Talk:Mek

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Edit the article attached to this page or discuss it at the project talk page. Help with current tasks, or visit the notice board.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been marked as requiring an image. Please add one in accordance with guidance.
	This article may require an infobox. Please consider adding one from the list of project infoboxes.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mek article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

[edit] Unencyclopedic?

Looking at WP:NOT point by point, I'd have to disagree. This is a comic series created by two notable creators (Ellis, in particular, is rather well known) and published by a major company (The Wildstorm imprint of Time Warner's DC Comics). Although it's not the best (or most popular) thing Ellis has done, it was successful enough to be collected and republished - and is still in print. Accordingly, I'm removing the unencyclopedic tag. If anyone disagrees, feel free to restore it - but a response here would also be useful. Thanks! --Mrph 21:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

maybe I'm using the wrong tag, but what was there shouldn't have been it's own article, it should have been merged. At this point, at least the framework is there to expand the article. thanks for working on it. Dstanfor 21:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the best tag to use would be (it's already marked as a stub, but I do see your point) - my understanding is that 'unencyclopedic' refers purely to the topic, not the state of the article, though. I don't have a copy of the comic to hand, but once I get a chance to re-read it, I should be hopefuly be able to fill the gaps in and expand this to a full article... --Mrph 21:27, 20 December 2006 (UTC)