Talk:Goats (webcomic)

message: Is everyone happy with the rough structure that I've plotted out here? Please suggest any changes that you think are more effective, I am aware that the current structure is comprehensive but possibly unwieldy. Snipergirl 15:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fine. This is naturally difficult to organize, what with the changes in the comic's format, etc. Your solution to the problem seems best. --Michael Kinyon 16:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Structure

message: If the planned Fleen section is going to be brief, it might make more sense to put it over in Jonathan Rosenberg. If it is going to be comparable in length to Websnark, then it probably deserves its own article. I'd do either of these myself, but I'm not sure what's planned for the section. --Michael Kinyon 19:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm. Yeah, good point. I'll move it over to Jonathan Rosenberg, and start a new page on it as well. The "fleen" section would just be in regards to Jon starting it up, etc. The "fleen" page I guess would be more like "websnark". Snipergirl 03:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fleen section

message: Under the business model heading there is this line
"As a "pioneer" of sorts in the web-comics industry, Rosenberg once experimented with micropayments, and produced strong evidence that no business model involving them as a primary source of income could be feasible."
Which seems to state the situation a little strongly.  Rosenberg did one thing to experiment with micropayments and it didn't work.  That hardly qualifies as "strong evidence that no business model" with micropayments could work.  If anything it was "strong evidence" that micropayments aren't going to work for Goats.  It doesn't really prove anything else.  As such, I think I'm going to go ahead and edit that bit.71.217.233.41 (talk) 01:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Micropayments

message: I don't want to be the guy that says humor isn't allowed (I don't see why it shouldn't be), but in some cases it gets a little bit much, and truly keeps the article from being encyclopedic.
For example:
:"Staropramen:    Arch-nemesis of the International League of Pedants. Poops a lot. Super-villain. "
I don't want the humor to leave the article, but can we at least have grammatically correct sentences?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 06:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone 

message: goats.com appears to have disappeared, for all intents and purposes - the front page and the couple of archive pages I checked simply state that "Goats is dead! Long live Goats."
So much of the article can be changed from the present to the past, and links either removed or changed to archive/cache links. -- pne (talk) 07:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The sources will probably need to be archived, but Goats isn't exactly dead but sleeping, there was a Kickstarter a while ago and the intention is to re-launch Goats. Unless there's new information it should be kept in the present tense.. Яehevkor ✉ 17:50, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

text: goats.com now redirects to amultiverse.com but the archives are inaccessible. I updated the references to point to the wayback machine.   (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

text: More than four years "on hiatus", and more than two years after the kickstarter: it is time to change this comic's status to 'abandoned'. Just waiting for Jon to admit it. --  (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: When he admits it we can change the article, sure. Яehevkor ✉ 20:06, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gone 

message: A large part of this article is not very helpful for people who have not followed the comic for years on end. I guess the page will get a lot more attention when Jon relaunches goats. Is anybody interested in a collaboration to rewrite it? Maybe something along the lines of the Gunnerkrigg Court article, while keeping the humor:
*format
*plot/synopsis
**setting
**plot
**characters
*critical reception
Thoughts? --  (talk) 21:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-write?