Talk:History of American comics: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:36, 29 January 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of American comics article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Comics: United States High‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by United States comics work group.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: Comics / History High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Comics portal This article is supported by WikiProject Comics - United States comics work group.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as High-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

History High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fringe theories

One editor had taken it upon himself/herself to present fringe theories espoused by a couple of mostly amateur, fan historians. Things like the so-called Copper Age and Atom Age are not used in mainstream comics scholarship, and to present them as established terms is completely misleading. These are fringe notions, and if they're included at all, it needs to be in a section specifically framing them as fringe. And we certainly can't give them the wildly undue weight they were given. --2604:2000:1382:C5DD:C101:1C49:1BAD:27F5 (talk) 05:31, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have to contest the claim that Shirrel Rhoades citing Steve Geppi (Rhoades 2008, p. 71) is a non-notable inclusion in a paragraph containing alternative periodization schemes. As for the Atom Age, it appears in William W. Savage, Commies, Cowboys, and Jungle Queens: Comic Books and America, 1945–1954, Wesleyan University Press, 1998, p. 111. --Omnipaedista (talk) 16:46, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Too much opinion

This article is a mess and is filled with too much ranting and conjecture by the writer. I get throwing in an opinion line if you can get away with it, but having an entire section with the subheading 'Periodization schemes'? Come on now. This is not information, is editorializing bordering on propaganda nearly. 2600:1702:820:7410:FD3A:8D3D:FC22:340D (talk) 18:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 One editor had taken it upon himself/herself to present [[WP:FRINGE|fringe theories]] espoused by a couple of mostly amateur, fan historians. Things like the so-called Copper Age and Atom Age are not used in mainstream comics scholarship, and to present them as established terms is completely misleading. These are fringe notions, and if they're included at all, it needs to be in a section specifically framing them as fringe. And we certainly can't give them the wildly [[WP:UNDUE|undue weight]] they were given. --[[Special:Contributions/2604:2000:1382:C5DD:C101:1C49:1BAD:27F5|2604:2000:1382:C5DD:C101:1C49:1BAD:27F5]] ([[User talk:2604:2000:1382:C5DD:C101:1C49:1BAD:27F5|talk]]) 05:31, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 :I have to contest the claim that [[Shirrel Rhoades]] citing [[Steve Geppi]] (Rhoades 2008, p. 71) is a non-notable inclusion in a paragraph containing alternative periodization schemes. As for the Atom Age, it appears in William W. Savage, ''Commies, Cowboys, and Jungle Queens: Comic Books and America, 1945–1954'', Wesleyan University Press, 1998, p. 111. --[[User:Omnipaedista|Omnipaedista]] ([[User talk:Omnipaedista|talk]]) 16:46, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
+== Too much opinion ==
+This article is a mess and is filled with too much ranting and conjecture by the writer. I get throwing in an opinion line if you can get away with it, but having an entire section with the subheading 'Periodization schemes'? Come on now. This is not information, is editorializing bordering on propaganda nearly. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1702:820:7410:FD3A:8D3D:FC22:340D|2600:1702:820:7410:FD3A:8D3D:FC22:340D]] ([[User talk:2600:1702:820:7410:FD3A:8D3D:FC22:340D|talk]]) 18:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)