Talk:Alan Moore/Archive 1

message: Surely there's a photo that doesn't look quite so much like Ian Anderson on a bad day...?
Have you ever seen the pictures of himself that he puts on the books?  I don't think Alan Moore is really that interested in looking like GQ cover.
Also, on the topic of David J, you should change that he is an "ex-member" of Bauhaus, as they (David and all of the original members) are currently on tour.
There's a picture fo him that looks a little more appealing, walking on a street with a cane. Kidney Stone 12:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The current photo does look a bit old. I'd be in favour of replacing it with a more up-to-date one. Also, there is a pretty cool picture of Alan Moore by Bryan Talbot here . Maybe it could be included if the copyright status could be worked out. It's a parody of the famous Allister Crowley picture so it fits in nicely with the stuff about Moore's belief in magic. Iron Ghost 00:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: In response to the denial of featured article status, I've added some references and put more detail into the bibliography. There's not, as far as I know, a great body of critical writing about comics, so most of the information about his work comes from reading the comics themselves. In which case, publication details of the comics will have to be the bulk of our references. --Nicknack009 23:16, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  References and stuff 

message: Someone added Category:Anarchist.  Can anyone back this up? Marc Mywords 07:28, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Alan Moore can.  Sarge Baldy 00:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anarchist? 

message: I seem to remember reading a number of rather odd pieces by Moore in which he refers to various occult practices he has performed. The article doesn't seem to cover this aspect of his life. Does anyone know anything about it? Leithp (talk) 14:44, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: He sure as hell is. His album The Highbury Working is all about performance of a ritual. A "working" is a magical ritual. Semiconscious 07:41, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Occult 

message: I note no mention in the "early work" section of the 1970s "St Pancras Panda" series, written and illustrated by Moore for Oxfords's Back Street Bugle magazine. In its thirteen episodes, our cuddly hero was, in his own words, "shanghied by furriers, kidnapped by cultists, browbeaten by bears, got at by gangsters, abducted by aliens" before getting a dose of relgion and being sent to meet his maker. Alas the series was never completed - Moore was offered work that paid actual money - and the eponymous panda was thus abandonned over 25 years ago in "Northampton - an accident black spot - where there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth". The "Penultimate Panda, Panky's Inferno" never appeared. Nick Levine 19:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  St Pancras Panda? 

message: According to WP:EL external links are there to add authoritative data 
* Alan Moore Portal
* LOEG review and artwork
* Transcript of an interview with Alan Moore on BBC Radio 4
* A flash-animated version of Moore's 'March of the Sinister Ducks'
* Interview with Alan Moore from The Onion, October 2001
* [] Comic Book Awards Almanac
* Alan Moore Magic Site
It seems to me that a lot of the above are personal fansites which are not authoritative.  I'd like to ensure that we keep below the Spam Event Horizon here. - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 17:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The interview transcript is on Comic Book Resources, which isn't really a fansite. Personally I found it extremely interesting when I heard it, and since there are other links to Comic Book Resources articles in the Notes and External Links section, I think that that one, at least, is relevant enough to be restored. I'll do so. Of course, if anyone refers to it for anything in the article, be sure to move it to the References section! :) --Nick RTalk 10:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Is the work 'bibliography' appropriate to describe Moores books, audio recordings, and films?  I guess I thought 'bibliography' was somewhat specific to books.  Would it make sense to title this section 'creative works' or 'published creative works'? ike9898 19:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see this diff to compared my proposed re-organization to what was there. Feel free to modify. ike9898 21:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography? 

message: This article now has lots of references, which is an improvement, but in most cases there is nothing to show which statements are supported by which references.  Anything you can improve along these lines will help push the article towards FA quality. ike9898 15:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: To be a magician needn't there be results of one's magic? Otherwise he would be a fumbling magician (joking). Is being a magician considered a matter of faith, as in "a practicing christian" for instance? I would propose to remove it or give it the correct name. Thoughts? Rigmarole 15:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there need be only the practice of the magic, not the results. Moore does engage in magical rites, so he is a practicing magician. Jessnevins 10:55, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A practicing magician? 

message: From what I can tell, Moore was joking when he said that he worshipped Glycon. Does anyone disagree? I want to rewrite it so that it is more apparent that he was joking. - Xtreme680 17:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not clear whether he was joking or not. The current wording says only that he claimed to have worshiped Glycon, which is true. I vote to leave it as it is. Iron Ghost 22:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He's not joking.  Here's a page which has gathered together a couple of responses on the subject from various interviews.  It's clear he's treating the subject with some humour, but it's not a gag.--Nalvage 15:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I stand corrected. Thanks, good thing I checked first. - Xtreme680 21:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glycon 

message: The article originally included the phrase, "Moore has also stated that he wishes his name to be "Alan Smitheed" from comic work that he does not own".  Clearly the writer of this meant to use Smithee's name as a verb, hence the inverted commas and the sentence structure, but people keep assuming it's a typo and changing it to "Alan Smithee" which then makes no grammatical sense.  So I've changed it to "removed".  Hope that's okay by everyone.--Nalvage 12:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw that and think it's a great move. I am going to find a place to put a link to Alan Smithee in there somewhere, just to please everyone. --Chris Griswold 00:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alan Smitheed 

message: Could someone detail his graphic novel The Lost Girls? There doesn't seem to be any mention here. I would, but I've only heard of it from one news story. Peace. JayW 16:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's mentioned briefly under "The independent period", and has its own article at Lost Girls. Probably deserves a bit more notice here. --Nicknack009 18:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a very brief section under 'Major Works' - if the picture stays it probably needs another paragraph adding to it so the formatting isn't all wonky, but I was wary of repeating information that's in the main Lost Girls article. Since I live in the UK and therefore haven't read it yet, I'm a bit stuck on what else to add. I'd be grateful if someone else could expand a bit so this section is inkeeping with the other titles listed under 'major works' Curiousbadger 15:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: * I think you summed it up nicely.  I might add another line.  Definitely worth reading for older and demanding comic fans  I think Moore was being deliberately provocative in categorizing it as pornography.  I believe it was seized by Australian customs at one stage.  This should be the model for the other major works summations.  Fred.e 15:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Lost Girls 

message: "including the acclaimed graphic novels, Watchmen, V for Vendetta and From Hell". But Alan Moore hates the term graphic novel and considers his work to be mainly just usual comics, as he has stated that he considers that graphic novels is just an unnecesary term for "expensive comics". Should it be changed here?
:changed to what, "expensive comics"?  I don't think it should be changed at all, as the term is widely used and recognised, regardless of what he thinks of it. --duncan 07:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that the issue is he hasn't produced a lot of graphic novels - he has done a lot of comic work that has been collected together as trade paperbacks, something I've tried to show in his bibliography. As he is  a fan of Bryan Talbot's work I suspect he is contrasting his own output with things like Luther Arkwright. The only true graphic novels I can think of are A Small Killing, The 49ers and probably Lost Girls. If the wording is going to be changed then graphic novels could be changed to "trades" or just "comic books" or "limited series". Then again it might be nitpicking as most people would understand when you call Watchmen a graphic novel but that is the angle I suspect he is coming from. (Emperor 00:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I disagree. "sort of graphic work that could conceivably be described as a novel" refers to a work that is comparable to a novel in terms of length, scope and artistic unity, not simply something that was first published in book format rather than pamphlet format. The only comics I own that I would consider comparable to novels are Watchmen, From Hell, Luther Arkwright and Cages, all of which were serialised before being published in a single volume (as were all Dickens's novels, and we don't call them "limited series"), and possibly the entire series of Sandman, which is a single work published in several volumes, like many Victorian novels, and Lord of the Rings. A Small Killing is probably too short to be a true novel, as is The Forty-Niners which is also an installment of a series rather than a unified work (this is not a judgement of quality, just a personal judgment of whether they're comparable to novels - I like 'em both, and admire a lot of comics, from Tintin to the Desert Peach, that aren't novelistic at all, and are no worse for that). "Trade paperback" is jargon and shouldn't be used in a work for the general reader - it's a wholesaling term and just means an oversized paperback book, regardless of content. --Nicknack009 08:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a tough call. I agree that the term "trade paperback" should not be used. I would be happy with either "graphic novel" or "limited series". Although, there is more agreement to the precise meaning of the term "limited series" and therefore it might be slightly preferable. --Iron Ghost 13:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphic Novels 

message: As editors have no doubt noticed when they edit this piece, it's much longer than Wikipedia guidelines suggest an article should be.  There are reasons for these guidelines; a too-long piece is both hard to read and hard to edit as a whole.
One easy way to cut is to make the summaries of his major works much shorter; these works all have lengthy articles of their own, and people who are interested can follow those links if they like.  As it is, we sort of have two articles on Watchmen, From Hell, etc., which is not an ideal arrangement of information. Just a thought. Nareek 19:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These works already do have their own extensive pages--there's no need to go on at such length about them here. Nareek 19:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Would anyone protest if I simply moved the entire section "Major Works" into a seperate article, "Major Works of Alan Moore"?  I think it disrupt the article to have the major works described twice, once in the historical part, and then again in its own part.  And as mentioned above, each of the major works have their own extensive articles, which will still be listed from the historical part.--Per Abrahamsen 05:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can I suggest you summarise it instead. I'm sure if people (like me) want a complete list they use an external link.Fred.e 15:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

text: It is already a summary.  If it is condenced further, it is even harder to justify over the the history section, which also mentions his major works.  It is not a complete list in any case, the complete list can presumably be found in List of published material by Alan Moore.--Per Abrahamsen 16:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a merge of the major work list and individual sections into a discussion of their commercial and critical success and their influence as a whole is what the bio article needs. I'll have a go and post it here.  --Fred.e 19:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too long 

message: I moved some sentences about his other works out of the lead section. As per WP:LEAD, the lead section of the article should attempt to summarize the article. Too much emphasis was given to these other works by putting them in the lead section, hence the move. The lead section could still stand some rewriting — it's fairly small considering the over-the-suggested-limit size of the article. However, I couldn't think of a clever, concise way to introduce, for example, his disputes with the major comic book companies into the lead section. So, I'll leave it to someone else. --GentlemanGhost 01:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section 

message: Not a bad article at all.  Needs a free license image and could stand some more references in the works section is all. Hiding Talk 22:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment 

message: This is one of the best articles on Wikipedia. Do not seek to reduce it further. The length is quite fine!
--Gautam3 03:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great Work! 

message: This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it.  Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed.  I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy.  In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright.  If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally.  Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 07:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube links 

message: How in what style does Alan Moore write?
Tgunn2 01:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writing style 

message: ... Is what the article could nearly be!  This is roughly a Biography not a review of works. Extensive discussion is on the pages about those works.  I don't think it should be the end result of chat room type discussions about tiny details.  One needs to take a step back and read the style manuals and guides before including reams of information.  Try thinking about what first hooked you and others on him.  People will probably be wanting to know who he is or a bit more about his work or life. Most people are not going to plough through this article other than those who are already fans.  And there is no end of newsgroups.  I have nearly everthing he has done (confessed completist) but trying to be objective to make this a feature article.  This helped me on another article i wrote, anyway.  Great there are so many interested editors Fred.e 22:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concise and informative 

message: I don't believe for one second that Alan Moore is a polygamist. I guess the basis is that he and his ex-wife had a female lover, but that's not the same thing as polygamy.
One of the things that I love about Alan Moore is that he's such a feminist. Someone should change this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.29.211.18 (talk • contribs).
===Rewrite===
I removed this.  It is not appropiate to include in a bio of a living person.  'V for...' picture is in twice.  Suppose sommeone will argue they need to stay as well as having its own article.  Suggest that this be renamed to Alan Moore data dump.  Can we have an article that people would want read, esp. if they know nothing about or little about him.  Drop me a note if you want to form a editing co-op to improve this to a good article then feature.  Fred.e 18:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All articles on remotely geeky subjects risk becoming data dumps. It's inherent in the wiki that there's no sense of selection, and many comics fans are information hoarders by nature. I haven't worked on this article for ages, and I'm dismayed that a helpful paragraph in the intro detailing his influences has been removed and replaced by meaningless hyperbole ("His works have helped to revolutionise the comic industry and are widely held to be some of the greatest comics ever written"). I believe the main reason Moore, and others like Morrison and Gaiman who followed him, were such a breath of fresh air in comics was that they were much more widely read than most comics writers and brought a wider variety of influences to their work. This is is a medium where Garth Ennis, influenced by John Wayne and Clint Eastwood movies, is regarded as bringing something fresh to the mix. Ithink the bit about his influences should be restored (and refs found, which shouldn't be hard) and most of the material in the "Major works" sections should be hived off into their own articles. Then we can look at the article as it stands and see what's significant and what's not. With a bit of effort we could turn this into a really good article - but I guarantee you in a couple of months' time it'll be a data dump again. --Nicknack009 00:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've given the article a pretty throrough rewrite, removing redundancies and trimming the style a bit, and brought it down from 53K to 35K. I've also moved the adaptations list from here to the List of published material by Alan Moore article, as it seems a bit silly for the main article to contain a bibliography of adaptations but not of his own work. I'm going to be retrieving some of the material cut from the "major works" section from the history and incorporating it into those works' own articles. --Nicknack009 02:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polygamy 

message: I removed this.  It is not appropiate to include in a bio of a living person.  'V for...' picture is in twice.  Suppose sommeone will argue they need to stay as well as having its own article.  Suggest that this be renamed to Alan Moore data dump.  Can we have an article that people would want read, esp. if they know nothing about or little about him.  Drop me a note if you want to form a editing co-op to improve this to a good article then feature.  Fred.e 18:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All articles on remotely geeky subjects risk becoming data dumps. It's inherent in the wiki that there's no sense of selection, and many comics fans are information hoarders by nature. I haven't worked on this article for ages, and I'm dismayed that a helpful paragraph in the intro detailing his influences has been removed and replaced by meaningless hyperbole ("His works have helped to revolutionise the comic industry and are widely held to be some of the greatest comics ever written"). I believe the main reason Moore, and others like Morrison and Gaiman who followed him, were such a breath of fresh air in comics was that they were much more widely read than most comics writers and brought a wider variety of influences to their work. This is is a medium where Garth Ennis, influenced by John Wayne and Clint Eastwood movies, is regarded as bringing something fresh to the mix. Ithink the bit about his influences should be restored (and refs found, which shouldn't be hard) and most of the material in the "Major works" sections should be hived off into their own articles. Then we can look at the article as it stands and see what's significant and what's not. With a bit of effort we could turn this into a really good article - but I guarantee you in a couple of months' time it'll be a data dump again. --Nicknack009 00:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've given the article a pretty throrough rewrite, removing redundancies and trimming the style a bit, and brought it down from 53K to 35K. I've also moved the adaptations list from here to the List of published material by Alan Moore article, as it seems a bit silly for the main article to contain a bibliography of adaptations but not of his own work. I'm going to be retrieving some of the material cut from the "major works" section from the history and incorporating it into those works' own articles. --Nicknack009 02:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: I just recently added the detail that Melinda Gebbie is Moore's fiancée, based on the article and interview in the August 23, 2006 Village Voice, but I then scrolled further down and saw that it asserts that she's his wife.  Have they gotten married within the past two and a half months?  Can anyone confirm what their marital status is with a source?  Thanks. Nightscream 11:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are married. It's not an RS, but Neil Gaiman blogged about the wedding in about... October? September? As it's fairly non-controversial, I'll find some coverage and post it. ThuranX (talk) 14:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

text: One: Our own page on her: Melinda_Gebbie. Two, this which cites  NG's blog. Finally, Half way down the first page 'married earlier this year], article written 2007. ThuranX (talk) 14:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Gaiman's blog would be reliable enough for this if you asked me, but the extra one's don't hurt. Gaiman is in his sphere of expertise and his views are published in reliable publications. Hiding T  16:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factural accuracy: Marital Status 

message: Can we have some discussion about the second paragraph of the introduction?  It's my opinion that the whole thing should be removed, influences should be listed under influences in the photo box.  The actual content of this paragraph other than the list of influences almost non-existent, I believe it pushes the actual valuable content further down the page.  Look up almost any author on Wikipedia; you won't normally find a list of influences in the second paragraph.  I think that it's symptomatic of a comics "community" craving acceptance by readers of non illustrated literature and I for one think it's time to admit that that acceptance is already there when someone arrives at this page; what's important is to and present some good encycopedic content.
:I disagree very strongly. Any artist's influences are important and should not be neglected. Specifically in Moore's case, a large part of the impact he made was down to him having a wider range of influences than the average comics writer in the early 80s. Along with the likes of Bryan Talbot and Grant Morrison, he is part of a movement that stems from the New Wave science fiction writers of the 60s and 70s. To include his influences is to place his work in context and tell the reader something about his work. To ignore them and treat him in isolation is uninformative and risks becoming a cult of personality. Such an approach is sadly not uncommon - the article on Bill Sienkiewicz mentions his influence on other artists, but not that he was influenced by artists like Neal Adams, Barron Storey and Ralph Steadman, and Glenn Fabry's article doesn't mention the influence of Moebius or Gustave Courbet, but they should, and if I can find appropriate references they will. --Nicknack009 22:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well what you have written makes more sense and reads better than what is there.  I think that phrases like "a large part of the impact he made was down to him having a wider range of influences than the average comics writer in the early 80s. Along with the likes of Bryan Talbot and Grant Morrison, he is part of a movement that stems from the New Wave science fiction writers of the 60s and 70s."  Should be in the article but the list itself should be moved to the list of influences in the data box or whatever it's called under his photo on the right. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.20.47.30 (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: ::Can somebody please cite a reason as to why he is included in the comic strip cartoonists? To the extent of my knowledge, that is a misrepresentation of what he does. Comic books are generally not the same as comic strips, though they might have at one time been quite similar. Unless of course, he actually has done comic strip writing before, in which case I withdraw my statement. But I'd like a reason. Jjmckool 07:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at the "early work" section you'll see he started out drawing comic strips for British music magazines and a local newspaper. --Nicknack009 16:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Gotcha, I lays my head down in defeat. Didn't read the whole article, my bad. Jjmckool 23:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comic Strip Cartoonists 

message: After taking a look at the article, as well as its many failed FA candidacies, I think that the same issues raised in the FA reviews might bar the article from GA status.  The article was promoted to GA status about a year and a half ago, but the GA criteria have changed dramatically since then (in fact I think there were no criteria at all in Jan 2006).  The main problems as far as I see them, are that many of the fair-use images either lack a rationale or don't give it's source.  There are also many sections that are under referenced or not referenced at all.  That is in addition to some of the other points brought up in the FA reviews.  I wanted to bring this up here to give editors and contributors a chance to work on the article and hopefully improve it based on the GA criteria.  Otherwise, I'll nominate the article for GA review soon. Drewcifer3000 05:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've hidden the images lacking rationales.  To be honest, I'm not sure we need as many as we have. Beyond that, I agree that there are problems with this article.  Some kind of outside review might not go amiss. --Mark H Wilkinson (t, c) 08:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA status 

message: I added a link to an interview regarding his anarchist leanings.  I will add a politics section sometime in the next week.  ;)
veganbikepunk  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veganbikepunk (talk • contribs) 21:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics 

message: Things that might be useful include:
*Interview with the Daily Telegraph
*Ragnarok - his first film
Picked them up via Lying in the Gutters and thought they could come in handy. (Emperor 02:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another - an interview about anarchy. (Emperor 14:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bits and bobs 

message: I'm removing this template from all its articles:
Which, I agree, is fairly provocative. However, I don't see how "V for Vendetta" deserves this on its own, or what useful information it provides. Surely the links in the articles are sufficient? If people want to revert my changes, that's fine by me. But please reply to this post so we can get a discussion started. At the moment I see no reason why the template should exist. Maccy69 13:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We are discussing comic-specific categories on the Comics Project talk page  and the suggestion is to make them into such navboxes and this would include the V for Vendetta one. (Emperor 17:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I've reverted my previous edit and requested a template deletion instead, see below. Maccy69 17:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  V for Vendetta Template 

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Maccy69 17:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of [[:Template:{{ucfirst:V for Vendetta}}]] 

message: Hello. Although the EL removal looked extreme, I thought it is warranted. Please see discussion below.
# Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article.
* Alan Moore on split from DC/V for Vendetta
* Roger Whitson writes on Alan Moore's relationship with William Blake in Watchmen
* "To Hell with Alan Moore" an overview of movies based on the works of Alan Moore
* Alan Moore speaks to his personal politics with Strangers In A Tangled Wilderness
* Index of interviews
* Alan Moore interviewed on Get Fresh (YouTube clip)
Although I think the sites above have good content, they could be used as references to imporve the article, but not as an EL.
# Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services.
* America's Best Comics
* Alan Moore on Marvel.com
* 4ColorHeroes Moore For Free
Even if the idea is to send the reader to the way of content, there is many more links that could be used here for his past work... in this case maybe it would be better to use a DMOZ tag. Thoughts?
--Legionarius (talk) 18:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The clause "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article" under "Links normally to be avoided" does not give you licence to remove almost any link, as you appear to believe. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a collection of all knowledge on a given subject, so your interpretation of this clause is incorrect. Most of the links given are interviews with Moore, and no matter how good or how comprehensive this article got, the words of the man himself would be a resource beyond what the article could provide. --Nicknack009 (talk) 21:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links removal rationale 

message: Any particular reason why Mr Moore's details appear to be in the "writer" infobox rather than the "comics creator" one..? ntnon (talk) 03:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: I have removed a surname from this section as I do not believe these details should be published on the internet without that person's consent. I appreciate the information has been widely available for some years, and still is available quite easily, but I do not think that it is something that should be included on a Wikipedia entry without that person's consent. Its seems prurient and tabloidy to me.
I am Mr Moore's daughter, and I know that all parties involved have now got different partners, and apart from my father, they have normal day jobs too. 
I would appreciate it if my deleting this name was respected, and it not be replaced in the text. 
--Leah Moore (talk) 14:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography and personal life 

message: Hello, I have in my possession two posters that Alan Moore produced to support social causes - one is from the early 1980s and one is from the year 2007. Would they be helpful additions to the article? (I can scan them). --Killerofcruft (talk) 18:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Bonemorrow (talk) 04:29, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alan Moore Artwork 

message: I'm going to request a bit of assistance on this one, since I'm busy on multiple projects.  I'm going to try to pull together a "Philosophy" section – perhaps a subsection of his biography, although we may have enough for a whole section onto itself, as he has been interviewed about it often.  This is for any of his spiritual, political, and philosophical positions.  Anything regarding religion, sexuality, aesthetics, environmentalism, anarchism, and anything you can think of.  I'll try to write it up in a few days and continue as we go.--Cast (talk) 03:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: no matter what his views are, this page really doesn't belong in "WikiProject Philosophy", which is where it is now, strangely.70.55.55.235 (talk) 00:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this is appropriate.  Take a look at the banner.  Mr. Moore is listed under the WP Philosophy "Anarchist Task Force", due to his anarchist philosophy.  The task force isn't just focused on articles explaining anarchist philosophy, but also on anarchist biographies.  Alan Moore has repeatedly expressed his anarchist views in interviews, and used them as the basis for V for Vendetta.  He has also used his philosophical views as the basis for other books, such as his exploration of ethics in Watchmen, the sex-positive perspective in Lost Girls, and also his environmentalist and anti-nuclear approach to Swamp Thing.  The Philosophy banner is appropriate for this article; we just need to create a philosophy section for it.--Cast (talk) 01:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You might be able to get something associated with this from - see, for example, the section above - his work/support/posters for various charities. A Northampton Council Housing one was a recent instance, which surely implies a philosophical position akin to socialism... (Or something.) ntnon (talk) 02:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestions, and I'll look into them, but so we're clear, I don't want to make any leaps and state he has positions based on implication.  I want quotes where he lays out his personal opinions in notable interviews.--Cast (talk) 04:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course. I would suspect this instance would have been covered in a local paper, but I'm sure I recall mention in another interview, too. I'll try and have a look later on for you. Are you working on the section online, offline or 'later on'..? ntnon (talk) 03:13, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to work on it on the actual article space, as working from a sandbox can limit the amount of input generated from browsing users, and working on it offline always leaves the possibility that it may be lost.  By editing-as-I-go I can at least avoid losing my updates, even if it will increase the article history menu exponentially (I have a habit of constantly having to correct myself, or second guessing edits, causing relatively small changes to take place over the course of a dozen even smaller edits.)  I would like to just compile as many links to online sources on a small list right here, on this section of the talk page.  All the same, I'm not editing the article right now, as I'm taking a break from my usual wiki-projects, like the anarchism task force, and by extension, this anarchist biography.  I'll get to it in time, but you may feel free to begin editing it as you wish.  I'll put a few source links down right now.  (Note, this isn't an attempt at "source solicitation".  I just can't think of a better place to put such a list.  Seems appropriate for it to be here, anyway.) --Cast (talk) 06:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philosophy 

message: This was flagged as one of our highest importance articles without a B-class assessment. I've looked it over and it still needs more references (a couple of sections only one or two when there are other statements, especially ones about motivation and disputes). I've tagged the major points and will leave off doing an assessment for the time being as it looks like they might be around in other references on the page or on the relevant articles.
I am also still concerned about the use of Lying in the Gutters (see above discussion), especially as the whole section on the LXG lawsuit is currently only supported by them. Looking through Cast of Characters vs. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen lawsuit it is clear there are other sources that can be used for this. (Emperor (talk) 21:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Also addressing those points will also set the article up well for a push on to GA (which will involve a polish and denser referencing, so if you can reference anything not tagged and not currently referenced then do so. (Emperor (talk) 22:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comics Project B-class asssessment 

message: Where did he receive his education? 63.76.234.250 (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education?