Talk:Xkcd

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Xkcd 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: Webcomics 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 WikiProject Webcomics.

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

Mathematics Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics 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.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Xkcd (talk · contribs) / Munroe, Randall This user has contributed to the article.

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Notability

Why does this comic deserve an article? It seems at least one other webcomic lost its article due to being disliked (but disguised as a lack of notability). Therefore, for the sake of uniformity, I would like to ask how this webcomic is notable, and why should this article be allowed to exist? I will likely be going through a few webcomic pages and asking the same question. Alchemistmerlin (talk) 05:35, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try substantial coverage in reliable sources [1][2][3][4]. If you are upset about some article you like getting deleted or some such, I suggest you try WP:Deletion review rather than looking for revenge elsewhere. rʨanaɢ (talk) 05:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not "looking for revenge", seeing as I distinctly dislike the comic in question and enjoy XKCD quite a lot. I'm simply trying to see some consistency here. Alchemistmerlin (talk) 06:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "consistency" you're talking about is referred to around here as the "what about X?" argument. We do not typically define notability by subject matter, such as "all webcomics are notable" or "all companies with over a hundred employees are notable". We treat them on a case-by-case basis as verified by the presence of reliable secondary sources (the general notability guideline) or by applying some common heuristics which are likely to mean that such coverage exists somewhere (specific sub-guidelines such as WP:ATHLETE). In this case, xkcd has indisputably seen significant coverage from multiple reliable independent sources and has had an established real-world impact which has been noted in such. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The xkcd article meets WP:V, the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia is Verifiability. The article cites over 10 reliable sources that mention XKCD. Notability is easy to establish. In addition, the article is fairly well written and well-sourced; It would not be a legitimate candidate for deletion by any measure. --Mysidia (talk) 02:39, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. Utter nonsense. Despite all our high-faluting talk about "policy" and "principle", the truth is that articles get deleted all the danged time for no better reason that "I don't like the subject of that article, and I have the authority to get rid of it, so I am doing so" and you very well know it.JackFloridian (talk) 03:31, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guess you just showed him. rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:48, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hat Guy?

Well, I found a transcript looking at the page source of "Actuarial" (#493) and it mentions "Hat Guy" in there too. Just a heads-up.

Newwikiprofile001 (talk) 02:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization scheme of "Xkcd"

I've noticed that in the url of the xkcd page and the url and title of the related talk page, xkcd apprears as "Xkcd". At http://xkcd.com/about/ , Randall answers the following faq,

   "How do I write "xkcd"? There's nothing in Strunk and White about this.

   "For those of us pedantic enough to want a rule, here it is: The preferred form is "xkcd", all lower-case. In formal contexts where a lowercase word shouldn't start a sentence, "XKCD" is an okay alternative. "Xkcd" is frowned upon."

Is there a reason the form "Xkcd" appears on wikipedia? As Randall says, he prefers first "xkcd" or second "XKCD".

174.20.76.63 (talk) 03:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Justin Hammar[reply]

MediaWiki automatically capitalises the first letter of a page's name. Marnanel (talk) 03:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions)#Lowercase first letter. Anyway, the page title itself shows up in all lowercase, even if the URL doesn't. rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism Section?

Could a criticism section be added? This article comes across as a bit fanboyish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.34.110 (talk) 17:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a news article or magazine article that criticizes XKCD? If your intention is to add general unreferenced criticism, the section will quickly be deleted. If you have referenced criticism, that would be something to consider. -- kainaw ™ 17:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A section devoted to it? Doubtful. Criticism sections are, by their very name, inherent failures of WP:NPOV, as are sections devoted to praise. Rather, any criticism should be worked into any existing section that is most relevant to it. Melicans (talk, contributions) 17:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]