Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Collaboration/2006

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics‎ | Collaboration

Successful edit

Alan Moore edit

Alan Moore was already nominated to FA and almost made it. It just needs very minor pruning. Moore is one of the, if not the most, influential comic writers in the business. Many of his works have been made into feature films recently, with more on the way. We also need to highlight the more alternative side of comics. Marc Mywords 07:18, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  1. KHM03 08:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Fritz S. 10:25, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Hiding talk 12:06, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. ←Hob 06:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Dan 00:24, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Brown Shoes22 04:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Dyslexic agnostic 06:24, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. DoctorWorm7 08:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Groovemaster D. 17:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC) Agreed. Moore is one of the best writers, having pushed a lot of boundaries. Due to the movies, he'll receive attention and his article therefore should cover the original material well.[reply]

Manga edit

Japan is one of the few countries where comics are widely considered an art form, are a major media, offer a wide diversity of generes and are read throughout genders and ages. Also, manga is becoming more and more popular all around the world. I think this article represents a broad aspect of the form of comics and is relatively close to being nominated as a featured article. Fritz S. 11:24, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Philip Nilsson 14:36, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 22:46, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. >x<ino 16:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC): i voted for this article because "Types of Manga" is just packed in the article, it needs to be moved to a sub page for less scrolling and more neater, and also for the "Distributors of Manga[reply]
  4. KirbyMeister 02:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC) for reasons listed above as well as the fact it's got a giant few paragraphs of mostly unwikified engrish...[reply]
  5. I support this for the reasons mentioned above. There have been some excellent attempts at trying to fashion the article into the best way possible, but it hasn't completely occurred yet. Perhaps some objective editing from someone other than otaku might help in this regard.--Mitsukai 18:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. CG 19:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Ugur Basak 03:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maus (comics) edit

The only graphic novel to ever win a Pulitzer. RPGLand2000 16:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  1. I'd go along with this. It's one of the few non-superhero titles, like American Splendor, that people outside of our community might have heard of and may wish to look up on Wikepedia. -- Tenebrae 17:57, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I agree. There are other well-known non-superhero titles now, but I think all of them owe their existence to what Maus did, and it deserves a better article. Lord Bodak 00:23, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Hiding talk 12:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC) I would agree - the context of the comic and its impact on the creator and his relationship with his family, as well as the difficulty later generations have in dealing with an event such as the holocaust it an incredible event which deserves the exposure it can receive here[reply]
  4. ike9898 20:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I agree, it's an important bit of comic history which should have a better article.Logan1138 13:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. I'd vote for this candidate. Not only is it an outstanding piece of work, but it's unique effect on the current respect given to the medium makes it worthy of featured status.Markeer 16:18, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. I'm (finally) reading volume 1 now. --Lkseitz 14:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --Jamdav86 09:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Franco-Belgian comics edit

Because many people have read comics by French or Belgian creators. Also a little bit because I have done a lot of work on this article and I would love to see it expanded and improved :) Mikkel 18:41, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Fritz S. 13:09, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Lvr 08:35, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Pcostabel 22:47, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Martin Wisse 07:42, 28 October 2005 (UTC) More work needs doing on European comics in general[reply]
  5. Pc13 09:40, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Goanookie 14:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Niklas o'Bee 04:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC) I would like to see some discussion on the main differences betweein Franco-Belgian comics and their American and Japanese counterparts together with the underlying historical and economical roots .[reply]
  8. Gamesmaster 15:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC). Since there's so many well-known Franco-Belgian comics (Asterix? Tintin?) and it deserves improvement.[reply]
  9. Pascal.Tesson 02:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC). A good idea because it helps to balance the focus of the English-language Wikipedia content.[reply]
  10. --LexCorp 00:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Fram 10:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peanuts edit

As probably the most famous comic strip of recent history, and given the recent best selling collections published by Fantagraphics, I propose we work this article up to featured article status. Hiding talk 21:35, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Fritz S. 13:07, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Orville Eastland 22:33, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Lukobe 18:38, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The most influential comic strip of the 20th Century which is still wildly popular worldwide and has been a major inspiration to many cartoonists, most notably Bill Watterson of Calvin and Hobbes. -  Mike | trick or treat  23:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Jamdav86 10:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Matteo 08:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Been reading Peanuts/Lil' folks since I learned to read! (And had them read to me before that : ) - jc37 23:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. ColinMoon - I'm a lover of all the classic strips; I taught myself to read with Peanuts. Likewise, I'm an avid book collector and the Fantagraphics series is a major yearly addition.

Unsuccessful edit

Scrooge McDuck edit

Emerged from being a one-time character in a Donald Duck comic to spawning an entire universe. Scrooge has starred in multiple comic book series, TV series, and video games. There is so much material in this article, and we already have a to-do list in the talk page. Scrooge is the legacy of the late great Carl Barks, and I think we owe it to Carl to making this article the best it can be. -- Wikipedical 00:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC) I agree totally that Maus is more than deserving of recognition with a featured article. However, I have over the years come to see that Art Spiegelman, along with Harvey Pekar and Joe Sacco, are not considered to be by many people comic artists so much as regular writers. I personally think that the book deserves consideration, but possibly more from the "literature" group than here. Watchmen however helped to usher in the "grim and gritty" age and close the previous "age" of comics, both of which could be significantly addressed in an article, is a work of significant impact, and is also as mentioned a magnificent work in its own right.Badbilltucker 13:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spawn (comics) edit

Like many other comics pages on wikipedia, we really are missing a listing of all comics created and planned to date. This is probably the most used section of any comic page, as it really is essential for anybody wanting to catch up on past issues/prints etc. --CalPaterson 17:36, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This whole article badly needs a revamp. I've done some work on it but just so much about it is put together haphazardly.--Rosicrucian 06:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The powers section especially has numerous repetitions and opinionated "facts." This is a landmark character of the '90s, so it deserves to have a better page then currently available. Cybertooth85 19:09, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watchmen edit

The only comic book/graphic novel to win a Hugo Award. Moreover, it is one the better constructed comic book articles. I have invested a lot of time in this article, citing sources and trying to weed out weak prose. I think the structure is quite good overall, but that it is difficult to find sources for everything. With more information, and a greater number of citiations, I believe that this article could become a featured article given time some time (and some T.L.C!). Adasta 20:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to throw in my vote too, as I currently have this as a featured article candidate, and would like all the help I can to make sure it goes through.--DCAnderson 16:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC) Already featured, retracting my vote.--DCAnderson 14:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll throw in my nomination, but this nom might not be needed as I think the article is going to make to FA status. All members of Wikiproject who can, may want to help out with some final copyedits and whatnot though. Other than that, the support outnumbers 1 oppose, whose concerns were met by the way. Some folks might want to vote one way or the other so that we can know where Watchmen stands. Tombseye 21:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Magneto edit

Magneto is a major character, comparable with Superman and Batman. Also I feel that the Magneto article could be improved to feature article status. T-1000 19:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Issue_Summaries edit

By writing issue summaries of major titles (from all publishers with titles that cross-over), one will be able to look up any footnoted reference in comics--as well as learn what transpired in missing issues. If the issue summary pages are cross-linked (each footnote linking to its source issue summary page), a tremendous amount of connectivity would be established.

Further, it could create a workable network of cross-referenced titles. By making lists of the footnotes, one could see which issues are effected by events in other issues, which issues are most referenced, and which issues fall into major cross overs (current example: Marvel's Civil War; useful example: Marvel's Infinity Gauntlet; indie example: cameos in creator-owned titles [Cerebus in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles]).

Support

  1. Colinmoon 00:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. CovenantD 21:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. J Greb 23:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  1. Colinmoon - The primary work I've done has been removed, with what I assume is good reason; I hadn't read the full article on summarizing. A note, though, that rather than summarizing of stories, the intent of this nomination is to catalog connectivity in comics--a further concern would be creating of appearance lists for characters. Is this of relevance?
  2. This is a clear violation of the guidelines concerning what Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Plot summaries. Wikipedia articles on works of fiction should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, not solely a summary of that work's plot. A plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic. CovenantD 21:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Surely, by looking at the Silver Surfer Issues Guide you can see that it is not a summary of plot but, rather, a summary of publication; the object of the proposed articles has no connection to fictional plots at all. Instead, the focus is of real-world linkage between issues.
  4. I see that it still violates Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. There is nothing to indicate why this information is anything other than trivial. What happens when somebody starts a list of Superman or Fantastic Four titles? CovenantD 07:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't that be part of an aspect of a larger topic.

?Phoenix741 18:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Seriously, Wikipedia is not a guide to comics. When I first started here, I thought it kind of could be, but it really is not OK for that. Start this at Wikia, where you can have all the room you want to do something like this. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The Sandman (DC Comics/Vertigo) edit

The series that paved the way for Vertigo (comics). This, among others such as Watchmen, helped change people's attitudes about the literary value of comics. The impact section looks pretty good already, a few references here, a little tweaking there, and I think this could be a FA. -- Norvy (talk) 14:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Silence 15:05, 20 September 2005 (UTC) - I've been working on these pages some, and I'd certainly welcome the attention of anyone who is able and willing to help, whether this comic becomes the CCotF or not.[reply]
  2. WTH. Give it a bump... - SoM 14:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Lex 01:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. –– Lid(Talk) 09:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Bifgis 04:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC) I'm all for Sandman, it's one of the greatest titles of all time.[reply]

Fantastic Four edit

The Fantastic Four are one of the longest lasting super teams, the beginning of the Marvel Universe, and a popular comic book. The current article has more space concerning publication history than team history. This is an article that would benefit this article and make it fitting of the legacy and rich history it has. User Talk: Cnriaczoy42 22:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Support ike9898 15:40, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Fritz S. 13:15, 27 September 2005 (UTC) - Fantastic Four is considered the beginning of the Silver Age of comics and pretty much the first of the Stan Lee-Jack Kirby Marvel Comics. The article needs some work, especially the Other media section, which has ridiculous long headings and most of the content about the animated series should probably be moved to separate articles.[reply]
  3. Support The Fantastic Four probably saved Marvel form being broke. With out them Marvel would cease to exist.->Phoenix741 17:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - We really need to do this for the sake of all Marvel fans.Da'jhan 15:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Robert Crumb edit

Nomination: Arguably most prominent and influential creator of the underground comics movement. Existing article is decent: some references, some illustrations, decent prose. There is enough other info out there to build this into an FA.--ike9898 22:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Support - I too would back up the decision to revamp this one, as he is the most complex of all of the aforementioned subjects, and as is now, his article is more than lacking considering all of the infomration available on him.--[Robolizard- 3 April 2006]
  2. Support - I agree. This article needs improvement.--Ibaranoff24 02:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]
  3. Support - My man crumb in da hizzouse! GIVE IT SOME 'PROVEMENT! YO! I'll head to it right now, ipso factos!--OleMurder 22:45, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Collaboration/2006&oldid=300682925"