User talk:Tenebrae/Archive 8

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SinCityFamilyValues.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:SinCityFamilyValues.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Spaceadv3.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Spaceadv3.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SgtFury67.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:SgtFury67.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:StrangeTales114 detail.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:StrangeTales114 detail.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:StrangeTales79.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:StrangeTales79.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tenebrae, I'm adding a FUR to this image, but it doesn't currenly appear on any article. If you want it to be ultimately kept, you might want to attach it to some appropriate article. 207.229.140.148 (talk) 23:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you think of something before Valentines Day, you can keep it - otherwise looks like it's gone. :) 207.229.140.148 (talk) 06:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Strangeadventures207.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Strangeadventures207.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, but...[edit]

While the cover may say "The Avengers", it is "Avengers" in every other article as we go with the basic term. There's also no "The Mighty", "Invincible" or "Incredible" to be found anywhere - just the core title.

Asgardian (talk) 02:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does the indicia say? Doczilla (talk) 02:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For what? Wikipedia? My point is the horse has bolted on this one.

Asgardian (talk) 02:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

For vol. 1? "The Avengers". And we went over this before with Asgardian, cites and refs should be the indicia title for the publication, not fan=geek shorthand.

And just because it's wrong in other articles isn't license to keep on doing it wrong, or pushing to revert to the wrong format. - J Greb (talk) 03:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I remember our going over this before. I remember pulling out some old issues and looking at the indicia, now that you mention it. Doczilla (talk) 03:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And no one picked this up before now? In 2 + years? Perhaps JGreb would like to go back and correct all the articles with "geek shorthand"? He will be busy.

Asgardian (talk) 03:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were in on those discussions. Doczilla (talk) 03:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recall the discussion from about two months ago, but nothing concrete was ratified. I don't mind adding a tidbit to the title...but there's a lot to change if this is the case.

Asgardian (talk) 03:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm talking about something from much further back than that. I don't know the discussion of 2 months ago. Doczilla (talk) 03:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While a postal indicia and a trademarked logo are valid in different ways, the least confusing thing for a general-audience reader is to use the trademarked logo that is highly visible on the cover and on the cover illustrations. But even if we don't want to use the trademarked logo (The Uncanny X-Men, The Incredible Hulk), a distinction can still be made between an adjective and a simple definite article ("The").--Tenebrae (talk) 04:05, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi[edit]

hi i was wondering if you could help me put the religions of the comic book characters in their articles. You can find a list of catholic characters here.

http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Invisible_Kid_II.html

and can i get you to help with the "pinata" article? i would myself but im a n00b.

and also can be your apprentice? im a n00b tell me what to do lol.Wikid00d88 (talk) 20:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Sorry, missed part of your message on my talk page the other day. I hope everything works out okay on the personal front. All the best, Hiding T 11:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:IrishMcCalla2.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:IrishMcCalla2.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New section[edit]

I received your most recent comment and wish to respond and hope that you will be fair in re-assessing my father's Wikipedia page.

There are four quotes on the page, three of which contain negative comments. The fourth quote really has nothing to do with Vince Colletta.

1)(From Pierre Comtois) Despite the serendipity of the two men's styles, Colletta would later be criticized, with good reason, for compromising Kirby's artistic vision by eliminating much of the detail that the artist put into his work".[2] <<Pierre Comtois is a Fanzine writer, not an artist or a professional in the comic book business. His negative assessment of Vince Colletta's style is only an opinion and can't seriously be considered for inclusion in a Wikipedia page.>>

2)(From Mark Evanier)Back when he was working for Marvel, Ditko said he'd pick up the latest issues in the office and always check the credits before taking the comics home. If he found Colletta's name — especially as Kirby's embellisher — he would make a point of putting the comic back, or even in a wastebasket. And he'd make sure Stan saw what he was doing and knew the reason why".[3]<<Again, hearsay that reflects negatively on Vince Colletta and serves no purpose whatsoever. It is a supposed quote from artist Steve Ditko-how is that verifiable?>>

3)(From Len Wein)Len Wein, on what he enjoyed most about working on Luke Cage: "Getting to work with the wonderful George Tuska, before Vinnie Colletta got his hands on the pencils and ruined them".[4] <<Why does this appear on Vince Colletta's Wikipedia page instead of George Tuska's Wikipedia page? Again, an unneccesary negative reflection on Vince Colletta. You wrote that the Len Wein quote is verifiable, I agree but it is just his opinion and you know what they say about opinions...-this s**t does not belong on Wikipedia.>>

4)(From Jim Shooter) <<This belongs on Frank Miller's Wikipedia page if anywhere. Although it is a positive reflection on Vinnie Colletta, it is basically irrelevant. I want to add this as it relates to my criticisms in general-Your inclusion of the above negative comments is akin to placing the Jim Shooter quote on the Joe Orlando page (it is not).>>

How did these quotes end up on Vince Colletta's Wikipedia page, anyway? Did you dig them up or were they contributed by the people named above? If they were contributed by Mssrs. Evanier and Wein, there is certainly cause to think that a vendetta of some sort is involved.

You wrote: "If you can find verifiable quotes, particularly from notable cartoonists, then you can include them with appropriate references, and provided that you do not put too much weight on one point of view." It appears that too much weight has been put on one (negative) point of view. You earlier wrote that the quotes were balanced, something about 2 quotes positive, 2 quotes negative and 1 quote neutral-I hope that I have demonstrated that this is certainly not the case.

I have viewed most of the Wikipedia pages you worked on and have found nothing in any of them that shows as much negativity as you have allowed to appear on the Vince Colletta Wikipedia page.

Finally, please forgive my previous attempts at editing and correspondence, I will try to be more judicious in my use of proper form in the future.

Franklin222 (talk) 13:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin222Franklin222 (talk) 13:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:John_Buscema_1975.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:John_Buscema_1975.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 20:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bucky?[edit]

Well, I last edited that one in October... :) But I see what's going on. I don't really have much of an opinion on that issue. Probably the classic look is the better pick for the infobox, but I'll see what develops on your discussion before I toss my hat in on that one. BOZ (talk) 01:29, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Vince Colletta[edit]

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

I guess that my main objection continues to be the third-hand reporting (Steve Ditko's supposed comments) that appear; and the personal nature of the comments that add nothing to the biography whatsoever. I will say this about Mr. Ditko and Mr. Evanier-Mr. Ditko had a problem with Daredevil being taken from him after the first issue when it was given to Kirby/Colletta and, although Vinnie had nothing to do with that decision, there was some resentment toward him from Mr. Ditko. To be very candid, Vince didn't identify with one super hero or book in particular as some artists did, he was just interested in working. In any event, while it is conceivable to me that Mr. Ditko said what was quoted by Mr. Evanier, why does it belong in Wikipedia? Mr. Evanier is or was a fringe player in the comic book scene. He was a big fan of Jack Kirby. Mr. Kirby loved my dad's inking of his work but he did take issue when Vince would either change or erase some of his pencils, mostly backgrounds. Mr. Evanier, in his adulation of Mr. Kirby, has been quoted often as being offended by my dad's audacity. I commented a little bit about those backgrounds in a blog-http://colletta.blogspot.com/-and his being allowed to place (supposed) negative comments on Vince's Wikipedia page serves no purpose.

As for Len Wein, his opinion is that Vince ruined George Tuska's pencils. Your response shows me that, when it comes to comic art, you know your stuff, and you have to agree that Mr. Wein's comments are utter nonsense. That notwithstanding, I continue to feel that Mr. Wein's comments are nothing more than a personal opinion and not worthy of being included in a Wikipedia page.

To me, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and a darn good one. I have never read an encyclopedia where people's personal opinions were part of the content.

Thanks again for your response and best of luck in the future.

Franklin222 (talk) 20:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 20:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta[edit]

I also want to point out that Pierrre Comtois' description of Vince Colletta's inks over Jack Kirby's pencils, if quoted in its entirety, paints a completely different picture than just the segment you chose to include; especially the last part.

"But the most important thing that separates this story from the series' regular run was the inking over Kirby of Vince Colletta. Although Colletta had been assigned to work over Kirby's pencils for Tales of Asgard almost since its beginning, up to now, he'd not yet contributed to the regular Thor strip. This story here, more than any other, probably cemented him in Lee's mind as the perfect inker to take over the regular Thor feature from the soon-to-depart Chic Stone. Sure, his work on Tales of Asgard had given those stories the epic, antique feel they demanded, but it was here, for the first time, that Colletta's hair-thin, detailed inking style (that seemed devoid of large areas of black, used to give figures weight and heft but that was also an artistic concept yet to be fully explored by the time of the Middle Ages, an era whose crude woodcuts most reflected the art style needed by the Thor strip) captured the elusive quality of otherworldly drama that the strip would increasingly demand as Lee and Kirby took it away from the everyday world of super-villains to a mythic plane where the forces of evil were on a far more gargantuan scale. Despite the serendipity of the two men's styles, Colletta would later be criticized, with good reason, for compromising Kirby's artistic vision by eliminating much of the detail that the artist put into his work. Be that as it may, what Colletta chose to keep, he rendered in such a way that showed off aspects of Kirby's art that no inker before or since has ever been able to reproduce. In this issue's story for example, where Kirby has chosen to lay it out in big, quarter page panels, Colletta outlines the bulky figures of Thor and Hercules in thin, scratchy lines that reflect more accurately the original look of the penciled art than heavier blacks would have done."

Selective editing often skews a writers intended meaning. The last part of Mr. Comtois' description obviously shows that he is complimenting Mr. Colletta's work, where you chose to chop Mr. Comtois' description makes it seem derogatory.

Regards,,

Franklin222 (talk) 21:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 21:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta[edit]

You know, that small addition makes so much of a difference. Probably not enough to make my youngest sister, Cynthia stop feeling so bad because of the other stuff, but better for sure.

Is the following quote acceptable for publication in Vince Colletta's Wikipedia page? It is from http://www.samcci.comics.org/ and is a quote from Nick Simon. . "Vince Colletta was a talented penciler and one of the mainstays of the Atlas/Marvel romance titles of the 1950's. In the 1960's he made his name all over again as an inker, principally over Jack Kirby. For me, the Kirby/Colletta version of Thor is the definitive one."

Another question: I could probably find more complimentary stuff about Vinnie but Wikipedia pages don't go on forever-should I send you more or is this quite enough?

Thanks for your consideration.

Franklin222 (talk) 23:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 23:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta[edit]

Hi,

Just another comment I came across from somone in the business. I copied it in its entirety but put the part that I feel is pertinent in bold. It is from: http://www.comicbookconventions.com/forum/index.php?topic=593.msg776#msg776

chris Guest

  Re: It has begun! The MegaCon Checklist is here!

« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2002, 03:19 PM »

Hi Austin...

Yeah, Brian DOES do a great job with that checklist every year...where he gets the time, I don't know.

And of course, everyone ELSE knows that inkers aren't tracers. It's a talant and an art in itself....we all know what a Vince Colletta can do to a Neal Adams pencils as opposed to a Dick Giordano. As I mentioned elsewhere I used to assist several inkers in my day,working for MURPHY ANDERSON, as well as assisting Dave Hunt and Joe Sinnott. I know how hard it is to make a bad penciler look good, or to make a great penciller keep looking great. So bravo to you and all the other comic professionals out there...I wish more of you would stop by this board and say hi.

See you at Megacon.

Chris Padovano

Thanks again for letting me post to you and I am sure there will be more.

PS: I wrote to someone who supposedly is in contact with George Tuska. I asked Mr. Tuska for his thoughts on Len Wein's quote. I will let you know what he says (good or bad)if and when he writes back.

Franklin222 (talk) 16:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 16:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PPS: Regarding Do not copy text from other websites without a GFDL-compatible license. I don't know if copying the entry above violates this rule. You will let me know.

Howard the Duck[edit]

Looks like we have a problem, there. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 23:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfC[edit]

Hey folks,

I'd like to get some community feedback on the comparative merits of the current version of the Buscema article and this longer version http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Buscema&oldid=181851662 - but to avoid any misunderstanding I asked - jc37 to request and moderate the RfC, which he's graciously agreed to do so on condition that User:Tenebrae and User:Hiding agree with this. Feedback on this would be appreciated.

Cheers,

--Skyelarke (talk)

cc. User:Hiding, User:Jc37 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyelarke (talk • contribs) 01:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CC of reply at User talk:Skyelarke:

I think it might be best if Skyelarke and I abide by the spirit of the Arbitration decision, and remain uninvolved in the John Buscema article for the duration of the ruling. I'm not sure why there's any rush, given the deadline. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is something that shouldn't be rushed, and the proposal has been on the table for over a month now. And I agree with the no deadline essay, although I think that waiting two more months to resolve a specific content question is a little too long; moreover, I think that the editing ban is good a safeguard to insure that no misundertandings that might lead to edit warring occur - Also, the arbitration decision does state that 'they are welcome to edit the talk page', (which is where the RfC would occur) as long as they don't engage in 'any form of disruptive editing, edit-warring, or editing against an established consensus.' Any thoughts?

--Skyelarke

cc. User:Hiding, User:Jc37 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyelarke (talk • contribs) 17:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CC of reply at User talk:Skyelarke:

My gut feeling is it might be better if both of us took some time off from the article, and the Arbitration's proscription is as good as any. There's no reason either of us should be obsessive. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. And that said, I would have to agree. While I appreciate your (Skyelarke's) enthusiasm in wanting to help with the article as soon as possible, and the arbcomm ruling doesn't prohibit such a discussion (indeed, I believe it explains how such should be done), I think we may be overstepeping beyond the "spirit" of the ruling by starting such an overall discussion so soon after the closure. (Especially since no one else supported, or even commented regarding this suggestion when posted there.) Let's just give this some more time. - jc37 10:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool - I agree that right now is not a good time - perhaps we can arrive at a compromise solution - between now and waiting several months perhaps we can have a middle ground, let's say in a months time?

Cheers,

--Skyelarke (talk)

cc. User:Jc37 , User talk:Hiding

Cool - I think it would be simpler to leave aside the idea of a moderator right now and simply make the RfC request myself (in about a month's time) - thanks for your help - Although I do think the concerns raised are valid - there are other factors (most that aren't really appropriate to bring to a Wikipedia talk page) that I feel would make a RfC beneficial to the situation -

If anyone has any questions or doubts concerning this, I would suggest that the following arbitration support ressources are availible for consultation -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Requests_for_clarification

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement

Cheers,

Skyelarke

cc. User:Jc37 , User talk:Hiding —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyelarke (talk • contribs) 15:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Vinnie Colletta[edit]

Hi,

Haven't heard from you since my last couple of contacts. Just incase you haven't read it before, please take a look, from Eddie Campbell. http://eddiecampbell.blogspot.com/2007/05/vincent-colletta-my-favourite-1960s.html

I also want to let you know that when you Google "Vinnie Colletta", as some might do, you get that crappy Len Wein comment first-right in the description line. Very sad...

Regards,

Franklin222 (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:StrangeTales79.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:StrangeTales79.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta[edit]

Hi again and thanks again,

Regarding the Google search, you have to Google Vinnie Colletta, not Vince Colletta.

Just one more, very important piece to refute the alleged comments attributed to Jack Kirby by Mark Evanier. They are from an well-known artist, Scott Koblish, and they quote another famous artist, John Romita, Jr. They appear in http://www.immonen.ca/news/archives/454 which you will absolutely love reading when you have the time to do so. Mr. Koblish responds to a comment from an interviewer.

Scott Koblish May 14, 2007 “So it’s no wonder that Kirby and others evidenced disdain for Colletta, his personality aside; he changed stuff!”

"That’s not true for Jack- Jack never evidenced any disdain for Vinnie’s stuff. John Romita Sr. used to tell me that Jack Kirby preferred Vinnie’s inks and would ask for him to work on projects togther. Vinnie didn’t get a bad rep until the fans started taking editorial positions in the 80’s. Ditto for Don Heck. Neither one got a bad rep until they were either dead or replaced. It’s easier to ruin the reputation of a dead man."

Enough said about this, I hope that it can be used in place of, or next to, Evanier's quote. Koblish and Romita are both artists while Evanier is not.

Finally, I have obtained George Tuska's home address from one of his friends and will write a letter to him tomorrow. As promised, I will let you know what Mr. Tuska says about Vinnie's inking of his work in the event that I hear from him and, to be totally fair, if Mr. Tuska does say something negative about my dad's inking, I will give you my wholehearted permission to use it, especially in place of Wein's comment.

Regards,

Franklin222 (talk) 07:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 07:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta[edit]

Hi,

Here is what I see when I Google Vinnie Colletta.

    Advanced Search
 Preferences 

Web  Personalized Results 1 - 10 of about 730 for vinnie colletta. (0.27 seconds)

Vince Colletta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaLen Wein, on what he enjoyed most about working on Luke Cage: "Getting to work with the wonderful George Tuska, before Vinnie Colletta got his hands on the ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vince_Colletta - 36k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this

Vinnie Colletta (comics) - Comicvine, the Comic book Encylopedia ...Vinnie Colletta. This page describes a comicbook creator. Comic Vine is User Powered ... This page covers the comicbook creator Vinnie Colletta . ... www.comicvine.com/vinnie-colletta/30961/ - 25k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this

Colleta's list of missing figures.... - Page 2 - Comic Book ...Vinnie Colletta was the art director at DC Comics and Jack Kirby had no say in who did or did not ink his pencils. As far as Vinnie's assistants, ... forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?p=6293586 - 54k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this

THE BEAT » Blog Archive » The wit and wisdom of Vinnie CollettaVinnie Colletta is a legendary name in comic book circles — legendary because he could be one of the worst inkers in the biz, but kept getting work becuase ... pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/04/30/the-wit-and-wisdom-of-vinnie-colletta/ - 34k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this

The Fate of the Artist: Vincent Colletta, my favourite 1960s "Inker""Vinnie Colletta is a legendary name in comic book circles — legendary ... "Vinnie Colletta. Much has been written about Vinnie in the years since his ... eddiecampbell.blogspot.com/2007/05/vincent-colletta-my-favourite-1960s.html - 67k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this

More in a moment but the Len Wein comment is right there in the forefront of the first Google result.

Franklin222 (talk) 15:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 15:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vinnie Colletta[edit]

Good morning,

I hope that you had occasion to do that Google search on Vinnie Colletta and found Len Wein's comment displayed so prominently. Sad, like I said before, and not, in any way, something that someone looking up information on "Vinnie Colletta" should see displayed first and foremost.

With regard to Mr. Koblish's comments, I was under the impression that a quote from an established professional in the comic book field, such as Mr. Koblish is, would be acceptable material regardless of where it was published. That goes double for the quote by John Romita, Sr. That prompts the question: Where was Mr. Wein's comment published?

I am happy to know that you enjoyed the fact that I found George Tuska. His friend, artist Dewey Cassell wrote to me and here is his email to me in part:

I know they would love to hear from you. Their 60th wedding anniversary is this Friday. Dorothy just had a heart valve replacement a little over a week ago, but she is home and recovering well. Because of George's hearing difficulties, he doesn't talk on the phone, but Dorothy is glad to pass on messages to him. He will be 92 in April and he still does commissions.

I wrote a book about George that was published in 2005. If you would like a copy, just send me your address and I will mail you one. (I think I have one that George autographed.)

I am a big fan of your father's work as well. I love the World's Greatest Superheroes newspaper strip. I think George and your father made a great team. I have the original art from several of the strips. (I am pitching a book to DC about the strip.)

I would love to interview you sometime, if you are willing. I write articles for comics-related magazines like BACK ISSUE, Rough Stuff, and Alter Ego. Let me know what you think.

Thanks for getting in touch with me. And please do contact George and Dorothy.

Dewey Cassell

Thanks again for the great correspondence, Tenebrae. This has been a lot of fun and I will certainly look into creating a web site featuring my father sometime soon.

Franklin222 (talk) 15:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 15:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biography section[edit]

No, I wasn't aware that the comics club had called for a superfluous "Biography" header, and your application of it to Dave Sim demonstrates a problem with it. Other than the housekeeping bits, the whole article is biography. How are Sim's fights with TCJ, his conversion, and what he's been doing with his life since Cerebus not part of his biography? - JasonAQuest (talk) 20:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't presumptuously "thank" me for "understanding" a standard which I find shortsighted and ideosyncratic. That's incredibly condescending. Even though you say that "we" (I assume this means you and the other WikiProject Comics members) drafted an example outline for comics creators, those articles are first and foremost biographies, not comics articles, and the standards for biographical articles in Wikipedia as a whole apply. If you look around Wikipedia, you'll find a wealth of biographical articles that don't clutter themselves up with a "biography" header, and there's a reason for that. Your "exemplar" seems to have been drafted on the assumption that a person's "biography" is something separate from their professional work, and Dave Sim is a perfect demonstration of where this assumption breaks down. Even if there is information in an article about a person that is not strictly biographical (e.g. Awards), it is quite common that the majority of it will be. Maybe you're too stuck thinking of comics articles in terms of character articles, where their so-called biographies are just one aspect of the subject, but for a person that's simply not the case, at least not as a rule. - JasonAQuest (talk) 21:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can only see that your precious "exemplar" contains inappropriate demands. - JasonAQuest (talk) 21:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see the development of a "congenial consensus" - or any discussion whatsoever - about the example template. That's why I started a discussion about that aspect of it.... against my better judgment, to be honest. I'm not a member of WikiProject Comics, and that's almost entirely because of you. When I first bumped up against you (as an anon) I was warned by other editors to steer clear of you, and I've subsequently seen the kind of mean-spirited pissing contests you engage in. You treat people like retarded children, then get upset when they don't kowtow to you. These fights you start (intentionally or not) are counterproductive, and detrimental to the civility of Wikipedia. I don't know if you treat people with such condescension on purpose to stoke your ego, or if you just don't know how to get along well with your peers, but I do think you should be aware of the impact it has on WikiProject Comics. I'm sure you do a lot to help, and I admire the patience of those who put up with your eccentricity, but I can't help wondering how much positive it works out to on balance. - JasonAQuest (talk) 22:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CC of reply at User talk:JasonAQuest:

I find it remarkable that someone who flames your talk page with needlessly personal invective and unsupported claims that amount to slander can make accusations about a person's character. I feel badly that someone, for whatever personal reasons, finds it necessary to answer politeness with vicious acrimony. When people cannot debate on the merits of their cases, they insult the other party and put up smokescreens. I would like to suggest a compromise, but given what I have seen from your words and actions, I don't know that it would accepted in the spirit in which it is genuinely offered.--Tenebrae (talk) 22:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Your comments do not appear to be polite; I have found them insulting from the very first. If you don't want to understand how others perceive you... that's not my shortcoming. - JasonAQuest (talk) 22:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need to point out that I never called you childish names. That behavior would be your shortcoming. And perhaps it is possible, and worth considering, that you misinterpreted simple politesse? --Tenebrae (talk) 23:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta[edit]

Good morning,

I wonder if this entry meets your criteria for inclusion. BTW, I have found so much great stuff lately by doing research into my father's work. I suppose that I have you to thank for it, don't I? It has been most rewarding. One of the most interesting things I read, from a historical perspective-Vinnie having been criticized for messing up Jack Kirby's later work and Kirby allegedly having him taken off his assignments-a quote by Joe Sinnott (not to be used for publication, if you don't mind): "I remember getting Kirby pages in the mail during that time and marveling at them-not for too long, of course, because I did have to get to work and ink them. But, as nice as they were to look at, some pages would take more time. Jack did excellent work, all the time. Near the end of his life, when I got something of his to ink, it slipped a little, but I always managed to tweak it so no one saw the difference."

Well, here is the entry I found on Vince: <<Colletta began his six-year run on Kirby's "The Mighty Thor" with the "Tales of Asgard" backup feature in Journey into Mystery #106 (July 1964). His arid inks brought a flattened look that, rather than being a liability, instead brought a majestic, medieval-tapestry feel that emphasized the pageantry and grandeur of Kirby and writer-editor Stan Lee's increasingly mythic tableau.>> It is from http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/vince-colletta/. This is not a blog. You will find much of the stuff that appears in your Wikipedia page in here, as well.

Regards,

Franklin222 (talk) 16:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 16:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go with that.[edit]

Re: My gut feeling is it might be better if both of us took some time off from the article, and the Arbitration's proscription is as good as any. There's no reason either of us should be obsessive.

You're right to go with your gut on that. Doczilla (talk) 23:03, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:PunMax44.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:PunMax44.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 01:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Blackeagles[edit]

Note that in the last installation of RfC/Grazon, it was suggested that Blackeagles is a sockpuppet of blocked user Grazon. See Grazon's user page for some information on this problematic editor. —SlamDiego_←T 03:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sub-Mariner33.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Sub-Mariner33.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MarvelComics1 Sub-Mariner p12.jpg too. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheBooksOfMagic ongoingseries 1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:TheBooksOfMagic ongoingseries 1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:UncannyTales.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:UncannyTales.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Amazing Adventures 31.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Amazing Adventures 31.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CaptAmerica3.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:CaptAmerica3.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Animatedfunnycomictunes20.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Animatedfunnycomictunes20.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:AmazingAdventuresV1no4.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:AmazingAdventuresV1no4.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ASailor'sStoryMarvel.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:ASailor'sStoryMarvel.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Vince Colletta[edit]

Good morning,

I just sent this to Doczilla and send this copy to you for your condideration.

I see that you are a prolific contributor to Wikipedia and I wonder how someone has that much time on his hands (given that most people sleep 8 hours a day). I am guessing that you devote the other 16 hours to Wikipedia.

Recently, you commented on an ongoing discussion between Tenebrae and myself regarding my father's (Vincent Colletta) Wikipedia page. You seemed to say, basically, "give it a rest" as did Tenebrae.

I am in the unique position of defending my dad, as I'm sure you would be doing if your father's Wikipedia page contained quotes that were exceedingly defamatory (Evanier, Wein). For the record, I also consider them to be unneccesary within the context of a biography.

I am going to go out on a limb and venture a guess that you did not view the entire list of 87 creators that were created by Tenebrae before commenting. I will suggest that you do so but, if you don't feel that it is required reading, I will summarize what I found.

My original assessment of the percentage of creators that had nothing but positive quotes in their bios was going to be around 90% but as I continued to read the bios I have changed that to 99%. Of the few bios that contained derogatory quotes (Abel, Alascia, DuBay, Fraccio, Powell and Rico), only one of them, a quote by Allen Bellman about Don Rico, was as vile as the Evanier and Wein quotes about Vinnie. Similarly, Bellman's entry was a "he said" type of quote akin to Evaniers which I feel is inappropriate for an encyclopedic subject.

My last post to Tenebrae was to ask whether a quote that I found about my father, that was not from a blog or talklist, would be considered. My post to you, however, asks that you thoroughly research a subject before commenting on it. If you research this one, you will find that the negative quotes on the Vincent Colletta Wikipedia page, and their level of contempt, are completely out of proportion to the rest of the creators biographies done by Tenebrae. I am also sending this discussion to him for his consideration and re-consideration of how unbalanced my father's biography is in comparison with those of his peers.

Franklin222 (talk) 15:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Franklin CollettaFranklin222 (talk) 15:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Avengers36panel.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Avengers36panel.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Avengers48.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Avengers48.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FeatureFunnies18.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:FeatureFunnies18.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FeatureFunnies7.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:FeatureFunnies7.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ComcsMagazineV1no1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:ComcsMagazineV1no1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FightinArmy76.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:FightinArmy76.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CrackComics5.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:CrackComics5.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FF10.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:FF10.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ChanderlRedTide-panel.GIF[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:ChanderlRedTide-panel.GIF. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ChandlerRedTide2.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:ChandlerRedTide2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HouseOfMystery160.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:HouseOfMystery160.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:LadyRawhide v1n1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:LadyRawhide v1n1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HitComics18.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:HitComics18.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MSH-CaptainAmerica 1966TVtoon.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:MSH-CaptainAmerica 1966TVtoon.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 00:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MartianChronicles comic.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:MartianChronicles comic.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 00:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Surreal Barnstar[edit]

		The Surreal Barnstar
		The Surreal Barnstar -- for a Wikipedian who adds "special flavor" to the community by acting as a sort of wildcard. You keep things interesting while working hard, striving to improve article quality and promote project goals. Don't let anyone bring you down. Doczilla (talk) 02:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, I always thought this was an fun looking barnstar with a cool name. Doczilla (talk) 23:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of African-American firsts[edit]

i'm not sure why you executed a wholesale revert of my edits. 1) i made no editorial comments, i moved a comma. 2) a male kiss and a gay kiss are completely different, and if the all in the family episode is notable as the first interracial male kiss, it is worthy of it own line item. 3) each of the edits i made where sound, accurate, and in accordance with wp policies on formatting and documentation. 4) rather than attack, revert and wait for the fall-out, you should know it is preferred to attempt a dialog first. i have restored my edits, and i too will search for the correct name of the w&g writer. --emerson7 02:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doczilla's RfA[edit]

.:

Oh, no! There goes To-ky-o! Admin Doczilla!

:.

File:Godzilla(01)reverse.jpg	Thanks for !voting! Thank you for !voting in my RfA which resulted in the collapse of civilization with 92 (94?) support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral. Blame jc37 and Hiding for nominating me, everyone who had questions or comments, everyone who !voted, everyone who tallied the numbers correctly, and WJBScribe who closed without shouting, "No mop for you!" Seriously, your response has overwhelmed me. I am deeply grateful.	Tenebrae Thank you for offering me my first non-voter congratulations.

"The bad news is time flies. The good news is you're the pilot." - Michael Althsuler

Doczilla _RAWR! 08:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Home Page

Talk Page

Joke Alert

Presents

I know you would have wanted to be involved in the RfA, and I appreciate that fact alone. Truly. Best, Doczilla _RAWR! 08:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Witness-Timely-MysticComics.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Witness-Timely-MysticComics.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:TeenTitans23.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on Image:TeenTitans23.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[Talk:Image:TeenTitans23.jpg|the article's talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Bass[edit]

hello again. you reverted my reference link for Karen Bass because is already in the main article. can you cite a wp policy to substantiate that? --emerson7 23:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Shadow[edit]

It's all good. Like you said, no matter how it all turns out, we should all stay friends and what not. Your arguments have merit, even if I don't always agree with them. Have fun! Now, back to my dissertation!!! Rabidwolfe (talk) 18:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edit to the lead here, it looks good. I shifted things around a bit but didn't have time to edit content when I was working on it. Hewinsj (talk) 16:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Batman[edit]

Do not remove the quote until the discussion is resolved.

Removing it removes the context for those discussing it. New participants in the discussion need to know what is or isn't being removed before they can venture a valid opinion.

If it is agreed to remove it later, it can easily be removed. If it is agreed to keep it, someone has to go back and find it.

I know you don't like Brubaker, but that's not reason to damage the encylopedia to make your point before anything has been decided.

Duggy 1138 (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to undo[edit]

Tons of articles head the list of numbered textual footnotes as "References." And more than a few also have "Sources." End of discussion. Ted Watson (talk) 19:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the middle of something & in a hurry to get back to it, and I found your original "argument" far less than convincing, so I apologize for my abrupt tone. That said, when you have arbitrary policy on one hand, and general practice the vast majority of which is going unchallenged and is not inherently problematical on the other hand, the majority rules (note that our going back and forth from each other's talk pages is counter to stated policy as quoted to me here, but you and I are doing just that, most editors do, and that self-admitted newbie who made the quote is the absolutely sole instance of complaint or criticism about it I've encountered in my one full year here). Please notice that I have refrained from further reversion pending the outcome of this discussion. Ted Watson (talk) 19:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely fair! And thank you for obviously (on "Preview"ing, that looks like I might have meant some sort of sarcasm for your not having explicitly said anything; honestly, I don't) accepting my apology for my tone. Ted Watson (talk) 20:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Digger article[edit]

How goes it.

I've been working on Digger (comics). Since you've shown interest in the article in the past I was hoping you would give me advice about how things are now.

Thanks. :) Stephen Day (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind words and your help. :)

Digger (comics) is a favorite article of mine amoung the ones I've created. With all of the AfDs in the comics project recently, I've been worried that this article could be put up for deletion. If that happens, I want it to live or die on the merits of what it is. Stephen Day (talk) 03:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Shadow[edit]

Thanks for agreeing on that. I realize that I was being a little bit blunt and possibly redundant but that comes from editing on short breaks. I think we were just looking at the problem from slightly different angles. To be honest I wasn't prepared for it to end that quickly, but I don't mind

The article never changed, and never did focus on the main character but included that along side the information on production and various incarnations of the franchise. I think someone besides you insisted on changing it to something like Shadow (fictional character) without actually checking the article and the argument that resulted from that gave us the current name.

Anyway, thanks again. I'll stick with it and hope that things get sorted out without too much fuss. Hewinsj (talk) 04:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MSH-CaptainAmerica 1966TVtoon.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:MSH-CaptainAmerica 1966TVtoon.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Marvel2-in-1n.20.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:Marvel2-in-1n.20.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MarvelBoy1-2000.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:MarvelBoy1-2000.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MarvelPremeire29.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:MarvelPremeire29.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MarvelSuper-Heroes16.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:MarvelSuper-Heroes16.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MarvelSuper-Heroes17.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:MarvelSuper-Heroes17.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:OurCancerYear.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:OurCancerYear.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Marvelage22.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:Marvelage22.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ManInBlack4.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:ManInBlack4.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Buscema#Request_for_Comment_-_Integrate_two_versions

--Skyelarke (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MovieTunes3.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:MovieTunes3.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Menace5 AtlasComics.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:Menace5 AtlasComics.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:OutfromBoneville.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:OutfromBoneville.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nightstalkers16.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:Nightstalkers16.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CaptainAmerica(Atlas)78.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:CaptainAmerica(Atlas)78.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 18:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ManComics_n1.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:ManComics_n1.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 02:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Long Halloween[edit]

I need HELP!!!! I am a Batman fan, but not that good of an editor, I need help expeanding The Long Halloween article. I added a reception part, but I need more Help please help or enlist aid!! -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kazaan (talk • contribs) 05:13, 28 March 2008

Vince Colletta Wikipedia page[edit]

Hello Tenebrae,

When we last corresponded, I wanted to include a positive quote about Vince Colletta but you declined to approve it, saying that the perfect balance existed between positive and negative quotes as it was. The positive quote was from a proper source, according to you so that was not the problem. Your objection stemmed more from the fact that enough text existed and that you considered it fair and balanced.

I now find that a negative Joe Sinnott quote has been added. I would like to see it removed and also have you respond regarding why it was allowed to stay while my positive quote was not.

Regards,

Franklin222 (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Franklin222Franklin222 (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the best[edit]

Hey pal. Hope your life is okay. My email is relatively active if you need me. Hiding T 20:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to hear everything is okay, and I hope it remains so. Look after yourself, and if you do ever need to talk, you know where I am. I've just scored quite a few back issues of TCJ, so let me know what creators you're working on. Just stumbled upon a small obit of Dick Dillin, so I'll see if that can be used in the article. Hiding T 16:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The obit has a photo, actually. If and when I ever get a scanner that works with my new system or my old computer which works with my old scanner, I'll scan it in. I think we can use non-free images of deceased people. Hiding T 16:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Curiously, the Journal give his year of birth as 1928 and age at death 52 accordingly. Hiding T 17:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy[edit]

My, it's crowded in here. Anyway, I've written an article about my other favorite Batman writer, David Vern Reed but I don't know how to submit it to Wiki. It seems that every "how to..." I look up, leads me to another and another, ad infinitum!

A simple lead or "1,2,3"--tip would be much appreciated. If your curious about it, you can read it on my talk page. I learned that much from all the Wiki "How to..."s DOH!Bernard ferrell (talk) 17:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Golden Age characters[edit]

Welcome back! I have fixed and added a lot of content on the Marvel Golden Age characters - I know you're interested in characters like that, so maybe you'd like to take a look at it some time. :) 204.153.84.10 (talk) 14:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you had a chance to check this out? :) 204.153.84.10 (talk) 16:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool, it's a handy reference with links to a bunch of older characters, so I figured maybe you could make use of it. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Been meaning to ask...[edit]

You ever visit Ars Technica? ThuranX (talk) 11:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a reg there with the same screenname, that's all. He's usually got some thought out positions. It's not an uncommon word, so I didn't particularly assume it was you, but thought it might be. laters, hope all is well. ThuranX (talk) 03:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back[edit]

Good to see you! BOZ (talk) 13:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

...for the heads up. Got it. =), Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 18:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Captain America edits...[edit]

per this edit, you may want to join this discussion. ThuranX (talk) 20:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New article[edit]

Hi Tenebrae. Although I have focused more on sports, I still care about the comics work being done. I have created a new comic book article called Portrayal of black people in comic books and it is definitely a work in progress. I was wondering if you would like to look it over at your convenience and perhaps provide a few suggestions. Thanks for your time. Cheers Maple Leaf (talk) 22:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things[edit]

First, is this edit by you? [1] I'm asking here first because I respect you and I'd rather be upfront than go to WP:CHU. Also, part of the Arbitration ruling was that "Sustained editorial conflict is not an appropriate method of resolving disputes." What I'm doing here is asking you to look through your comments at WP:AE and think about the tone and the necessity of some of them. It's better to talk about the content than the editor, and stick to facts and keep it as civil and neutral as possible. For future reference, try not to personalise issues if at all possible, for example where you state "I've stayed off Wikipedia for a while largely because of this kind of thing, and Asgardian's reverts began as soon as I returned" should probably in future instances be left in the initial draft, not in the finished version. Try to focus on discussing the content. Anyway, all the best, Hiding T 17:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. :) I thought about saying something myself, but I'm glad Hiding did it first because he probably knows you a lot better than I do. Truth be told, it seems to be that Asgardian (while far from perfect, but who isn't?) has gotten a lot better in recent months. I've seen him less likely to edit war, and he'll discuss things with people more than he used to, so there is definite improvement. To be frank, I didn't like him very much when I first started getting involved with the comics project, but over time I've come to appreciate him more. Take a backseat look at him and keep an objective eye on him while others deal with him; maybe you'll see where I'm coming from and maybe you won't. I don't want to see you tripping yourself up over your personal feelings towards someone you've had a longstanding conflict with - I know how that can be. :) BOZ (talk) 18:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding. I think it would be best if you stick to the facts, and ignore any condescending comments, or if they bother you simply post that you have been called condescending to the Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts and provide a diff, and then leave it alone. Keep to the facts, stay bland and keep your cool, and a lot of the issues you're having on Wikipedia should go away, one way or the other. Life, sadly, is not as simple. Hiding T 18:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:1969ComicArtCon book.jpg}[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:1969ComicArtCon book.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:1977ComicArtConventionProgram.jpg}[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:1977ComicArtConventionProgram.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Artist credit for Jack Abel inks[edit]

Dear Tenebrae, I'd first like to say that the pages you create and your chronicling of some of the more obscure comics creators is refreshing and commendable. Amongst them, the page on Jack Abel which I once corrected the credits given to the image it displays. As the artist of that image (Michael Netzer (Nasser)), I know the work as well as I knew Jack Abel for the many years we shared a room at Continuity Studios and worked together on the Legion of Superheroes stories for DC Comics. My correction was not vandalism. The mistake in the crediting of the image can be traced back to the rescheduling of this story, and that it was not credited in the original comic book, as I'll now explain.

The source of the image in question (http://www.comicsfun.com/gallery/splashes/Legion232p29.gif) has been moved from the original location cited in the Wiki image page. The new location of the source image you used is http://www.comicsfun.com/comicart/K-to-R/Legion232p29

If you look at the caption of the image in the source page, you will note that it is credited to myself (Mike (Nasser) Netzer)as the penciller. It also carries a question mark after the issue number (231 ? ).

The reason for this discrepancy is that when Jack and I originally produced this story it was scheduled for issue #232, as is written on the original scan of the art. But after the art was produced, an editorial decision was made to publish it in a giant sized issue #231 (one issue previous to the original scheduling), as the second part of a two part lead story. Issue # 231 can be seen at the GCD database at this URL: http://www.comics.org/details.lasso?id=31409

As you can see, the GCD page shows two sequences to the lead story. The first is "A Day in the Death of a World!" penciled by James Sherman and inked by Jack Abel. The second sequence, "3 Hours to ... Holocaust!" carries the exact same credits.

Now please look at a scan of the second sequence splash page on my site: http://www.michaelnetzer.com/rEvolution/images/stories/galleries/comicsint/leg_3.jpg

As you can see, the splash page is not credited. This was a mistake because of the last minute change from issue #232 to Issue #231. But if you research this issue or ask people who can identify art styles, you will find that this is not James Sherman pencils, rather mine. I have no reason to take credit for anyone else's work and would not place images credited to myself on my site which were created by others. I have my own gallery page for the Legion of Superheroes which also carries these images amongst others. http://michaelnetzer.com/rEvolution/content/view/259/87/

The image you used in the Jack Abel page comes from this same story which this splash page belongs to. This is why the original art collectors credit me with penciling that page in the image source which you used, because art collectors are able to identify the art style, and they know that they own a Mike (Nasser) Netzer original. Not a Rick Estrada or James Sherman.

I believe this is a good image to use as an example of Jack Abel inking and that it behooves Wikipedia not to make such a mistake in crediting it. I only ask of you to research what I've said here, perhaps look at the original comic book and note the art styles, and become convinced yourself. I will not make the change again on the Jack Able page or the image page until you are convinced of the veracity of what I say, or if you'd perhaps like to make the change yourself once you are certain.

In the meantime, I will turn to the GCD proprietors regarding this mistake in their crediting the original story this image appears in, #231.

Again, your work on comics creators is commendable and I'd hope we can resolve this discrepancy and credit the image properly. MichaelNetzer (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GCD correction made[edit]

GCD has made a correction of credits for Superboy and The Legion of Superheroes #231 upon my informing them of the mistake and explaining the circumstances. It can be seen in the second chapter credits: http://www.comics.org/details.lasso?id=31409

With the issue number #231 in the original image you used: http://www.comicsfun.com/comicart/K-to-R/Legion232p29 ...this should be ample verification for crediting the art properly in the Jack Abel page. MichaelNetzer (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cc of reply[edit]

Thank you for the kind words, and may I say it is a wonderful thing to speak with someone who knew Jack. I spoke with him many times when he was the proofreader at Marvel, and until his stroke, he was an absolute joy, just so full of life. I remember the first time I met him, at the reception area at 387 Park Ave. South, doing like so many new pros and gushing a little. I told him how much I'd loved his work growing up, that his ink line was so smooth and so lush. Without missing a beat he turned to the receptionist and said, "You hear that? He called me a smooth lush!"

I am so glad something positive came out of my having happened to have chosen that piece of art as an example of Jack's work. Completely by chance — or perhaps comics karma — the relatively high profile given it in Wikipedia allowed a decades-old error to finally be fixed.

And may I say thank you for a second thing: You patience and understanding over the credits as given in one of the standard sources. I wish I'd been familiar with your art (I was always more a Marvel guy). You're artwork is absolutely top-notch, and I can completely see the Neal Adams/Continuity influence.

All's well that ends well, and I'm glad we've given your own legacy a little more coverage. Ah, and Jack Abel -- he's not obscure to the ones of us in the know! With all great good wishes, and a hope that you'll drop a line sometime, --Tenebrae (talk) 02:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knowing Jack Abel[edit]

Thank you for the gracious reply. Jack Abel was a very good spirited and witty person as you said. When we worked together at Continuity and he expressed interest in inking my work, some in the studio tried to discourage the idea because his work was considered not illustrative for the new era or too "slick", as Gene Colan is quoted as saying. The "Neal Adams" age of comics art had classified Jack's inking as not necessarily suitable to the new age. I myself loved his work since childhood and like you, it evoked within me a sense of a rich, plush and smooth look that I thought would enhance my pencils. Through it all, and though he knew what the "young set" was saying about his work, Jack remained a gentleman with a wit and charm that only produced good vibes around him. There was never a sign of bitterness at the general attitude in the mid-Seventies that his style had become "passe" as many said. The room we shared was a magnet for visitors who loved to spend time with Jack and listen to his seasoned wit and charm. Chaykin, Weiss, Morrow, Austin, Starlin and countless others would head straight to our room when visiting Continuity to say hello before they'd visit the front room. When he suggested we begin a Sundays softball game in Central Park and word spread about it, he touched on something that most comics creators needed them, a way to spend time together outside of the work environment. Jack Abel was not only a very talented comics artist but also a connoisseur of life. When I returned to NY for a few years in the early 90's, I settled (by chance) into his neighborhood in Queue Garden Hills, Queens, only two blocks away. We spent much time together in that period and even shared many bus rides into Manhattan. It was a great privilege to also have known him in that period of his life and career, and I learned of his passing away soon after I came back to Israel. Jack Abel was a rare breed of talent and humanity that we don't see as much of today in the comics.

This episode of crediting the art on that image has truly corrected a decades old omission and also brought back many good memories... and I thank you again for the wonderful work and exemplary attitude you're injecting into the Wikepedia comics project. As an aside, you're also right about my own Wiki Biography but with a slight correction that I did not write the original article. Someone who knows me did so and when I could not convince them to edit it so as to fit Wiki standards I began taking it upon myself to do so, even with the risk of COI and other Wiki standards. I made corrections, replaced images in order to avoid copyright issues and provided all the references. It still needs much work and I've refrained from it only in hopes that someone else would do it in order to avoid these issues. Thanks again and best wishes for the good fortune in everything you do. MichaelNetzer (talk) 19:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Finger[edit]

Thanks, it was the best I could find. There are two images of Finger on the net, but neither give any source or copyright holder details, and one of them is, I think, the basis for Robinson's portrait. The two other images are at [2], image alone at [3] which I think is the inspiration for Robinson's and looks to be from a newspaper or book, judging by the yellowed paper, and one at both [4] and was probably sourced from there by [5], image alone [6]. They're both pretty poor images, and the Robinson one, although not a photo, probably works best. Hiding T 10:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a photo of Finger playing golf in Daniels' 60 Years of the World's Greatest Heroes, but I don't have a scanner, and again there's no copyright holder listed. Hiding T 10:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Avengers48.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Avengers48.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not orphaned. Has appeared for some time at Black Knight (Dane Whitman). --Tenebrae (talk) 00:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SpecSpiderMag2.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:SpecSpiderMag2.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)^(Talk) 14:41, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stan Lee[edit]

Pretty easy call ;) I'd been checking out the user's contributions (I have most of the Virgin Comics articles on my watchlist so their edits stood out) and I'd already added that reference over on Virgin Comics - it was remiss of me not to drop a note over in the Stan Lee entry right then but it is always a bit tricky coping with the flood of information after a major comics convention. (Emperor (talk) 02:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Ooooo cool. Hope you took lots of photos!! I tend to get a bit embarrassingly fanboy and forget all about it (even though the last one I went to I had a list of people I should take photos of). (Emperor (talk) 02:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Re: Iron Man[edit]

Thanks! And double thanks for starting up the reviews section. Alientraveller (talk) 18:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:AmazingSpiderMan23.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:AmazingSpiderMan23.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

iron man section[edit]

Thanks for finishing out the reception section for me, one less thing i have to do!--Dlo2012 (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Syd Shores edit[edit]

I am not sure how to properly cite my edits when it is I who am the source. I am Syd Shores' daughter and would like the information provided about my father to be as accurate as possible. If you can assist me in going about accomplishing this, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. CKarlebach.