text: @LordAmeth @Tutwakhamoe there is a bit of CrossGen coverage in contemporary issues of Wizard, which are at the Internet Archive even though they probably shouldn't be. I don't really have any time or inclination to ascertain if they are about this particular series as CrossGen was not so good, but throwing it out there. User:BoomboxTestarossa/ComicSourceDump might give some pointers. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 08:39, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the resource! It seems to have received coverage in a side column. I will try to find more coverage of the subject. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 14:51, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

text: Okay, I've done a sort of framework for where I would neutrally state (and Wikipedia policy generally indicates) the article would ultimately need to be. The article is very stubby and crucially lacks any significant context. I don't know Crossgen very well (it was like the Image-lite thing by the guy who did Aspen, right?) but I would say I have an above-average working knowledge of comics and I'm still very little the wiser as to what this series is and why it's notable as a result. What little real-world information in there is uncited. There are no third-party citations at all; everything stated seems uncontroversial but y'know, it could just be made up because no citations. Until I churned out a lazy, lazy infobox there was no information about who even wrote the thing. As for the run as a reference, yeah, it's useful but ultimately should be in-lined. That most of these concerns have existed for ten years is, while not a hammer blow, Not A Good Thing either. FWIW I wouldn't go for deletion but redirecting to Crossgen to preserve what has been done in the page history should anyone ever care to do actually expand it. However, as it stands it's sadly just not good enough as a standalone. It's nothing personal, there are a lot of uncited comics pages that are getting this done to them. If the page has legs it will be back; redirecting and/or deleting is not a one-way street if the sources are out there. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Deletion