→External Links: new section |
MikeWazowski (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
::::I wasn't thinking notability ''per se'', but notability apart from a single publication. If we included every label every minicomic has ever been published under, well, we'd end up with a list of one-shot minicomics publishers, with the odd incorporated publisher here and there (hey, we'd get to include my own Acid Toy Productions, the label I published a bunch of minicomics under when I was 19! Yay!) |
::::I wasn't thinking notability ''per se'', but notability apart from a single publication. If we included every label every minicomic has ever been published under, well, we'd end up with a list of one-shot minicomics publishers, with the odd incorporated publisher here and there (hey, we'd get to include my own Acid Toy Productions, the label I published a bunch of minicomics under when I was 19! Yay!) |
||
::::I think we should look at this as: "What would be most useful to readers of this list"? I think, if the publisher doesn't already have a page (which would automatically warrant inclusion), then we should at least be providing a reference to show that the publisher is not 100% tied to one title. <span style="padding:0 .75ex;font-variant:small-caps;background-color:#fdd;">[[User:Curly Turkey|<b><span style="color:#520;">C</span><span style="color:#f60;">üRly</span><span style="color:#040;">T</span><span style="color:#090;">üRkey</span></b>]]<small><sup style="margin-left:1.5ex;">[[User_talk:Curly Turkey|Talk]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-5ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Curly Turkey|Contribs]]</sub></small></span> 23:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC) |
::::I think we should look at this as: "What would be most useful to readers of this list"? I think, if the publisher doesn't already have a page (which would automatically warrant inclusion), then we should at least be providing a reference to show that the publisher is not 100% tied to one title. <span style="padding:0 .75ex;font-variant:small-caps;background-color:#fdd;">[[User:Curly Turkey|<b><span style="color:#520;">C</span><span style="color:#f60;">üRly</span><span style="color:#040;">T</span><span style="color:#090;">üRkey</span></b>]]<small><sup style="margin-left:1.5ex;">[[User_talk:Curly Turkey|Talk]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-5ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Curly Turkey|Contribs]]</sub></small></span> 23:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::::I see it simply - no article, no links to legitimate articles, remove them. If they only have a link to their website, but no article? Delete them. This is what I did on my own this afternoon as I was unaware of this discussion. However, I'm about to [[WP:BEBOLD]] and re-remove the ones I removed this afternoon, as they have no place in the article. [[User:MikeWazowski|MikeWazowski]] ([[User talk:MikeWazowski|talk]]) 00:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== External Links == |
== External Links == |
Revision as of 00:45, 10 February 2012
Comics List‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Cleaning up the list
I recommend that we break each section into two subsections (major publishers and minor publishers), for the sake of ease in dealing with the list. The problem is, how would we classify major vs. minor? I would recommend a criteria of more two imprints, but under this idea, Comico was a minor publisher, and Studio Ironcat a major one. So we'll have to think on this one. Any ideas?--Mitsukai 19:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
- An example of what I'm talking about, based on a major/minor criteria of at least two imprints, can be found here.--Mitsukai 20:00, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
- I dunno, mate. The distiction between major and minor publishers seems dangerously subjective to me. For example, if we're going by manga sales, Tokyopop is the major publisher while DC is a minor one. If we go by original comics, the ranking is reversed. Furthermore, it gets confusing when one tries to account for the Image evolution and reorganization. I say we leave it alone. --Strannik 22:01, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Is 4Winds, publisher of Scout, still in business?
Added Custom Comics of America, who made the RaceWarrior series. Anyone but me have them?--Alexrules43 20:08, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
omission
FYI, Event Comics is missing from the list. (Not an active publisher AFAIK)
What is a comics publishing company?
We include companies like Dell and Fawcett, which had comics branches of larger publishing firms. Should we include, say, Pantheon or Scholastic Books, book publishers with substantial squarebound comics lines? Certainly, Scholastic with Bone, Amulet, Adventures of Super Diaper Baby, and so forth gets a lot more pages of comics into people's hands than a lot of the smaller publishers listed here. --Nat Gertler (talk) 06:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- I think it might be reasonable to include them if the company has an arm devoted to comics, as Pantheon does. For companies that just happen to have published comics, I don't think you could ever hunt them all down, and I don't think it would be useful to readers to have the list populated with nearly every known publishing company on Earth, most of which only published one or a handful of comics. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 22:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Claypool is not defunct
Claypool continues to publish new comics material - just as an online publisher rather than a print publisher. The put up some new material today, in fact. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Combine lists?
Now that the lists are tablified, why not combine them? We could see which companies were defunct by the "defunct" column, and by sorting by column you could get all the defunct companies together automatically. It would require less maintenance, and be more helpful to readers, I think. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 22:24, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- I support that. I've done something like that at List of animation studios--Cattus talk 22:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Are you volunteering to do it, or should I go ahead? It's a bit of a job, and I'd hate to do it just to find out it's already been done. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 03:51, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- You can do it :)--Cattus talk 12:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- Okey dokey. I'll probably do it tomorrow. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 13:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- Done. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 02:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Okey dokey. I'll probably do it tomorrow. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 13:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- You can do it :)--Cattus talk 12:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- Are you volunteering to do it, or should I go ahead? It's a bit of a job, and I'd hate to do it just to find out it's already been done. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 03:51, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Delete companies that have no info?
There are an awful lot of companies listed here that are nothing more than an external link---not even a founding date or any other data on them. Would it be so terrible just to delete them?
There is also an awful lot of redlinks. Should we be preserving them? CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 02:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Good work on the list. As for your question, I guess we should keep the red links as long as they have reliable sources. Red links without reliable sources should be deleted.--Cattus talk 18:32, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Part of the problem is that we've not defined "comics publisher" for the purposes of this list. Is someone who does online comics a comics publisher? Someone who does minicomics? It's hard to judge what to include without that. (For problematic cases, the best thing to do is to flag them as Citation Needed, then if no data is added for a few months, delete.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Well, someone who self-publishes a minicomic is certainly a publisher, but not a publishing company, and this is a "List of comics publishing companies". Further, something like Chester Brown's "Tortured Canoe" was never used for publishing anything but the Yummy Fur mini, so it will never be notable apart from YF.
- I agree we should decide on what a "comics publisher" is. A few sections above, I suggested that we shouldn't include companies that only incidentally have published comics. I think that leaves the door open to a company like Pantheon, which does not focus on comics, but does have "Pantheon graphic novels" section (although not an imprint. I think they're stamped "Pantheon" like their other books). CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 21:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- So is notability to be a drawing line? (That's not inherent; notability is a standard for having articles, not for being included in an article.) You say that the person self-publishing isn't a company, presumably relying on the "group of people" definition rather than "a business" definition, but there have been lots of comics-publishing businesses of reasonable place in the field that were just one person. Heck, to avoid unflagged WP:COI concerns, I'll cite myself as an example -- I am the only person here at About Comics, we've (that's the royal, corporate "we") been publishing for more than a decade and even though we've worked with over 100 freelancers, none of them have been an employee of About Comics. It's hard to see that my being just one person makes About Comics less significant than some two-person company that turned out two issues each of two titles; dividing the list on that basis seems arbitrary. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:30, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Companies can be sole proprietorships (they're not defined as "a group of people"). Aardvark-Vanaheim is now (Gerhard sold his stake in the business to Sim). AV definitely belongs on the list. Tortured Canoe does not, and Brown's best-selling stature isn't going to change that.
- I wasn't thinking notability per se, but notability apart from a single publication. If we included every label every minicomic has ever been published under, well, we'd end up with a list of one-shot minicomics publishers, with the odd incorporated publisher here and there (hey, we'd get to include my own Acid Toy Productions, the label I published a bunch of minicomics under when I was 19! Yay!)
- I think we should look at this as: "What would be most useful to readers of this list"? I think, if the publisher doesn't already have a page (which would automatically warrant inclusion), then we should at least be providing a reference to show that the publisher is not 100% tied to one title. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 23:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- I see it simply - no article, no links to legitimate articles, remove them. If they only have a link to their website, but no article? Delete them. This is what I did on my own this afternoon as I was unaware of this discussion. However, I'm about to WP:BEBOLD and re-remove the ones I removed this afternoon, as they have no place in the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- So is notability to be a drawing line? (That's not inherent; notability is a standard for having articles, not for being included in an article.) You say that the person self-publishing isn't a company, presumably relying on the "group of people" definition rather than "a business" definition, but there have been lots of comics-publishing businesses of reasonable place in the field that were just one person. Heck, to avoid unflagged WP:COI concerns, I'll cite myself as an example -- I am the only person here at About Comics, we've (that's the royal, corporate "we") been publishing for more than a decade and even though we've worked with over 100 freelancers, none of them have been an employee of About Comics. It's hard to see that my being just one person makes About Comics less significant than some two-person company that turned out two issues each of two titles; dividing the list on that basis seems arbitrary. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:30, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
External Links
There are almost 30 publishing companies that aren't linked to an article but to their websites. Should these be turned into redlinks? I think I'll be bold and remove them. Discuss... Rwalker (talk) 20:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)