User talk:J Greb/Archive Nov 2009

Hey J Greb, I need an administrators help. I just recently created an article about Gloria Grant. But the redirection of Glory Grant (same character) still goes to List of Spider-Man supporting characters which needs to redirect to the Gloria Grant page. The redirection of it going to that page is the main reason why the article is using her less well known alias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhenderson777 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest way would be to edit the redirect. you can access that by going to Glory Grant and then clicking on the link in "(Redirected from Glory Grant)" that shows up near the top of List of Spider-Man supporting characters.

You would then change

#REDIRECT [[List of Spider-Man supporting characters#Supporting characters]]

to

#REDIRECT [[Gloria Grant]]

- J Greb (talk) 21:20, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, J Greb. I appreciate it. Jhenderson777 (talk) 16:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to undo all the changes User:Koavf has recently instigated against process, and I can;t work out why these articles are still in Category:2000 AD (comics) characters. Any thoughts? Hiding T 12:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I got there in the end. Nightmare. Lost a whole day on this mess. Hiding T 13:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a test run, and I'm confident I can run the bot through to change all instances of superherobox to infobox comics character. Will this mess with anything you're doing? I think I can also get rid of comics color, but it appears it will still leave a line, so I'm going to get an expert at regexp to have a crack at that. Hiding T 14:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a fellow Project editor, I want to thank you both for all the work you're work doing. As always, you and some of the other vets make me proud to be contributing. Comics history has been reported often woefully and sloppily, and I've noticed that since Wikipedia, the mainstream press now gets the nuances and details right when reporting on creators and titles unfamiliar to the general public. Just sayin'. With great regards, -- Tenebrae (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hiding, That shouldn't be a problem. - J Greb (talk) 22:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask, how come I can't add the switch the image of Tim Drak as Red Robin from Red Robin 1# with Robin #150, the image you already have, on the box at the right? I mean, one of this website's purposes is updating current events, right? Drake's not even just Robin anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NeoBatfreak (talk • contribs) 18:44, 7 November 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Actually, using Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Style guidance#Superhero box images, the idea is to use "the most universally recognisable appearance of a character" not the most recent. For Drake that is in no way the current Red Robin costume.

And please remember to sign your talk page comments. - J Greb (talk) 19:58, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just wondering about Micronauts (comics) - it has a comics character infobox, which seems wrong but are they a team? The name is really the name of the toy line so perhaps a team/title box wouldn't be right, or it might. Perhaps just a title infobox, as it is the title. Thoughts? (Emperor (talk) 15:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Title would be a good start... though the "team & title" set for the comic first would also work since IIRC the term was used for the group of characters that were the focus of the series. - J Greb (talk) 22:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, checking there does seem to be a well defined team [1] [2], so even theough the Micronauts are the toys in the comics it does seem to refer to the specific team of heroes (which makes sense) - it has been a while since I read any so I'm a little fuzzy on the details (although I did have the toys too - I occasionally find an arm in the bottom of a box of old crap). I'll go with the team/title box I think and if anyone objects they can downgrade it - at least it is more right than the current one.

On a sidenote I did find the comics character box being used on the Edna Mode article - I suppose it was originally the superhero box so might be used more widely than just comics. I thought I;d flag it while I was thinking of it in case it is problematic (as we are transitioning over from the older name, slowly). (Emperor (talk) 04:35, 7 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I've got a list at User:Hiding/X3 which has instances of a comics infobox on teh article but no comicsproj banner on the talk page. I've been adding banners or altering the infobox where I can, usually swapping superherobox for infobox character. I can't amend some instances, since there doesn't seem to be suitable generic alternatives for all our infoboxes. There's no {{infobox fictional organization}} for example. Edna Mode is on the list though, so I've caught that one. Hiding T 22:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In case you'd like to sign or to offer your thoughts: User talk:BOZ/RFCU Asgardian draft. -- Tenebrae (talk) 03:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude, I was the one that edited the Bendis template to separate Avengers from the rest of his marvel work. I mean if you look at Frank Miller's template it has Batman separate from the rest. Bendis did a lot on avengers over the last 5-6 years, (and whilst its quality is questioned by some, this is not important). There are about five Avengers templates flying around wiki somewhere, but they are not particularly well organised, and they are all over the place. Thing is i reckon if someone was looking for Bendis' work alone, and also all the recent plotlines and events etc., then his template would be better for that. Otherwise we should look at revising the Avengers, New Avengers, Mighty Avengers, Dark Avengers, Initiative and possibly other templates.Ermol (talk) 23:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broad strokes:

• Miller's navbox is separated differently than Bendis to begin with.
• The Batman section in Miller's is not a subsection of any the others there.
• Using the navboxes for the comics, problematic as they maybe, to justify changes to a navbox for a living person is tenuous at best.
• Adding the story lines - splitting the Marvel field into that an titles - may be a good idea, but singling out 1 hard to pin down set by title isn't.

- J Greb (talk) 00:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

meh I can see your point, but I still think that come kind of grouping should exist. Personally I would prefer to get rid of the New/Mighty/Dark/Initiative (perhaps leave initiative cos it falls under other things) templates and reorganise the Avengers template, perhaps do it like the X-Men one and have separate templates for Avengers and Avengers titles and storylines, with stuff like Secret War/Illuminati/Thunderbolts/Young Avengers and all that taken into account there. I mean i am fairly new at the proper editing styles etc. bit to a newcomer it looks a bit confusing. Ermol (talk) 17:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, user Hughveal has been uploading comic book images and claiming them as public domain images. Seeing as this is your bailiwick, and I don't have the time to keep an eye on him. --Xero (talk) 16:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi J Greb. Do you want to be the comicsproj rep at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/infobox template coherence? Looks like they're proposing big changes and I don't know how it would affect our infoboxes. Hiding T 16:14, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• There's an RFC at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/infobox template coherence. Hiding T 20:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you run your eye over Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Templates/Infoboxes, I've revamped it. Hiding T 12:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. - J Greb (talk) 23:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Template Barnstar
		For all your hard work maintaining the comics project infoboxes and other templates, I award you this barnstar. Thanks, it is very much appreciated! Hiding T 12:52, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Me again. Sorry to bombard you. Can you look at The Greatest Hero of Them All, it's doing something weird with categories and it doesn't do it if the infobox isn't there. I can't fathom it although I recall running into the issue before. Sorry. See also The Death of Ferro Lad. Hiding T 20:33, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The template needs the sortkey to be set. - J Greb (talk) 22:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus on the Madelyne Pryor talk page was that the main image should be Goblin Queen, but the issue was with Silvestri as the artist..I thought my image fit both criteria to be the main image. There hasn't been any new discussion on the topic since May so I assumed it would be ok Justiceofthewar (talk) 19:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still, present the image you think should be used on the talk page. It may be a that the image will satisfy every one, but it has been a sticking point. Hence the note in the 'box prior to you adding the image.

And in all honest, that the topic has been quiet since May, when the infobox had the image removed, is more a case of accepting/approving the interim solution - no image. Not that now is a good time to force the issue by adding one as a fait acomple. - J Greb (talk) 19:17, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am just curious as to the procedure here, I put my image up for consideration and it has yet to be discussed. Just wondering if there is a "waiting period" for these kinds of discussions, or if nobody is interested I cannot put it up? Justiceofthewar (talk) 03:10, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You recently participated in a debate regarding Categories for deletion criteria G6: Disambiguation fixes from an unqualified name. Your input would be appreciated at this RFC. Thanks for your time. Hiding T 14:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]