Talk:Coagula

February 2007

Early on Kate is identified as a lesbian

Is she? As I recall, she wears a button that says something like "elect a transsexual lesbian to the White House", but never actually says she identifies as lesbian, so she may always have been intended to be bisexual. —Celithemis 06:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Coagula Revival

Can anyone confirm that Miss Pollack intends to bring back Coagula in any future date? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cardsharp21 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation, please

I was looking for a fairly well-known but not mainstream piece of music software called Coagula. This is some pretty bizarre and specialized info to appear under the term without a disambiguation page...24.17.180.126 (talk) 19:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The purpose of a disambiguation page is to distinguish between similarly named articles. Since there is no article for Coagula (software), there is also no disambiguation page. When an article about the software is created, it is likely this page will be moved to Coagula (comics) and the main Coagula pagename used as the disambiguation page. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 01:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coagula. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120529061952/http://www.techgnosis.com/gaiman.html to http://www.techgnosis.com/gaiman.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:39, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

NFC update

In contravention of WP:NFCC#8, there is no sourced prose or critical commentary on the appearance of this character that requires copyrighted material (File:Coagula.jpg) to illustrate. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 02:44, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Given the above, IAW the NFCC, are there objections to removing the unnecessary copyrighted material from the article? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 22:16, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Despite these explanations here, and linking hereto in my edit removing the NFC (- NFC IAW Talk:Coagula#NFC update), Aspects (talk · contribs) replaced File:Coagula.jpg without participating in this linked discussion, and while falsely saying that the file was removed without explanation (rv unexplained file deletion). Can anybody either explain that user's edits, or possibly introduce reliably-sourced critical commentary on Coagula's appearance so as to have actual reason to retain the NFC? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:25, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, you wrote so much in code, especially when I saw NFC and not the correct NFC, I thought there was no explanation. I would have stated that since the file is a picture of the character used in the infobox on the character's article to identify the subject it thereby passes WP:NFCC. If you still think it does not pass WP:NFCC and given no responses here for years, you should take the file to WP:FFD to see if you can reach a consensus for its deletion. Aspects (talk) 16:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

There's nothing written in this article the understanding of which is dependent upon or assisted by the NFC; in fact, no aspect of the character's appearance is mentioned at all, for that matter, failing the requirement of WP:NFCC#8. I'm unconcerned with the file's deletion or not; it just isn't needed in this article. Do you have any reliable sources which make critical commentary on Coagula's appearance, such that this NFC is needed? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:40, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

You haven't listed anything here, and you haven't added anything to the article, so again IAW the above NFCC reasons, I'm removing this copyrighted image from the article. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 21:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Fair use images that are orphaned for seven days are deleted from Wikipedia. Whether or not you are concerned about its deletion, your actions could lead to it being deleted. I have already explained how a file of a picture of a character that is used in the infobox in the character's article to identify the subject passes WP:NFCC. I also told you that due to consensus for its deletion, the next step in the process is to take it to WP:FFD to try and gain a consensus. To keep removing the file without consensus here or at WP:FFD could lead you to getting blocked from editing per WP:EDITWAR. Per WP:BRD with no consensus for its deletion, I am going to revert your deletion. Aspects (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I have already explained how a file of a picture of a character that is used in the infobox in the character's article to identify the subject passes WP:NFCC. You really haven't. Without the copyrighted image, what reliably-sourced content in this article is less understandable? Which string or block of text is better understood with the NFC? As I asked, and which you're yet to still answer, do you have any reliable sources which make critical commentary on Coagula's appearance, such that this NFC is needed? the next step in the process is to take it to WP:FFD That's weird, because Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines says that "a page's associated talk page […] is to provide space for editors to discuss editing that page." Nobody else interested or versed in this topic has objected to removing this NFC, nor have you yourself explained its necessity IAW policy. To keep removing the file without consensus here or at WP:FFD could lead you to getting blocked from editing per WP:EDITWAR. Wikipedia:Edit warring says "Don't use edits to fight with other editors. Disagreements should be resolved through discussion." Discussion was instigated with my inquiry on 18 October 2021, which was continued on 13 June 2022 and 21 March 2024. Waiting about two and a half years before removing unneeded NFC (as defined at WP:NFCC#8) isn't edit warring. You on the other had have never edited nor discussed this page except to replace NFC you cannot explain the necessity for. Furthermore, making unobjected-to edits after 128 weeks of asking isn't a bold edit; showing up every eight days to revert and say 'nuh-uh' seems far more like just "go[ing] for it". I am going to revert your deletion. I've deleted nothing; I'm not an administrator. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 19:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Now that Aspects' prerequisite FFD discussion has concluded, let's resume discussion about this article and its needs. Does anybody here have any reliable sources that would actually allow the above-discussed NFC to be used in this article? — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

The FFD was closed as Keep, so there is no need for additional reliable sources to justify the file's inclusion in the article. More reliable sources would be nice, but the lack of reliable sources is no longer a valid reason for the file's removal from the article. Aspects (talk) 22:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

The FFD was closed as Keep You mistakenly thought I wanted the deletion of File:Coagula.jpg, and demanded I begin a discussion there on your behalf. To avoid being banned, I acquiesced and began that unnecessary discussion for you. Now, that wild tangent has been resolved, and I'm returning to actually discussing the image's policy-compliance-purpose in this specific article (again, without respect to any deletion). there is no need for additional reliable sources to justify the file's inclusion in the article. There's certainly need for some legitimate justification for its use here; we have a detailed policy all about it. the lack of reliable sources is no longer a valid reason for the file's removal from the article. None have been added since you began edit-warring here, so… yes, the lack of any reliable sources supporting the infringement and exploitation of unspecified copyright holder(s) still needs to be addressed one way or another. Hence why I asked other editors for their help in meeting the requirement that will sate you in the manner you seem to need. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 23:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics template

BattyBot (talk · contribs) recently repeatedly removed the |B-Class-X= parameters from the {{WikiProject Comics}} ([1], [2]) despite the template itself showing they were still in use. I replaced them twice IAW the template documentation ([3], [4]), going so far as to include a {{bots}} to preclude the error yet again. Most recently, GoingBatty (talk · contribs) has reverted yet again (including the third unexplained removal of template spacing), saying that The B-class parameters were recently {{diff2|1193582963|removed}} from {{tl|WikiProject Comics}} (as a result of this discussion at WT:COUNCIL). They have now, also, removed the |B-Class-X= code from the template example at Template:WikiProject Comics/doc, to retroactively excuse the bot's edits. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@Fourthords: Look at this diff, and you'll see that the B-Class parameters were removed from Template:WikiProject Comics by MSGJ BEFORE my bot's edits to update the talk pages where the template is used. Your reversions led me to notice the documentation was not updated at the same time the parameters were removed from the template, so I manually updated it. (I also asked MSGJ to update the documentation when they update a template.) I'm sorry that my bot edits weren't clear, so I used a more explicit edit summary to explain the removal of the template parameters. Did you have a question about discussion I linked? GoingBatty (talk) 17:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't have any input or interest about the WikiProject templates or their functionality; I implement them because other editors find utility in them. The above talk-page post was just to clearly explain the recent back-and-forth to other editors, in case our edit summaries were too opaque. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 17:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)