Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Webcomics/Archive 3

message: This section seems to me to be ignoring the massive number of deleted articles listed lower down.  How many of these would pass the website inclusion guidelines?  brenneman{T}{L}  00:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are five Keenspot strips on the list: Andiewear, Everything Jake, Help Desk, Hound's Home, and Lost & Found. The rest would need to be justified individually. Nifboy 02:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the section header to "Articles we don't have" -- that's at least factual, while "need" was debatable. I think a short note on why we might need each article might make this section more useful (such as Nifboy started to provide for a few above). Although if we're going to go to the trouble to explain why individual webcomics ought to have encyclopedia articles then we might just as well create stub articles on them. Or redirects to the Keenspot article or something. Not that I think every comic on Keenspot ought to have an article -- there have been some pretty unexceptional comics on Keenspot over the years. -- Dragonfiend 02:40, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We've never hashed out the question of Keenspot with regard to inclusion criterion, either.  While I'd shy away from making any further "notes" on wp:web, I do think that this deserves more examination. - brenneman{T}{L}  03:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For me, Keenspot is generally "good enough" for inclusion. The general concensus seemed to be that it was a huge step towards notability even if it wasn't guaranteed. The absolute worst Keenspot strip is Look what I Brought Home, one of Keenspot's earliest members, and I'm still on the fence on that. Nifboy 04:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: *It's stretching a long ways back in my memory here, but have we tried laying the existing guidelines next to the keenspot list?  I thought (as I intimated above) that we'd found in most cases there did exist some outside chatter about the comic?  Having a non-trivial print run seemed to be common, if I recall correctly... brenneman{T}{L}  04:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not Keenspot specifically, no. The sample list had a few Keenspot strips that also passed because of other criteria. I know at one point or another I (incorrectly) cited Elf Only Inn as the absolute low point for Keenspot strips, and inferred that if that was going to stay then the vast majority of Keenspot also stays. Nifboy 05:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Articles we need" on the main page 

message: Should we categorize by country? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 03:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Comixpedia does it, but I don't think it's very effective. Also note Megatokyo. Nifboy 04:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Webcomics of Ukraine]] 

message: I wanted to get some feedback from the WikiProject over an edit war at Tim Buckley (artist).  It stems over a Criticism section that was added to the article a month or so ago.  Take a look at the talk page and you'll see that the discussion has gotten fairly heated.  In response, I temporarily axed the criticism section, protected the article, then asked the participants to hammer together something that actually complied with WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and WP:NPA.  I'd like more eyes on this one, but before taking it to higher levels, I wanted to shop here first.  If you look in the article's history, you'll be able to see the criticism section in its various incarnation.  Thanks.  –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 01:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tim Buckley (artist) protected; requesting comments 

message: Do we really need this?  I never remember to update it when I add :Category:Concluded webcomics to an article, and the list itself contains no more information than the category does.  –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 22:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Delete per nom. Nifboy 22:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hah! –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 22:40, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, yeah I think it would be good to keep. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 13:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, so how is it different from the category?  I noticed there's one redlink in it, but if it's to be used as a list for comics we don't have articles for, the question of verifiability and maintainability is bound to come up. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 13:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of concluded webcomics]] 

message: Sorry for clogging the page with AfDs and PRODs.  I know it's out of character for me to be nominating so many, but last week I went digging for lost sheep, and boy did I find a lot of them.  Some were so far away from meeting the big three content guidelines that even I couldn't justify keeping them.  I've been nominating just a few a day, to avoid causing a backlash, but it looks like they've snowballed anyway. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 23:44, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concerning the recent spate of deletion nominations 

message: User:Someguy0830 made some format changes to the Infobox, so you might want to take a look at it.  I kinda wish he'd mentioned it here first, but personally, I like it.  It's more compact and handles ginormous URLs better.  There is one gotcha, though.  Because of the way the url field renders now, unless it has a single bare URL (e.g., http://foo.com/), it doesn't look right.  For example, if you were to put two sites in the url field or if you added a comment about the site's availability, it looks a little messed up.  Just try it and you'll see what I mean.  I don't know enough about templates to fix it, so I've been moving URL comments to the article text and for sites with two URLs, I just move them out of the infobox and put them in an external links section.  That may be best practice anyway. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 13:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted it and made some improvements. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 13:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New look for [[Template:Infobox Webcomic]] 

message: There's a proposal on Talk:list of webcomics#External Links to remove the external links for each webcomic entry.  They were actually removed yesterday, but I reverted it back to the old format as I didn't feel there was sufficient consensus to make the change.  Your input would be much appreciated. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 11:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links in [[list of webcomics]] 

message: Evil, Inc. really should not be a disambig page, and Evil, Inc. (Hardy Boys) should be moved back to it's original location.  I personally don't like disambig pages with 2 links in them (everyone has to use an extra click), and much prefer something like:
:This article is about the Hardy Boys novel, for the webcomic see Evil, Inc. (webcomic)
Although the webcomic being a redlink, I wouldn't even like to see it there.  Still, the dab page is pretty useless.  I've not taken this to WP:RM as I can't stand some of the pencil pushing bureaucracy and process there.  So if others agree, can some admin just move the pages back? - Hahnchen 08:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the admin who regularily takes care of WP:RM, I'm slightly offended by the accusation of pencil-pushing... —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 14:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Evil, Inc.]] 

message: Do any of you guys here think that it would be a good idea to merge these two articles into the Keenspot article?  I mean, the Keenspot article isn't particulary long, and the 2 other articles are pretty short.  And they're all closely inter-related anyway, I just think it'd be easier to navigate, having KeenCAST redirect to Keenspot wouldn't exactly throw off the reader.  I'm not going to make the changes in case I'm accused of deleting them on the sly, but if you like it, roll with it. - Hahnchen 02:30, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Keen Toons]] and [[KeenCAST]] 

message: Anyone have thoughts on adding OS-tan to our portfolio?  I don't think it belongs on the list or should have an infobox, but I've considered adding our banner.  Though it clearly involves sequential art, it's one of those rare phenomena that likely would have remained unknown to English speakers had it never received a Wikipedia article.  That makes me a little hesitant to cover it without buy-in. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 12:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[OS-tan]]? 

message: There's a fellow with a very odd theory concerning the characters of Count Your Sheep.  I'm extremely sleep-deprived, which is allowing me to assume good faith and call it original research rather than vandalism, but it's not really something we can keep in the article.   –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 06:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heads up at [[Count Your Sheep]] 

message: I recently made an attempt to redirect Eve (Applegeeks) into the main Applegeeks article.  It was quickly reverted, however, so I am bringing the matter up for discussion on Applegeeks here.  I'd like your input.  –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 12:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Eve (Applegeeks)]] --> [[Applegeeks]] ?