Talk:Looking for Group

Notability

I did a bit of googling and I didn't find any indications of Looking For Groups notability. Article itself doesn't have any sources for this either. Is this comic truly notable? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability Isvaffel 11:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Comic does appear to be growing. It has advertisements on multiple web-pages including PVP-online.com. It is growing by word or mouth in Real World as well as in game (WoW.) LFG forums statistics lists current forum participation at 1400+ users. Obviously this is all anectdotal, but the comic does appear to be growing.

Bodhisattvaspath 19:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC): Looking For Group currently has 2 comic issues in print, one of which was listed on p. 245 of the August issue of Previews magazine. Item # AUG073444

67.118.218.193 19:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Does buying advertising space create notability? That just means they bought space. --J.Rai (talk) 22:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

See the Awards section as well. I just added in the direct link to the Joe Shuster Awards site. IMHO (talk) 19:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Are Blind Ferret Entertainment notable? The upcoming LFG movie is described as being the first feature-length product they are producing. (Note that I still agree this article is 85% fancruft) 85.210.97.44 (talk) 09:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I think Blind Ferret would be considered notable, more so than either of the comics really, but have not seen any secondary sources on it. Blind Ferret is not only the proclaimed copyright holder for all the LICD and LFG stuff, but also does the animation for CAD and PvP I believe. Hats of to Sohmer, Lars, and any other members of Blind Ferret for not only putting their own stuff up, but really pushing their own business. IMHO (talk) 01:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Blood Elves, Undead, Trolls, Orcs and Tauren.

While Mr. deSouza and Mr. Sohmer might give the appearance of some of their characters having the same characteristics as the fictional races (Blood Elves, Undead, Trolls, Orcs, Tauren, etc...) of the Warcraft universe, neither Sohmer nor deSouza have made any mention of their characters being analogous to races in the Warcraft universe either in their comic or on their forum. In fact, they have claimed on their website that their characters draw from many fictional sources and are unique in their own right.

Gid may be a forest troll from WoW they are GREEN tend to have some markings (darker patchs around the eyes) AND tusks (gid my not even know here race)

NOTE forest trolls are none playable and havn't hade much of an affect on WoW world so most poeple don't know about them (it is on the WoW community website under story)

Here is an archived quote from the developer:

"Should note, guys, that while alot of things may seen as to be from WoW, the strip is in fact a compilation of all fantasy games and books. We're paying homage to it all, not just to one game.

We're going to be creating our own world and our own rules, and not just play in someone elses, despite what we might borrow from here and there."

Archived Quote from Ryan Sohmer

- Bodhisattvaspath 04:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

They may be drawing on it; But one must admit thus far it feels very much like it's drawing almost only from World of Warcraft. Cale may be similar to Drizzt on the surface, but he also sounds like every third Sin'Dorei hunter.

-Ramenth

Maybe you;ve just been looking at too much World of Warcraft things lately, since no one I know has attributed it to that game. Mostly I get asked if it's about Everquest or DnD —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.149.63.64 (talk) 02:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

Bodhisattvaspath 18:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC): Since I've removed the edit that he's a Blood Elf several times now, I think it was necessary to add in information from the writer that directly contradicts such a claim.

Bodhisattvaspath 20:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC): With the recent edit on the article page of Cale from Elven warrior to Elven hunter, there needs to be a verification of this. Can anyone verify that Cale is specifically a hunter? If this cannot be verified, the edit shall be changed in 14 days.

The comic is based on wow and hunters are bow wielders, Cale clearly wields a bow, so its either hunter or archer, and i believe Cale is a High Elf. i cant immagine him being a magic sucker... Gamlon is a high elven kingdom, the Vulii are Blood elves, if we look at it from wow perspective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.212.102.217 (talk) 12:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Except that the author of the comic has stated that it's not specifically based on WoW, but fantasy in general. Besides, Elves are extremely common themes in fantasy and look very similar in almost all cases anyway --199.190.223.190 14:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

One note that would lead one to think that Cale is a Blood Elf rather than a High Elf is the fact that he is often refereed to as a woman, which is a common occurrence in the World of Warcraft, even among the Blood Elves themselves. As to his class, Hunters have pets (Sooba) whereas an archer would not. The creators have stated that they drew from Everquest, which would make Cale possible a Beastlord. NightBear (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

While all of this lfg-is-not-wow stuff is basically right, I have to say one thing: Tauren are not the same as Minotaurs. Krunch is a Tauren, not a Minotaur. Minotaurs, in most of their appearances, have an entirely human body with only their head being that of a bull. The term Tauren, though it is relatively new and used almost exclusively in Warcraft, should (in my opinion) be used for any bull-men similar to the Tauren of Warcraft if no other name is known. 85.70.174.197 (talk) 21:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

A quick search for minotaur statues shows one at Bretton Hall in West Yorkshire with a cow-like upper torso and upper arms but human lower torso, legs and hands. Also one in Cheltenham with a human body but four hooves and one in the UBC botanical gardens that has almost nothing human about it, being even more cow-like than Krunch. Thus I conclude the distinction is a lot fuzzier. 85.210.97.44 (talk) 09:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Sooba

I've never read the series, but it seems that with Cale's similarity to Drizzt, it's plausible that Sooba is supposed to be derived from Guenhwyvar? Worth a mention in his/her section? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.226.20.205 (talk) 01:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

Krunch

"Krunch doesn't admit to being one or the other, but at the moment it appears as though he is the warrior." And yet to read through the comic he shows all signs of being very intelligent and thoughtful; His thoughts on good/evil, and the reading and semi deciphering of whatever scroll he was reading of the Shreik from. On top of that he has a diary (I assume) which seams to be fairly thoughtful.

What just because he's a warrior he can't be intelligent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Holy Ono (talk • contribs) 19:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The latest addition to the site (page 131) reveals that Krunch is in fact the philosopher. The final panel portrays his (apparent) brother who is referred to as "the warrior". 03/18/08

On a different note, Krunch is described as a Minotaur. Although I agree to keep the WoW references out of this, shouldn't he be called a Tauren, since Minotaurs have a human body? -- 77.180.148.187 (talk) 22:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 17:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC): Not necessarily. There are varied interpretations of the minotaur form (of which Taurens are based anyway), some of which have more human features, others more features from a bull (such as fur, hooves, etc...). Minotaurs in Dungeons and Dragons have been depicted both ways, and if you do a google image search on Minotaurs, it's about half and half with human bodies versus quasi-bull bodies.

While all of this lfg-is-not-wow stuff is basically right, I have to say one thing: Tauren are not the same as Minotaurs. Krunch is a Tauren, not a Minotaur. Minotaurs, in most of their appearances, have an entirely human body with only their head being that of a bull. The term Tauren, though it is relatively new and used almost exclusively in Warcraft, should (in my opinion) be used for any bull-men similar to the Tauren of Warcraft if no other name is known. If you do a Google Image Search for the word "minotaur" (as mentioned above), it indeed does show about half images with only the head of a bull and the other half are Tauren-like humanoids. This is, however, not very conclusive as most of these images are drawn by random people all over the Internet and it is awkward to try and connect a bull's head to a human, albeit larger, body. I think the original minotaur concept from greek mythology is more important than what people made of them because they were too lazy to think of a way to draw them without changing their anatomy. 85.70.174.197 (talk) 21:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Can you find any evidence that the word "tauren" exists outside of Blizzard? I can't find it right now, but I thought I found a page on the LFG website which explicitly states that Krunch is not a Tauren. Yngvarr (c) 21:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

It probably does not, but it is the most accurate description of human/bull hybrids with slightly bow-backed bodies and hooves we have. These are not Minotaurs. Minotaurs have feet and they are usually not all hairy. If you don't want to use the term "Tauren", then find another one, but "Minotaur" is not the correct term for these creatures.85.70.174.197 (talk) 18:04, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

You know what? With an edit summary like that [1], do whatever the fuck you want. Yngvarr (c) 18:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

All right. Judge me by my edit summaries. I wasn't arguing just out of boredom as you may think, it just seemed to be the only right description of the situation. 85.70.174.197 (talk) 20:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

All right you two, that's enough. This is not a big issue. Yngvarr, could you try to find that page that says whether Krunch is a Tauren? In the meantime, I think Minotaur is good because its article has a picture - the section on Taurens is just a short blurb. If we can come up with something saying he's one or the other, then we can change it. --Eruhildo (talk) 22:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

As for the edit summary, I think everyone can agree what "when you argue on the internet..." implies. As for the disclaimer against tauren [2], which doesn't explicitly state that it is not tauren, but it explicitly states with its own races, and since you can't prove a negative, I'd go from there. Yngvarr (c) 22:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I dunno what to think, because exactly that same problem is with elves. The original elves were more like fairies - little flying bastards - not noble, tall creatures. Tolkien turned them in what most people consider them to be now. And since C.S. Lewis used the name Minotaur for hairy creatures with hooves, I think you're right. Tauren is an in-game term. I was wrong. Oh goddamit, I can't believe I'm admitting it :-D

Bye. 85.70.174.197 (talk) 23:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC) , the accountless guy.

Actually, Tolkien took his elves from Norse mythology. 142.26.133.248 (talk) 20:07, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a good ref to me. I say go with minotaur then. --Eruhildo (talk) 05:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Reveiw of 'Supporting Cast'

We may need to go through and edit, or even remove, the supporting cast section. So far, every character listed has been a 'local scenery'/plot point character who show no sign of ever showing up again. Maybe we should wait until one or more make a second separate appearance, or are in a set number of strips.--Donovan Ravenhull 02:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Bodhisattvaspath 18:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC): There are a number of references to characters in the supporting cast on multiple pages. I would strongly suggest giving the strip more time to develop before writing off any of the supporting characters.

Wasn't so much trying to write off anybody, but just wanted to be carefull before we start adding too many.--Donovan Ravenhull 14:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Pella, Tavor

Tavor should be updated about the event on page 74, and Pella (the dwarf or whatever that serves as a guide) needs a mention. Also, maybe a possible link between the Archmage and Richard should be mentioned, it seems possible that the Archmage is Richard before he became a warlock, their facial structure seems the same and Richard mentions the Archmage seems familiar. Any agreement? --66.67.187.203 00:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh No...

Richard's looking at taking over Kethenecia. I doubt Cale would approve, or that everyone would get along with the new (undead) refugees. Judging by the look of shock on the rabbit (Archmage)'s face, I doubt he approves of the idea either. I think this is the end of Richard and Cale's friendship. 142.26.133.248 (talk) 15:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it time to 'promote' Pella?

The character of Pella has been pretty much a constant for the last dozen or so pages, and appears to be a long term addition to the group.

On the other hand, she doesn't get much dialouge and there hasn't been much indication in the non-strip parts of the site that she is a long-term addition.

Shall we at least come up with a guidline as to when she (or another character) might be 'promoted' to 'main characters'? --Donovan Ravenhull (talk) 15:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Name?

Unless I'm mistaken, the correct name is actually "Looking For Group", with "For" capitalized. Zerris (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 00:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC): You are not incorrect. It is capitalized in the comic and on their website.

Article

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 00:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC): Please remember that while this is an article dedicated to a notable webcomic, especially with the release of the hardcover book, it is not a "dumping ground" for everything that goes on within the comic strip. As such, it is unnecessary to go into each and every storyline in the character biographies. I am, of course, referencing the Richard portion of the entry, which is several times the size of any of the other characters. The entry for Least I Could Do has had the exact same problem with the character of Rayne's entry. This is not a novel-version of the comic, so keep the information biographical in nature, and be sure to correct for all time-indicative information, such as "recently" and the like. Much of what is listed under the Richard entry should either be placed in a different section more relevant to the storyline, split off onto its own page for storyline, or removed from the wikipedia entry with some kind of note encouraging interested parties to actually go and read the webcomic. Much of what I'm referring to are Richard's quotes (while humorous, for the most part they do not belong in the entry), most of the talk of Richard's exploits - which can be clearly seen within the comic itself, and other speculative commentary.

Richard

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 23:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC): The entry on Richard is far longer than any of the other main cast. If the information is notable, it will be kept on the article's page. If it is frivolous, it will be removed. Any information that others wish not to be removed should be moved over onto a separate page for Richard. Since there was no counter-discussion of such trimming of the Richard portion of the article since 22 January 2008, I will edit the portion this prior to 9 March 2008.

  Bodhisattvaspath • Talk • Contribs   03:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC): Re-iterating pertinent information to the article. Consistent reverts reintroducing information to the article, primarily about Richard, are little but plot bloat and are not notable. The information is non-biographical in nature and primarily related to the character's doings, rather than who or what the character is. Such information belongs on a Richard subpage, not the Looking for Group article. If the Wikipedia community feels it has become necessary to introduce such a subpage, such items might be more appropriate there, but that's questionable, given Wikipedia's policies on plots and summaries.

In my opinion, no such subpage is needed and his section needs to be trimmed down. --Eruhildo (talk) 04:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

  Bodhisattvaspath • Talk • Contribs   04:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC): I agree. I've trimmed it several times now, but if you check the history for the article, you'll see that another user keeps reverting the edits.

Ah, now I see how it is - he reverted your removal twice. I know how annoying that can be. I'll drop him a line on his talk page asking him to discuss it here.--Eruhildo (talk) 06:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

  Bodhisattvaspath • Talk • Contribs   12:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC): I (once again) trimmed down the fancruft information in the Richard entry. There were several "recently, he did this..." edits that were removed, as well as multiple references to the village that is the source of Richard's power with duplicate and/or fancruft information.

Clean up

I cleaned up all the main character sections and added some references. It could use a bit more clean up, but it's better than what it was I hope. I'll try to work on the minor characters soon. Without even reading it, it looks like Tavor's section needs to be cut in half. --Eruhildo (talk) 17:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC): Agreed. Biographical sections do not need to outline every plot point each character goes through, which is why I heavily trimmed down the section on Richard. Such plotline information should go on a separate page.

I'm of the opinion that most of the plot stuff can be removed entirely. We only need a small plot summary near the top. This article is not nearly large enough to justify subpages. --Eruhildo (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The whole cast, especially the supporting section, is just a wall of text and really doesn't add to the article. It reads like a fan recounting the plot. Have a look at more famous webcomics and notice how they only use a few lines to describe the main characters. --Thrinsel (talk) 03:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

A Few Questions.

In the article its said that "Due to his secular nature and the fact that he is generally able to give logical reasoning to his beliefs...". The "logical reasoning to his beliefs" is pretty obvious. But "secular"? Didn't he lead them to Kenethica based on the texts of a few-thousand year old scroll claiming that it was "prophesied"? Exact quote: "These scrolls, pages of the archmages codex, were laid down a millennia ago, are entwined with prophesy. Everything we do has been pre-destined in these scrolls"? Secular thought generally doesn't entertain any "prophesy" (in my knowledge). It just doesn't seem like "Krunch" to describe him as "secular" (given his role). If in disagreement, can someone explain to me how he has a "secular nature"? Thanks! Paladin Hammer (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

In a world where magic is a thing you see in daily life, believing in prophecies is quite normal. 85.70.174.197 (talk) 22:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

EDIT IN: Also, anyone think Ray'd Bool should be added to the page? His role currently seems to indicate thats he's here to stay for awhile. Maybe as just a minor-character? Paladin Hammer (talk) 23:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Benny

It should also be noted that she shares many characteristics with Krunch's people, including three-fingered hands,eye markings, and eyes that flash red when angered. -- moved from main page to talk page, as it is speculative in nature.

  Bodhisattvaspath • Talk • Contribs   16:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC): The three-fingered hands does not necessarily represent a relationship between her (as of yet unknown) race and Krunch's people, nor do the eye markings. If we had confirmation of her race, or were to see another member of her race depicted in the comic, this might be more solid than speculation. As for eyes that flash red when angered, this is not only an artistic element that Mr. deSouza employs with a number of characters in the comic, including other main characters, but is a rather commonplace element in comics themselves.

Like Naruto.85.70.174.197 (talk) 22:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Despite all the dodging around Benny's race, she's so clearly a Blizzard-style troll that it's not even funny. (Although she is, admittedly, a Cutefase—JFGI.) Qit el-Remel (talk • contribs) 22:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Original Research

The section on "References to Pop Culture" cites no sources whatsoever, and thus appears to be claims made by individual contributers - which is considered original research and therefore is forbidden by the no original research policy. Material in the section in question should either be removed, or citations should be given. --zandperl (talk) 19:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

The section also contained single mentions to specific strips. Seeing as the entire page is a send-up of a lot of pop culture and fantasy myths, single references to specific pages that do not extend beyond a single strip isn't really that appropriate to the page and it would quite rapidly be overwhelmed by the list (in addition to being severe OR). I've re-read the strip to page 38 and the only one that really stood out was the Sword of Truth references; everything else is a one-off. I think they could easily be subsumed into a single line saying "many aspects of contemporary fantasy are addressed and mocked" or somesuch. I've removed the whole section as well as fixed some formatting errors. WLU (talk) 19:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, the "in pop culture" section should be for places where LFG appears in other pop culture arenas. The purpose of the page is to be encyclopedic, not to explain every single joke. WLU (talk) 20:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Blind Ferret Entertainment and upcoming projects

I haven't been on the LFG forums in a few months, nor paid more than glancing attention to the announcements, but I believe that their were announcements going so far as casting calls for voice actors for an LFG animated series. Anyone who can find anything should add it it.

At the very least, I'm pretty sure BFE was responsible for the "Slaughter the World" clip. IMHO (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Stratics Exclusive link broken

The link for the first reference is a dead end. Switching 'ddo' to 'www' gets the site up, but then I can't find an article dealing with LFG in the December 2006 archive, though I only gave it a quick browse. There anyoen that can pinpoint it and fix the reference link? IMHO (talk) 00:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I did some quick looking around, but I couldn't find anything. I couldn't find a dated archive, maybe I was looking in the wrong places. --Eruhildo (talk) 03:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. I had to view one of the current news items. That page had a left hand bar which included "news archive", link here: http://www.stratics.com/php-bin/show_news_archive.php I've found a 2008 link to a Stratics video interview with Sohmer, but nothing from the date in the reference yet. Still checking.IMHO (talk) 17:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Benny's name

Has "Benn'Joon" been used within the comic itself? I know it is listed as her name in a character list or wallpaper or something, but has it come up in the story?IMHO (talk) 21:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Too lazy to find the page but it has been mentioned. 61.184.101.28 (talk) 08:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I found it on page 97; when the characters are introduced to the village, they say "Benn'Joon", but not "Benny". Groundlord (talk) 16:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Order of listing for Supporting cast

It seemed to be rather random, so I rearranged it as follows:

1) Primarily by order of appearance. Simply be mentioned doesn't count, so Elttil Tchib is listed later though he was mentioned fairly early in the comic. There is one slight exception.

2) When a group of characters appear close in time and are part of a clear hierarchy, they will be listed according to rank, official or otherwise, top down. So, though Tim was introduced before Lord Stoll's second in command, Styx, who himself appeared before Lord Stoll, they are listed in the opposite order. IMHO (talk) 21:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

That looks good, though if ordering becomes an issue in the future, alphabetizing is another option to consider. That said, I think the list is too long. Some of the entrees have far more data than they need and some of the characters seem too minor to mention. For instance, does Styx really play a large enough roll in the story to be listed? I can't see having Tim since he's a recurring character, but Styx doesn't do all that much if I remember right. Now that I think about it, Lord Stoll doesn't really seem major enough to deserve an entry. A mention of him in the plot section should be sufficient. Also, having "(deceased)" next to the name of a character isn't necessary in my opinion - just saying that he/she died in the character's summary should be enough. Well, I've gone on long enough and most of that wasn't really directed at you IMHO. So, does anyone have any thoughts on this? --Eruhildo (talk) 23:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the whole thing is a bit much TMI. Personally, I prefer synopses over in-depth plot (or character) outlines such as this. Especially with an on-going series. Give enough basic information to lay out the character personality, but that should be enough to underscore the characters conflicts and contrasts. Of course, the information should ideally be sourced to something other than the in-universe details, but I (sanely) realize that is not always possible for things like this. I doubt there's a critical examination of Cale'anon's friendship with Richard out there (and if there is, then I will be afraid). Yngvarr (t) (c) 00:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I think some list of supporting characters is worthwhile. As to specific inclusions, for now I just organized the list a bit. My initial read didn't leave me feeling that any entries were too manini, except for maybe the dragons. As for the "deceased" tag, I have found them useful in other character listings, so I threw them in. For now though, of the ones you've mentioned, I'd say leave Stoll in. Though it looks like that arc is well behind us, he was the leader of an army and was familiar enough with the head of the Bloodrage clan to possibly creep up again. All that said, I do think clean up is needed on a number of character entries, both main and supporting. I just do little bits at a time. IMHO (talk) 02:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Continuing my deference to the change of topic in the thread, I did end up removing two entries from the list. Fitch, though entertaining at the time, really is too minor as a character himself. The dragons entry really didn't say much and seemed more a place to mention a funny by Richard. In the dragons' case, however, I've been thinking of adding a Places section, likely to include Legara, Gamlon, Kathencia, and maybe the Gnome Kingdom, and possibly (or not) the Port of Tyne. The Legara entry would of course mention the inclusion of dragons in their military because, and I'm sure any neighboring countries would agree, you take NOTE of dragons in anothers military. :P IMHO (talk) 02:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Stoll is clearly a minor character and should not be included. Maikos seems to be gone permanently, and we may want to consider getting rid of him in the article too. Finally, I think we should make the "major characters" those who travel with Cale and Richard: Benny, Krunch, Ray'd, Dorel, Pella, Sooba, and Bunny. That said, I think it would be good to include a short list of the (kingdoms? races? armies?) on each side of the war. Trying to figure those out from the article as it is now is incredibly confusing. 74.96.97.176 (talk) 02:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Comic reviews

LFG has been in print format for over a year now. There has to be reviews, even small ones out there. Anyone who keeps track of the general comic scene, please list some articles when you see them even if you don't think you have the time/desire to work them into this article.

We really do need much more secondary source commentary on the comment. IMHO (talk) 01:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

To my surprise, a google turned up nothing. I mailed Ryan Sohmer if he can point us to some good material. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:26, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Delete?

The article does not reference external sources that indicate the relevance or notability of the subject. As such, per WP:WEB I think the article should be deleted.

There is also far too much space given to describing characters, with all the references leading to the comic itself.

If this subject is notable, please provide evidence, inside the article, referencing more than just awards won, but how the subject has influenced other works, or reviews from notable publications on the subject, etc.

As the article stands, it isn't worthy of being included in a general purpose encyclopedia, and should be trans-wikied to comicpedia (if such a place exists). — Preceding unsigned comment added by My name is Mr Smith (talk • contribs) 09:00, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

If you think it should be deleted, then nominate it for deletion stating your reasons. Such an issue cannot be decided on the talk page of an article. Canterbury Tail talk 14:01, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Looking for Group. 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/20101105134429/http://forums.lfgcomic.com/index.php?showuser=5858 to http://forums.lfgcomic.com/index.php?showuser=5858
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100626032522/http://forums.lfgcomic.com/index.php?showtopic=3939 to http://forums.lfgcomic.com/index.php?showtopic=3939&hl=movie
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071121140102/http://www.lfgcomic.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=2&t=1971 to http://www.lfgcomic.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=2&t=1971
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726124939/http://forums.lfgcomic.com/index.php?showtopic=2986 to http://forums.lfgcomic.com/index.php?showtopic=2986
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080514123014/http://secure.blindferret.com/lfgdownload/ to http://secure.blindferret.com/lfgdownload/

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:38, 6 January 2018 (UTC)