Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:43, 9 September 2013

This WikiProject was featured on the WikiProject report at the Signpost on 27 June 2011

Archives

Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Comics/Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/WikiProject used

Nomination of Spider-Man (set index) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spider-Man (set index) is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Spider-Man (set index) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

GAR notification

Calvin and Hobbes, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

Name change

If a character has a name change after more than 20 years of appearances under one name, I am questioning if this is the best way to handle it in an article. 50.151.230.203 (talk) 17:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Tintin

I respectfully propose a new workgroup: Tintin. I am new to the WikiProject Comics but not new to Misplaced Pages Tintin articles and Franco-Belgian comics articles, which I have been editing in collaboration with other fine editors for a few years. The long-range plan is Featured Topic Tintin containing multiple Featured Articles, including the main article, the list articles, the book articles, and the character articles. Perhaps by formalising a workgroup, more qualified editors can join in. I humbly request your suggestions and support. —Prhartcom (talk) 14:30, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Two weeks later ... the sound of crickets. Ah well. —Prhartcom (talk) 04:24, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

proposal to split navboxes

The navboxes for comics are way too big and difficult to navigate through (which is the point of a navbox). Mainly I see large cast of characters and fictional groups mixed with media. I propose splitting the characters/groups apart from the media so it can be easier to manage and navigate.Lucia Black (talk) 10:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean by splitting them? Having a more prominent divider within the navbox, or actually having two separate navboxes for fictional content and media? And if the latter, what's wrong with assigning subjects either a single navbox or multiple navboxes on a case-by-case basis, the way we do now?--NukeofEarl (talk) 14:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking the latter. And I just mentioned the problems, but your question comes off more like "We been doing it like this for a while, why change?" their too big, and "case-by-case" seems odd as I see large number of navboxes being too big. Either the line for too big is too far off, or editors stopped caring. Template:Green Lantern, Template:Justice League, template:Hulk and various other series where the characters are mentioned first, making it difficult to find the media. This can also help place better templates. Such as only putting media navboxes in media articles while having character navboxes in characters.Lucia Black (talk) 21:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I think you both have a point. Lucia Black, the templates that you mentioned do seem to be too large, but I don't think that the idea of splitting characters and media applies to every navbox. NukeofEarl is correct that each navbox should be examined on a a case-by-case basis, plus there is always the option of a navbox having collapsible sections, such as {{G.I. Joe}}. I think you should propose any splitting or section changes on the talk pages of the templates that you are concerned about. Fortdj33 (talk) 12:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. Lucia, I think you partially misunderstood me; I see the problem you're talking about, but I'm only seeing it on a certain percentage of navboxes. To give just a few examples, I think you'll agree that Template:Symbiote Family and Hosts, Template: Spawn, and Template: Spider-Woman are of quite reasonable size. In particular, the Spider-Woman one has so few media entries that a template covering just Spider-Woman media wouldn't be large enough to satisfy Misplaced Pages's template policies. So if we were to universally split fictional elements from media the way you're suggesting, in Spider-Woman's case this would in effect mean simply deleting the media entries from the template. Again, I agree that there's a problem, I just think that it would be better addressed by splitting specific navboxes than by creating a universal policy.--NukeofEarl (talk) 15:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

But looking carefully at those series, their part of spider-man franchise. (Except for spawn). But fine. How about I look for them and find a way to split them (or prioritize them better).Lucia Black (talk) 18:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Question about sectioning - "Other versions" and "In other media"

Why exactly are "Other versions" and "In other media" two separate sections in comic book articles, usually? Basically, film and cartoon versions ARE other versions - and usually, the other media has a companion comic book or something. (A strong example would be Smallville Season 11) . Those are the same versions, same continuity etc, but they are actually split in terms of Misplaced Pages - this could lead to a lot of duplicate information.

Don't exactly want (or care) to change it across Misplaced Pages, but a discussion on the topic would be nice. Has this been brought up before? || Tako (bother me) || 18:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I would say that "Other versions" applies to alternate comic book versions of a character, when they appear in titles that are not part of their mainstream continuity. But "In other media" is for appearances of that character in media other than comic books, such as film, television or video games, regardless if they are different than the original character or not. Fortdj33 (talk) 19:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the wording of Fortdj33. I think of "Other versions" on say a DC character page, to include anything about their Flashpoint counterpoint (if any), or say any other incarnation of them from an alternate reality. And then "In other media" exactly as Fortdj33 stated. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:38, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

MOS page shortcut

Is there anyway to add more shortcuts to that page? I was looking for it, and typed MOS:COMICS and was surprised that didn't take me to it. I know for other MOS pages, like film, using MOS:FILM takes you to the MOS page for film. Or even MOS:COMIC would be fine. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

It's just a matter of create the page and redirecting it. I've taken care of it, as well as added the shortcut to the list on the MOS/Comic page.|| Tako (bother me) || 05:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

New image for the Superman work group - the current is broken

I have suggested a new one here: Template talk:WikiProject Comics - Christian75 (talk) 21:12, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

H.I.V.E.

This article still needs improvements. --George Ho (talk) 16:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Ultron

Is it appropriate to mention in the article's lead that James Spader will portray Ultron in the next Avengers film? 129.33.19.254 (talk) 15:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes.Zythe (talk) 15:28, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that's what I figured - please join in the discussion on the talk page to weigh in. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Move question

Does anybody think Giant-Size X-Men should be moved to Giant-Size X-Men 1, per WP:PRECISION? I haven't been able to find many WP pages created for single issues, so I'm unsure. This isn't really a "series", per se — two one-shots in 1975, two 30 years later. Much of the material in all four issues are reprints. It's only Giant-Size #1 that's really significant and notable, not the other three. Woodshed (talk) 09:34, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I think the only justificstion to do something like that would be if each of the issues had so much written about then in reluable sources that they had to be split into separate articles. Curly Turkey (gobble) 12:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree. WP:PRECISION states an article title should be "precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but no more precise than that". The only reason to add the issue number, would be if there were another article about Giant-Size X-Men that required the disambiguation. Fortdj33 (talk) 00:44, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Whammy on the Whaam! 50th anniversary drive

Interested parties can see Misplaced Pages:Featured_article_candidates/Whaam!/archive2#Whammy_on_the_Whaam.21_50th_anniversary_drive.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:14, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Whaam! 50th anniversary drive now in WP:TFAR mode

The WP:TFAR nomination for Whaam! is now open at Misplaced Pages:Today's_featured_article/requests#Whaam.21 to celebrate the 50th anniversary of its first exhibition. I presume that after nearly 700KB of discussions some people may be interested in this nomination.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:43, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists