|The Tag: Page 22
||[Oct. 22nd, 2008|10:50 am]
The book for The Tag is now available in the store, just to make the collection complete. If I had gotten it done a while ago, I could have suggested that you could buy the ebook and find out how the story ends before anyone else, but since we're so close to the end anyway, I might as well just tell you the ending. Everybody dies. Of scurvy.
Also: It should be noted that while I'm happy to make fun of delete-happy wiki editors when a comic calls for it, and although I'm part of a community (webcomics) who have been very vocal about the unfairness of being deleted, and a victim of the same (the above quote about being just under the bar of notability was from my own wikipedia page's deletion process), I am actually on the side of the deleters.
While many may wikipedia editors may not be able to explain their intentions well, or even have the right intentions, I read an interview once that made sense. It said that like it or not, people all over the world use Wikipedia for school papers, so it had better be at LEAST as well researched as a school paper. And with most webcomics, there just aren't enough sources to compile a paper. In most cases, the only source of information is the webcomic site itself. When a webcomic doesn't get an article, that doesn't mean it isn't important, just that there aren't enough sources to write one yet. At least Frank: The Comic gets a Wikipedia mention!
That little chicken scratch pattern in the background of the book cover? I drew that crap by hand, yo.
You rock, Ryan. I wish I could buy the books, but I'm a new grad student who doesn't have money for rent right now, so.... maybe when I'm not broke?
Kinda surprised he went with "Sockpuppet" instead of "Conflict of Interest" in the last panel. :P
And I'd usually agree with the deletion reasoning (the one given under the comic), but it's enforced way too arbitrarily in my eyes. Wikipedia is full of trivia articles, stubs and lists that aren't deleted. And not just because they weren't nominated. Random browsing shows me that, for example, "List of problems solved by MacGyver
" was kept by consensus
. Personally, I'm quite happy that it was kept (I loooove Wikipedia for its weird lists and trivia articles), but it makes me go "Huh?" when compared to some deletions such as the "webcomic purge" from back then. I'm really no Wikipedia pro, but I think they need some more consistent goalposts instead of establishing custom rules for each class of articles ("Websites and -comics will only be kept if there was a non-trivial mention in a notable news outlet, and the site or comic itself shouldn't be used as a source. But lists of fictional elements
or MacGyver problem solutions are fine as long as the parent concept is notable in some way and it's more than just a plot summary. Sourcing is no problem - we'll just cite the series/episode itself!").
In the end, meh. I stopped caring about Wikipedia politics and rule discussions a long time ago (for the sake of my sanity and because internet discussions are so incredibly time-intensive), so as long as they keep at least some of their senseless trivia, I'll be reasonably happy, I guess ;)
Aww. See, now that you've linked to that article, someone will delete it. You watch!
The great majority of the webcomic articles needed to be deleted. You've got no argument from me. But when the article on Girly is deleted, something is terribly wrong. Thank goodness for Comixpedia.
The comic doesn't have it's OWN article, just a mention on the LiveJournal article.
Hilarious. I loved this!
Aww, too bad I can't buy things off the 'net.
2011-04-13 09:37 pm (UTC)
Looking forward to have my say
Hey - I am really delighted to discover this. cool job!