Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Archive 21

message: I don't quite know where to put this information, but I'm working on a site collecting comic book covers using a variety of aggregator APIs. For every series, I'm linking to Wikipedia for more information on the comic book. (For every single issue, I'm linking to a Google search for that issue.) You can see the results at CoverBrowser.com. My question is maybe someone has an idea how the collection at Cover Browser can possibly be of aid to this WikiProject or how else I can help out (other than editing comic articles, or adding new ones like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicente_Segrelles)? -Philwiki 15:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Covers 

message: Before I go blundering into things I've got a few questions:
#Are there any guidelines existent for the layout of and information to be included on these pages?
#Is the a sound reason why a list page would imply the list would be maintained with an in continuity POV?
Thanks for listening — J Greb 14:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just using that football list as an example, team lists could consist of columns identifying the character and denoting the issue the character first appeared as a member of the team (real world perspective: not all comics actually tell a story where a member clearly joins; sometimes they show up already as a member) as well as the years they were a member (because denoting particular issues they were members in could get messy once you take into account appearances in other titles).  WesleyDodds 02:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team list formats 

message: This CFD could benefit from more attention from project members.  Thanks.  Postdlf 15:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Depowered mutants]] 

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 22:15, 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 14:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Directory 

message: I decided to make my 15,000th edit here. I have had a great time being a part of this project. Of all the the nerd (I mean that positively) projects, this is by far the best and the most encyclopedic. I am very glad to be a part of it. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓)
:WOW!  15000-- that's a lot!  Congrats! --HKMarksTALKCONTRIBS 21:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, such nerdy pleasures we enjoy, eh? Congrats. Doczilla 21:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Only about 12,500 more to go until I can do this. - Mike | Trick or Treat 00:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good God — that made me curious to see my own number. I've made 11,582. I thought I had a life...! Anyway, CG, keep up the fine work. --Tenebrae 00:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great to have you here CG. BTW, how do I check how many edits I have? -- Jelly Soup 00:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Fantastic news, Chris! You're a real tribute to the project and the 'Pedia. Here's to the next 15,000! --InShaneee 00:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you guys know how many you did?--SidiLemine 13:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go here: Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits --Tenebrae 13:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I also found , more practical for us newbies with < 3000 contribs!--SidiLemine 13:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: It's crazy we've been editing roughly the same amount of time and I have less than 1/7th of your edits. You dove in headfirst, I'm still wading in the shallow end. --PsyphicsΨΦ 17:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but I'm burning out. The edit counter is here. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 06:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My 15,000th edit 

message: I'm a fairly new member to the comics project, and I just wanted to get to know how things are around here and the interests of the editors. Are your interests generally in comic books such as Batman, Spiderman, Marvel, etc. or more in the area of newspaper comic strips like Calvin and Hobbes, Peanuts, Dilbert, and FoxTrot? I'm generally into the newspaper strips and that's why I'm here. From what I can tell the project is about both, but I thought it would be interesting to knid of poll the interests of the contributors here. - Mike | Trick or Treat 00:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  General question 

message: Do the votes from the old Peanuts collab nom count for this nom? See the nomination for more info. - Mike | Trick or Treat 01:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. No need for the distinction, either. --Jamdav86 10:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Collab question

message: I've updated the Comicsproj template, in line with other projects and how they use theirs.  Basically, people can now use the template to tag articles in the rating system, but also to tag them for any concerns.  Here's the usage instructions, any thoughts on extra fields welcome. Hiding Talk 22:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|Comicsproj}} 

message: The  project banner template should be added (not subst:ed) to the talk page of every article within the scope of the project.  While the template does not require any additional parameters, it has a number of optional ones that add various extra features to the banner.  The full syntax is as follows:

General parameters:
* class – a rating of the article's quality; see the assessment department for more details.
* importance – a rating of the article's importance; see the assessment department for more details.
* attention – "yes" if the article requires immediate attention; this should be used sparingly.
*cleanup – "yes" if the article requires general cleaning up. Please detail what aspects of the article require clean-up on the article's talk page, otherwise the tag can be removed without redress to the problems.
* fiction – "yes" if the article needs rewriting to maintain an out of universe approach per Wikipedia:Writing about fiction.
* image – "yes" if the article requires an image, which should be added per guidance.
* infobox – "yes" if the article needs an infobox added or updated.
* portal – if the article is used in the featured article queue of the Comics Portal, the subpage number of its entry.
* collaboration-candidate – "yes" if the article is currently a candidate for the project's Collaboration of the Month.
* past-collaboration – if the article was previously a Collaboration of the Month, the dash-separated dates of the collaboration period; must be left blank otherwise.
* peer-review – "yes" if the article is currently listed on the project's peer review department.
* old-peer-review – "yes" if the article was previously listed on the project's peer review department.
* rfc - "yes" if there is an issue regarding the article which is being discussed upon the talk page and further comments are required.
To avoid needlessly cluttering up talk pages, it is usually appropriate to remove any unused parameters from the template. Hiding Talk 22:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project banner 

message: The current Ant-Man page is just a redirect to Henry Pym with the link to the current Ant-Man Eric O'Grady near the bottom of a very large article. There have now been three sepparte and distinctive charcters to use the name. Shouldn't this page be detailing the history of the Ant-Man identity? 
I don't know enough about the overall history of the name or I'd do this myself Stephen Day 00:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It could be that in the future, but for now it can be a disambig. --Jamdav86 11:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Too much redirects... check Ant-Man (comics). —Lesfer (t/c/@) 16:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Problem solved : ) —Lesfer (t/c/@) 16:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ant-Man

message: I've been doing some work clarifying the legal status of these characters, per information cited on the :Category:Nedor Comics superheroes (sorry, I couldn't figure out how to make the full link work...) Talk page.  Just thought I'd mention it here for anyone interested. 24.176.0.225 01:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nedor/Better/Standard legal rights

message: Since two of these have survived AfD for whatever reason, I figure we might as well bring them into line as best we can with policy and guidance.  To that end, I know Chris pared down Runaways story arcs a while back, and Onomatopoeia just did the same for Ultimate Spider-Man (story arcs).  My question is what the best/consensus for organization of these articles is.  I remember Chris editing the Runaways arc article to remove headings, instead opting for putting the arc title in quotes and putting them all in paragraph form.  Onomatopoeia's edit to the Ultimate Spider-Man arcs page is a bulleted list.  Is there a consensus on how these articles should be organized?  If not, can we form one?  I didn't see it in the editorial guidelines.  Also, Ultimate X-Men (story arcs) appears to be a half-and-half paragraph (with headings) and bulleted list (and the last entry, for Cable, is a page long synopsis of one comic book). I'd edit that last one myself, but I'm at work and I can only get away with so much editing here. --PsyphicsΨΦ 15:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think both are legit, but I think a full text is more pleasing and better (WP:WIAGA) to read than a bulleted list. A bulleted list is much easier to maintain though, IMHO, because people become more concise. Just make sure to add infos about publishing dates, artists, real-world references (in Ultimate Spider-Man, the movies and the video game) when available. Onomatopoeia 15:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Storyline articles 

message: I came across The Pitt today, and it's a one shot. There is also The Draft (comics) made by the same editor. Do these one-shots need pages here? And in general, do one-shots really need articles?  In my opinion, they don't. I can understand a list of one-shots, describing them... or something similar, but certainly not single articles on 1 issue comics (unless it's very important, which is pretty rare I believe). The pages for Pitt and Draft are lengthly, and they are just one shots. Wikipedia isn't a fan's guide to every little note, some cleanup of one shots needs to happen here. These two articles aren't the only examples, just the most recent I've seen. I believe there was some Civil War articles that were one-shots recently, I'm not sure if they were merged or not. RobJ1981 17:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Within the history of Marvel's New Universe, The Pitt was a turning point as big as Crisis on Infinite Earths. It was Marvel's effort to revise and rescue their New Universe line of comics. It redefined that fictional universe. Ordinarily, I'd say that one-shots should be incorporated into other articles, but not items with that significance. Doesn't Countdown to Infinite Crisis have its own article? I would, however, suggest merging The Pitt and The Draft (comics) into  an article on The Black Event. Doczilla 17:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Countdown does indeed have it's own article, I just checked. It doesn't seem to be too lengthy, and could be just merged into the Crisis article. One-shot lead-ins/tie-ins to events are important, but I don't think they are that important for a single article. RobJ1981 17:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you do feel it's necessary to get rid of one-shot articles, I'd take it one at a time instead of trying to paint them all with the same brush.  If a one-shot can be merged into a different article, then that would be a good idea.  But if a one-shot article can't easily be merged, then maybe it can remain on its own (or, if you absolutely must, you can put it up for AfD to see what others think). - Lex 19:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The Pitt should be merged into the New Universe article. I like the Pitt because I live in Pittsburgh, and it has a map of what part of the city is destroyed. Incidentally, I tagged this  article for the Pittsburgh WikiProject I started. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 07:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A question and comments on articles about one-shots

message: List of Phantom Zone villains - I was utterly shocked when I discovered this doesn't exist. (There is even an issue of DC Comics Presents - the last issue (#97), I believe - dedicated to it.) Anyone up for helping create it? - jc37 22:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure Phantom Zone doesn't cover the topic sufficiently? It seems to list many peope who were imprisoned in it. --HKMarks(T/C) 22:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even close. Particularly the from the Silver Age.  I guess I'll dig out some comics and start making a proto-list of characters, and issues. Help, of course, would be great : ) - jc37 02:53, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, consider putting it on the PZ page anyway, and incorporating it into the text.  There's a glut of lists and stubs, and too many little articles all spread out means none get the attention they deserve.  Good luck! :) --HKMarks(T/C) 04:40, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The PZ article leaves many out. I remember misty drawings of groups of villains, usually all male, in the Zone, almost none of whom are named in the article. A list makes sense. I agree that it should be part of the PZ article. The article's not so long that a separate list is required. Doczilla 05:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Phantom Zone villains

message: There is something strange going on with infobox's caption on this page. I've tried to edit to fix the problem -- good thing I have sense enough to preview before saving. I'm not good with code and I can't figure out what is wrong. Could somebody help? Stephen Day 02:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Looks like someone tried to make the image the same was a spot image is done. — J Greb 03:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Big Hero 6]] 

message: I just listed :Category:Marvel Comics mutants with superhuman strength for merging back into its parent categories, :Category:Marvel Comics characters with superhuman strength and :Category:Marvel Comics mutants; see CFD here.  I wonder though if :Category:Marvel Comics characters with superhuman strength and :Category:DC Comics characters with superhuman strength should not also be merged back into their respective parents, for similar reasons as I expressed in the CFD.  I think a fictional superstrength category is more useful if you can juxtapose how different companies have depicted the power (compare the Hulk with Superman), and "the category has a lot of entries" is not a good reason for subcategorizing; the size of the category only tells you when it's time to act upon a good reason for subcategorizing.  I believe this is the only superpower category that has been subdivided.  Postdlf 21:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With good reason. I would venture to say that the two most common "superhuman powers" are: Strength, and some sort of Invulnerability.  This is obviously because "fight scenes" are rather common in superhero comics, and you need the heroes (and villains) to be able to "dish it out" as well as "take it". I don't believe that we have an "invulnerability" category. If we did, it would likely be rather HUGE. And category size is a good reason for sub-categorisation, for "ease of use" reasons, for example. - jc37 22:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subcategorizing fictional characters by power categories 

message: The subcategories for this have gotten a little out of control; I just listed :Category:Great Lakes Avengers villains for deletion after finding it among the utter wreck at the bottom of Doctor Doom.  It's also a stretch to call Doctor Doom a "Moon Knight villain" or a "Punisher villain" (were Acts of Vengeance guest-spots really all that character-defining?)  We need to limit inclusion only to those villains who were particularly defined by their adversarial relationship with a particular hero/group; for Doctor Doom, for example, that only leaves the Fantastic Four.  Otherwise, it's bloated into :Category:Supervillains by heroes they fought at least once.  Thrilling.  Postdlf 21:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Damn right. Doczilla 21:25, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Supervillains by adversary]] 

message: Some people who don't like "Fictional character biography" keep changing it back to "Character biography" which (1) isn't what the comics exemplar calls for and (2) doesn't meet the Wikipedia Manual of Style that a character biography summary must be clearly identified as fiction. The word "character" does not have to mean fictional. That's why we say fictional character instead of just "character" in article after article. If you don't like it because you think it's redundant, that's fine, but bring it up on the exemplars talk page (as discussed earlier on this page) and the Manual of Style talk page instead of wasting your own time making those changes and creating work for other people (in which case you should show the courtesy to go back and clean up your own changes instead of leaving it for others to do). This issue is a matter of consensus and Wikipedia policy, not just individual taste, so anyone who wants to address it needs to do so at the higher level. Doczilla 21:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Opening sentence about the character being fictional doesn't suffice in order to fulfill what the Manual of Style says about how a character's biography section must itself be clearly identified as fictional. Doczilla 05:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, the next section after intro is "Publication history," so by the time an article reaches the bio section, it's down a ways. I'm thinking that encyclopedias should err on the side of making things super-clear. Doesn't hurt anything. --Tenebrae 05:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fictional character biography

message: As it stands Peanuts has the most votes, but a few are over a year old.  I don't really know the procedure here, but I'd suggest if you want a comic-related article to be the collab, go to WP:CMCC and cast your vote.  I'd say give it till the end of the day and whoever the winner is gets to be it.  Best to stay on top of these things. --PsyphicsΨΦ 23:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be the top candidate now, with the most recent votes, so I think it's fair to make it this month's collab. - Mike | Happy Thanksgiving 02:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collab of the month 

message: I've set up a system for assessing comics articles, as per the guidance given by the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment.  I've set up a page copied from what I suspect is a template at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Article Classification to detail the process, but briefly, to assess an article, paste one of the following onto the article's talk page in place of the WIkiProject banner: .
* - to rate an article at FA-Class
* - to rate an article at A-Class
* - to rate an article at GA-Class
* - to rate an article at B-Class
* - to rate an article at Start-Class
* - to rate an article at Stub-Class
* - to leave the article un-assessed.
A bot should then sort out the articles and make up the stats and the logs for us, if I have it set up right per the instructions at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot.  I think we're one of the last WikiProjects to get this set up, so maybe we need to work harder on this.  Also, anyone really hot with templates might be able to take a look at .  I figure we could set up  along similar lines to allow using that to tag articles for categorising in certain sub-cats of :Category:WikiProject Comics cleanup. Hiding Talk 00:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great to see you've created this Hiding! I was wondering why the comics project hadn't already gotten involved with assesments. - Mike | Trick or Treat 00:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, will do. - Mike | Trick or Treat 00:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been almost a week, should we start assessing yet? I'm free to do a bunch each day, as long as others help out. RobJ1981 00:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: People can start, yes, but I think it might also be wise to get discussion going on how we're tagging so that we get a consensus on what gets tagged as what.  Hiding Talk 13:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a cat class for comics categories? I didn't see it listed, so I wasn't sure. If there isn't one, one must be made. There is many comics categories that should be assessed as cat class, seeing as how other projects use cat class as well. RobJ1981 03:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please forgive my ignorance... but what is a cat class? — J Greb 04:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cat class is the shortened name for category class, which is the class put on the category talk pages to organize them. RobJ1981 19:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The categories are automatically added when you assess the article in the manner detailed.  Please don't put the articles in categories manually, this will disrupt the process.  A full explanation of the process can be found in the page linked to above, Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Article Classification. Hiding Talk 20:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comics article assessments 

message: Someone has made Marvel Movie Universe and Marvel Movie Universe Timeline articles.  At present these seem to be original research/unverifiable speculation.
In any case, they are nonsensical: are the X-Men films really firmly dateable to 2000, 2003 and 2006?  Particularly amusingly, the Marvel Movie Universe article itself notes the problems with continuity between the films, without noting that the most simple explanation is of course to assume they aren't set in the same universe.  Now, it's entirely possible there may be crossovers in future.
but yeah. anyway. Are these actually salvageable? Cos I don't want to send them to AFD unless i'm sure.  Morwen - Talk 12:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, they're junk. AFD away. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marvel Movie Universe 

message: Comic Genesis used to be Keenspace, the free comic hosting service. It's still free, it's still open to anyone, it's still analogous to Newgrounds, Livejournal, or Geocities.
I don't know if Keenspot should count for #3, but #3 was originally written with Keenspot in mind, back before the webcomic notability standards were merged into the web notability standards. No reason we can't change that, but we need to consciously change it if we're going to. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two separate issues here

message: As I understand it:
* We share "parent-project" status for anime and manga with WikiProjects: Films, Television, and Japan.
* There is a Wikipedia:WikiProject American Animation.
* There is not a WikiProject Animation.
Therefore I think it's fair to say:
* We share "parent-project" status for animation (in general) with Wikipedia:WikiProject Television, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Films.
Considering the "Peer review" system, and the article rating system being currently set up, I think that we should discuss this, due to several articles that could become confusing otherwise. 
Does anyone have any issues with the above? - jc37 22:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we look at all of those things: films based on comics and comics professionals. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 18:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I thought, too. It would seem we even look at articles which are "in format" similar to comics, such as cartoons/animations which have not been previously in comic format. - jc37 23:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProjects

message: (This is only partially an extension of the WikiProjects thread above.)
There are a fair number of lists (and perhaps articles with lists within them) that say "...in fiction", but are rather obviously "...in comics" (especially if we add catoons/animations).
Considering that it looks like we're going to need to eventually list/review all the comics-related articles, this probably needs clarifying.
I would like to see the following:
*All comics (with cartoons/animation) related lists/articles be renamed to "...in comics and animation". (Compare to the standard for "in computer and video games".) I think that there are going to be few (perhaps none at all) cases where a comics-related list won't be inclusive of animation as well. Though I can see where a split could be useful for long lists to "...in comics", and "...in animation".
*Truely "in fiction" articles that have an "in comics" section, could have the comics section split to it's own list with the  template used in replacement on the "in fiction" list.
I'll start attempting to compile a list of such lists/articles, any help would be welcome. In the meantime, I would appreciate comments from everyone on the WikiProject, to see if we can determine consensus about this. - jc37 22:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Sounds a good idea. Hiding Talk 11:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "...in fiction" vs. "...in comics"