Talk:Questionable Content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peer review Questionable Content has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
WWW

This article is part of WikiProject Webcomics, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to webcomics on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Questionable Content, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low-importance within webcomics for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
To-do list for Questionable Content: edit  · history  · watch  · refresh

See talk:Questionable Content/delete for the VfD discussion. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:04, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Reason for move

(I got cut off in my edit summary): "NOT pre-emptively disambiguating article titles is one of the main rules of Wikipedia. Until someone decides to write an article on "Questionable content" the thing (previous mover's rationale was "misleading" - what the heck, exactly, do you think belongs in an article on "Questionable content"?), the title stays." Thatcrazycommie 23:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Northhampton

Since the sign in the library actually reads "Smith College",[1] I'm not sure about this article's statement that it's a 'pun on' Smith. Marten and the librarian's tee read Smif, but that could be an internal pun in light of the fact that the only official sign is correct. In my view, it is Smith College, and has been confirmed as being set in Northhampton. Although a brief search of the town revealed no Coffee of Doom. Very dissapointing.

Showing the town square in the most recent comic makes it pretty clear to me that we're in the real Northampton--or at least as close as we can get to it when we've got talking robots. So I made the edit. Objections? MRig 04:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd be a bit concerned about OR. Do we have any third-party confirmation that this is Northampton? I like your version though. Rmj12345 05:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, the character info section of the site for the webcomic lists the college as "Smif", so I think it would be appropriate to list it as "Smif" and make a note that it may be related to the actual Smith College.

[edit] "First Kiss"

This is only sort of accurate. It was the first kiss actually shown, but Steve/Ellen and Nat/Amir have all done plenty of kissing. I'm going to change it to "first kiss actually shown." Thatcrazycommie 17:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Technically not even that! [2] —Tamfang 07:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Faye's toast fire

Did the fire that burned down Faye's apartment building actually start from her trying to make French toast in the toaster? I thought it was just toast. In this strip she just says "Well let's just say I'm not very good at making toast." Is the French toast reference in another strip?

That page has been revised after its initial publication. It originally read "French toast" rather than "toast".
Bo Lindbergh 15:06, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)
Then why not change it to toast here since it has been changed to toast in the comic? --Meredith 06:09, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
Because it needs more cleanup than that and I'm lazy. The toast incident doesn't need to be mentioned both in the intro paragraph and in Faye's entry in the cast section, for instance. Bo Lindbergh 14:05, 2005 Feb 16 (UTC)


[edit] Criticism

Any particular reason for removing this? The article is glowingly positive enough (to the point where there was a serious discussion on whether to delete it for purely being an ad for the comic); the link isn't the most flattering but I think some balance is appropriate. Caradhras 17:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

The reason it was removed is because it is an external link to a review. Unless we want to link EVERY review of QC available online, I do not believe it is fair (or relevant) to link one that happens to be negative. Furthermore, the review is full of factual errors and is neither typical nor representative of the criticism that the comic has recieved. The QC Wikipedia article isn't what I would call "positive" so much as "objective". Nowhere do I see any attempt to judge the overall quality of the work- it's simply listing information about the comic.

Hey, it's OK, no need to accuse me of article-spamming. I like the comic too, I'm just trying to make the article sound more neutral and less like someone is telling their best friend about the awesome webcomic they just found. Caradhras 05:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

If there is going to be a criticism section it should have more than just "this comic goes over our critics heads" IMO Claphands 01:39, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, last time I was here the criticism section was just a few comments on the fact that the indie-rock jokes Jeph uses from time to time are very rarely understood by people outside of the "scene".

Heh. As with Nothing Nice To Say, for all I know most of the bands mentioned are imaginary, but I think I get most of the jokes anyway on an abstract level. —Tamfang 21:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jeph's attitude towards Wikipedia

I quote from the "blog-like entry" "PPS: The dudes over at Wikipedia are seriously uptight. Smoke some weed guys and chill out."

Why this? Sentientmeat 06:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

I actually came here to check out the QC WP page because of that link. I think, if you look around, it's not too hard to see that WP editors sometimes take themselves too seriously (see also: Wikipediholic, Wikiholiday), and it's (in my observation) very much Jeph's style to point out that sort of thing. The discussion above about toast vs. French toast might seem pretty laid-back to long-time WP editors, but from an outsider's perspective it appears to be a lot of quibbling over a ridiculously trivial bit of wording.
My guess is that the comment wasn't meant as anything other than a mild poke, and I wouldn't worry about taking it too seriously. Bcordes 15:40, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
Some say that it is because Wikipedia doesn't reconise the term "Webcest"
I'm almost positive that the comment was in response to the "Webcest" thing.--burnt in effigy 20:12, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Faye's Dead Dad

Surprising that there's no mention of Faye's suicide revelation and the webcomic meme that sprouted from it, such as in a recent Something Positive wherein Faye happened to be there to see HP Lovecraft end it all. 204.69.40.7 18:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Hannelore?

Would anyone object if I moved her into main characters? Because she doesn't seem to be a one-arc character like Marten's mother, or a one gag character like certain others in the Secondary Characters section, and if my calculations are correct has appeared more than Ellen or Steve in total, both of whom are in main characters.

Hannelore seems more central because they're in the same building, I think. So you go ahead and move her. Shen 20:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jimbo currently writes...?

Didn't he quit that gig under circumstances that would embarass a mere mortal? I couldn't find the strip. dsws 08:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean this one? Shen 14:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

He got a new writing gig.

[edit] launch date

I have in my notes[3] that QC may or may not have been launched on 03.Aug.03. I don't remember how I got that date; maybe I extrapolated back from the first dated strip (#16, Sep.7). Anybody got the straight dope? —Tamfang 05:39, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I believe it launched on 01.Aug.03. IIRC Jeph has said this in interviews.

[edit] Formatting

It seems like the first section is a little long. Most Wiki articles are much shorter. Maybe we can move most of the stuff in that section into actual categories (History, etc). --Bakkster Man 19:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

"very much a dank depressed goth girl"- can you use dank in a metaphorical sense that way or did you mean 'dark' :p

Not sure where else to put this, and not exactly clear on how to start another section. I just reformatted the Synopsis section and renamed it "Overview." I felt the Synopsis wasn't exactly a synopsis and more unrelated ramblings about QC. I kept what was originally written about QC's setting, futuristic technology, and accompanying blogs, then added my own sections detailing the guest strips and the Thanksgiving strips. I know the To-Do list says to cut down on external links, but I can't see any way to clean up this article without linking to the source material. What say you fine folks?

Looks good. Don't forget to sign your posts on talk with four tildes (~). I'm going to add a new section for this cleanup down at the bottom - let's move our talk down there for now. Rmj12345 17:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] QC time

Who went through the archives and counted up the days? Since I also have no life, I've made notes of the strip#s at which day-transitions appear to happen, going mostly by when the characters change shirts. I came up with: 9, 22, 28, 42, 49?, 56?, 57?, 62?, 68, 81, 100, 119, 139, 164, 186, 214, 237, 270, 310, 351, 384, 396, 418, 431, 464, 510, 535, 570, 581. Anyone have a conflicting list? —Tamfang 07:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

About Ctrl build's recent edit to "Duration" — on review of the archive I'm leaning strongly to agreement that there's no gap before #396, and I'd rather see not see the chronology set out twice with one difference. On another(?) hand, to say that 351-395 are continuous and that 396-present are continuous is not to say that 395-396 are not continuous; the gap may be zero days. —Tamfang 10:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm gonna go ahead and try to clean up the duration tomorrow, and confirm that the time spanning strips and arcs is correct. The one frustrating part is that I met Jeph Jacques at my college's sci-fi/fantasy convention and he said at a panel that time elapsed in QC has been more than three months but less than a year. There's no way to quote him. </cry>

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 03:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I got through 400 strips today (largely because I have no life), and confirmed what the previous author wrote about the consecutive days from strip 57 through 403 or so. I added the consecutive and individual days passed from strips 1-56 and cleaned up the analysis of QC duration the previous author wrote. I am not finished yet, but will resume tomorrow when I have the fortitude to look at 400 more QC strips. ;-) Someone please let me know if any of the edits I made today cross into the realm of individual research.

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 17:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so before I go any further with this, I want to be sure that all you fine people who've been consistently editing this article agree that the work I've done of tearing through strips and documenting the distinct days is not OR. If it is, then please let me know so I don't dump hours of my time into doing something that will be frowned upon and/or deleted. Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 05:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About that criticism section

I have removed it and it must stay out of the article until it's compliant with WP:LIVING and WP:RS. This is policy directly from Jimbo himself, so there's not much to discuss. It's all gotta be sourced, and the sources must be notable, no exceptions. Sorry. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 22:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It's not obvious to me how WP:LIVING is more relevant to that passage than to any other random paragraph. —Tamfang 01:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
For one thing, it wasn't sourced. Pretty much any critique needs to have that or it looks like original research. For another, some of it was phrased as a criticism of the author himself rather than the comic. As soon as you do that, WP:LIVING kicks in. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 01:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Winslow

Is Winslow an AnthroiMac? In the article, he's referred to as an AnthroiMac and an AnthroMac. However, he doesn't resemble an iMac computer. I think I'll go ahead and change it to Anthro iPod, seeing as he is named as an iPod on QC's Cast page. -xerai 17:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The Cast page now says: "Hannelore's Apple AnthroPC model- basically an overgrown, sentient iPod." From this I don't think "Anthro-iPod" is justified. —Tamfang 06:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Picture

Jeph's art style has changed somewhat since the comic that's the current sample picture. Could someone please talk to Jeph about a new picture from the 600's era? I've never talked to him, so I don't think it would work if I asked. --70.20.71.214 18:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC) If someone wants to grab a more recent comic off the site, that is fine with me as long as it's properly attributed, etc. I am especially fond of the fight scene between Marten and the Vespa chick! --jeph

[edit] Blackboard Comment List

I think it's getting a bit long/unwieldy. We should either pare it down to the "best-of" or make it a list page. My two cents. Bo-Lingua 15:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, cut it down. Not notable enough for a separate list page imho. —Tamfang 17:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I can agree to the notability issue for the separate list. Bo-Lingua 20:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Free SPOKE with purchase. I couldn't figure that one out.

[edit] Raven's Piercings Citation

On the blackboard here: http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=325 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.177.173.220 (talk • contribs) 14:27, October 18, 2006.

[edit] everyone's a critic

THIS WEBCOMIC SUCKS BALLS! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.126.171.216 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 3 November 2006.

Perhaps you'd like to change the article to reflect that: "Questionable Content is a slice-of-life comedy webcomic, which sucks balls ...." —Tamfang 08:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

It'd need a citation.

[edit] Character List Too Long

We should try and shorten up the character bios a bit. Some of them (ex. Hannelore) are far too long and I think most people won't bother to read much of it unless they're hardcore fans of the series. --Rubiksphere 08:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I tried to edit some of the Character bios down some...I somewhat succeded, but you're right. Hannelore's is still to big, even with me deleting and shortening many of the sentences. I also deleted the secondary characters that has single day gags. I mean, why on earth was the Record store cashier up there?

Christoph Jenkins 19:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm an unregistered, but I'm going to try my hand at shortening the character biographies. I edited Marten's yesterday (3/19) and since my edits and citations of events are still here today (3/20) I guess it's safe to assume Wikipedia is happy with the edits? I'm going to re-edit the bios for Faye and Dora today as I edited Marten's and see if y'all like them, and if so, I'll continue editing them like I did for Marten's. Please let me know if my edits are not exactly what you want. --Unregistered user

Hi, I'm already working on this, so I'd appreciate it if you'd look over my proposed edits at the bottom of the page and tell me what you think. Nobody's said anything, so I think I'm going to instate them today.Rmj12345 15:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi again, I decided to register. :-D I'll grab continuity if you're already on bios. The new ones look pretty awesome already.

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man, ---DasBooch

Well, thank you. Glad to have you here. Rmj12345 16:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to move Hannelore to the minor characters section. She's one of the most major minor characters, but she's not in either major sphere, she's not an original character, and she only shows up about once every fifty episodes. Rmj12345 17:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Doras Bisexuality

The article states that Dora may be bisexual. However, it states that she has made out with a girl here: http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=404 I think we should change it to "Dora is bisexual". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.218.105.204 (talk • contribs) 21:51, November 15, 2006.

Kissing someone of the same sex does not necessarily mean a person is bisexual.DuckieRotten 11:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

True. But on the other hand, she is very clearly sexually attracted to Faye, and hints sexually at other women. AudiblySilenced 06:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

She makes jokes about Faye's figure, as do most characters in the strip; that doesn't mean she's hitting on her. But whether or not she's attracted to Faye, the bit about her bisexuality needs to be taken out. While she has not stated her sexuality explicitly, she's also never pursued a relationship with a woman (though she hasn't really pursued any relationships with anyone except Marten). As it is not stated explicitly in the strip, it's speculation and constitutes original research, which of course is a violation of Wikipedia policy. If there are no objections, I'll take it out sometime in the next few days.Rmj12345 07:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I have an objection if you mean to leave it as "is bisexual" or remove bisexuality completely. I think that "may be bisexual" is perfectly accurate however. Dora has made more than a few jokes about herself and other women but i cannot recall if she has ever seriously and clearly stated her sexuality. So I am good with may be and bad with anything else unless someone can point to a serious statement by Dora or, better yet, by Jeph to that effect. WookMuff 07:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I am not saying whether or not she's bisexual one way or the other. I'm just saying that it's not a published interpretation. According to the Wikipedia policy on original research, OR is "unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories, or any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position." I believe that stating even the possibility of her bisexuality is original research, as it constitutes unpublished speculation/arguments. Just because she mentioned making out with one woman in the past (I don't remember another reference) and makes jokes about Faye's figure is not sufficent evidence to label her as bisexual, and just because she has not confirmed her heterosexuality in the strip does not mean that we can put it in there. If lack of absolute confirmation of heterosexuality is grounds for stating possible bisexuality, then you could put that every character in the strip may be bisexual. What if I changed the text to "Dora has referenced making out with women in the past.", with reference? Rmj12345 08:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I dont think that it would be fair to call Dora bisexual. She seems mildly interested in women, but considering the overall view of her in the entire strip, I wouldn't call her bisexual. Also, Raven has once stated that she made out with another girl after getting drunk once. But that doesn't mean that she's bi. Christoph Jenkins 19:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment

I don't know, but this page seems a little better than a Start-class to me. ~ EdBoy[c] 19:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GIR vs Pintsize, the eternal struggle...

From http://www.questionablecontent.net/interview.php

What do you say to people that compare your character Pintsize with Invader Zim's Gir?

I don't really mind, itÕs not like I can control the associations that people make in their brains. I loved Invader Zim but I do try to make Pintsize as non-Gir-like as possible. Gir is insane and possibly retarded. Pintsize is perfectly sane and intelligent, he just has an odd sense of humor due to years of constant exposure to the Internet.

So, do you think we could add a mention of this to pintsize's (it took me ten goes to type that word) character description? Something along the lines of Many people draw comparisons between Pintsize and GIR, a robotic mischiefmaker from the television show Invader Zim. In and interview Jeph Jacques stated "I loved Invader Zim but I do try to make Pintsize as non-Gir-like as possible. Gir is insane and possibly retarded. Pintsize is perfectly sane and intelligent, he just has an odd sense of humor due to years of constant exposure to the Internet."

Because it seems to be a common association for people to make. WookMuff 01:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The strip picture

You know, shouldn't we update the strip in the infobox so it's more representative of his current (artistic) style? Just a thought. Dåvid ƒuchs (talk • contribs) 00:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, someone wanna get on this? I dunno the rules of webcomic copyrights. M@$+@ Ju ~ ♠ 06:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] OR/cleanup tagging

I'm really not seeing any sourcing for this-most of what's written, especially about the characters, seems to be an original analysis of what the various comics may mean. Unless these analyses can be supported by reliable sources, the article needs to be cleaned to what's actually and unambiguously shown in the primary sources shown, rather then analysis such as "Dora may be bisexual" and many other such examples. Seraphimblade 12:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

Does the fact that the comic, per Alexa.com, has been averaging around 200 million hits a day average for the last 4 months[4] mean anything? One would think the traffic alone is a sign of notability, at least in my mind. Bo-Lingua 20:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is not popularity. Seraphimblade 04:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
And that attitude is exactly why Wikipedia itself won't be notable ten years from now (too bad it's not a crystal ball, either!) Notability is not popularity, but popularity by definition IS notability. You can't be NOTED by millions of people without being NOTABLE. That's like saying you can burn without being flammable or be safely ingested without being edible. There are other forms of notability besides popularity, but it's impossible to be popular and not notable. Wikipedia's growing blind spot is actually irrelevant here, though: winning awards from an independent source is specifically cited as one way to establish notability. This topic is therefore notable by Wikipedia's narrow-to-the-point-of-irrelevance standards. I could sign in so as to sign my comment more efectively, but at this point I don't want the stink of this "community" on me. 68.13.21.225 20:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree with your logic entirely. It's not mutually exclusive. If 200 million people visit a landmark a day, you would say that it's notable. How is this webpage any different? For that matter, if it were only a million people a day, it would be notable enough for wikipedia's standards, I should think. Bo-Lingua 23:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I see your point (though you may want to bring up your concerns at WT:N, they'll be heard by a lot more people there!) I wish there were a better term for "notability". "Encyclopedic suitability" is probably more precise, but it's damnably unwieldy too. "Notability" is something of a fuzzy term-most people do indeed think of "notability" of something in terms of how widely it's known, how popular it is, and so on. The basic trouble of not using notability, however, is this. We're forbidden from engaging in original research, which means if secondary sources haven't reported on something, we're basically stuck with very trivial observations without violating that. A list of characters, the basic and indisputable ways in which they've interacted (Dora is Martin's girlfriend, Faye lives with him, Pintsize is his robot, Hannelore has OCD) will work, but any synthesis which would make the article interesting also violates NOR. Now that's not to say it's not a good comic, or a popluar one-I love it, I've been reading it for quite some time! But I like quite a few things that aren't suitable for articles here. I hope this isn't one of them-I would imagine secondary sources exist somewhere, and I'm sure trying to find them, but I've come up empty so far. The easiest way to solve this would just be to put forth some reliable secondary sourcing for this, would settle the whole matter. Seraphimblade 00:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, okay, there are valid concerns there. I'll admit my previous comment was hot-headed (though thank you for not pretending, as so many on this here interweb do, that the presence of anger invalidates any underlying point). It just seems like the prevailing mindset at Wikipedia is a bit, er, schizophrenic with regards to this. I know that the comment page on a random webcomic isn't the best place to effect global change, so I won't bother ranting here any further. 68.13.21.225 01:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ellen

Why is there no mention of Ellen in the list of characters at all? Dark Avatar 08:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Probably because no one has entered her in the list...at best she's minor. Bo-Lingua 02:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] QC in the news

Did a quick search for "Questionable Content" in Google news to see if anything new had popped up. Only two popped up:

The first is probably not usable, since it's just a blog. The second is from a major newspaper, though. Anyone want to insert a mention that QC is being used for a "create a comic" activity for kids in New Haven? GarryKosmos 05:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I can handle that. Thanks for helping in the ongoing fight for notability. Rmj12345 16:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] OR Cut

I'm going to try and cut major character bios down to four or five sentences and minor character bios down to two or three, and then take the OR cut off of the article. I'm also going to add the character illustrations from the strip's cast page. I'll email Jeph or put a notice in about it, and I'll propose edits here before I go through with them. Thanks! Rmj12345 18:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I am also going to change the main comic to reflect the new artistic style. I got permission from Jeph. Rmj12345 19:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Marten proposal -
  • '
    Marten Reed.
    Marten Reed.
    Marten Reed' - Marten is an indie rock fan and musician originally from California[1], where he also went to college. He has been living with Faye, whom he was romantically interested in for many months, and is now in a romantic relationship with Dora.[2] Marten is in a band named "Deathmøle" with friends Amir and Natasha.[3] He works in the Smith College library.[4]
Faye proposal -
  • '
    Faye Whitaker.
    Faye Whitaker.
    'Faye Whitaker - Faye works at the Coffee of Doom with Dora and lives with Marten. Faye rarely used contractions in her speech, except when drunk, when her Southern accent would emerge. .[5] She moved up to Northampton from Savannah, Georgia two years after a mental breakdown, after witnessing her father's suicide. .[6] She has resumed therapy. .[7] She is known for a quick wit and a sharp tongue, usually used in affection.[8]
Dora proposal -
  • '
    Dora Bianchi.
    Dora Bianchi.
    Dora Bianchi - Dora is an ex-goth who owns and operates "Coffee of Doom", the coffee shop where Faye, Raven and Penelope work and where Marten spends most of his time. She is in a romantic relationship with Marten. Unlike most of the main characters, she prefers metal to indie rock.[9] Dora does graphic and web design in her spare time, and she has a pet cat named Mieville who becomes jealous of most other males in her life (except Marten). .[10]

[edit] Archiving "Duration" section

I've cut the Duration section for OR, but I'm going to leave it here because I think it's kind of a valuable fan resource....it may be OR, but it's damn good OR.

[edit] Duration

Although the comic updates daily from Monday to Friday, the brevity of each individual strip coupled with maintaining continuity and plot often results in any given sequence of events (even those covering only a few hours) may take several strips to complete and/or resolve. Therefore, many days, weeks or months may pass in real time while the events of the QC take place over a few hours. The exact amount of time that has passed from the beginning of QC until the present has never been officially declared, though it is possible to track small periods of time within the strips themselves.

The following are spans of time that are clearly defined in the comic, as common events, clothing, execution of plans, and references to "yesterday" and "tomorrow" by the characters carry throughout the given span of strips.

  • Strips 1 through 21 (excepting #14) cover two consecutive days. Strip #14 is a stand-alone strip and does not advance the plot. Strip #15 resumes where Strip #13 ended.
  • Strips 22 through 27 (excepting #24) cover one day. Strip #24 is a guest strip.
  • Strips 28 through 32 cover one day.
  • Strips 33 through 48 (excepting #34) cover two consecutive days. Strip #34 is a Halloween special edition strip.
  • Strips 49 through 55 cover one day.
  • Strips 57 (December 11, 2003) through 99 (March 14, 2004) cover three consecutive days.
  • Strips 100 (March 16, 2004) through 350 (May 1, 2005) cover nine consecutive days.
  • Strips 351 (May 2, 2005) through 395 (July 3, 2005) cover two consecutive days.
  • Strips 396 (July 4, 2005) through 750 (November 10, 2006) cover fourteen consecutive days.
  • Strips 751 through 834 (March 7, 2007) cover three consecutive days.

The gaps between strips are the main obstacles for determining the exact duration of QC history. The amount of time between strips 21 and 22 is indeterminable. Between strips 22 and 398, there are eight gaps of time between strips separating spans of consecutive or individual days of QC time. Of these eight gaps, there are two bits of dialogue which give some perspective on passage of time during gaps, but do not explicitly give an amount of time. The first occurs in strip 315 - the real estate agent informs Marten and Faye that they should be able to move their belongings into the new apartment "next week," implying that the gap between strip 350 and strip 351 is around a week in length since strips 351 through 395 cover the two consecutive days where Marten and Faye pack up and move into their new apartment. However the exact duration of that gap is largely subject to individual interpretation.

The second bit of dialogue alluding to a passage of time over a gap between strips occurs in strip 398 when Dora notes that Faye has been sleeping on Marten's couch for several months (she started rooming there in strip #22). Since the strip has only had 21 explicit days at this point, this statement implies that at least one of the seven remaining gaps between the strips is many weeks (possibly even months) long, but less than a year. Since the gaps of time are largely indeterminable and there are only two vague markers of time within the dialogue to account for the lapses of time, determining the passage of time in those gaps is a primarily subjective decision to be made by each individual reader.

I'm leaving it here under the "Sharing Material" Wiki talk page guidelines. Hope that's okay! Rmj12345 16:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] March 2007 cleanup

Here's my proposal to change the minor characters - I've made very, very significant cuts. I still have to edit and add Hannelore to the list.

  • Penelope Gaines works at "Coffee of Doom" with Faye, Raven, and Dora. She is frequently compared to another minor character, "Pizza Girl". [11].
  • Tai is Marten's boss at the Smith Library. She is a student at Smith and a lesbian with a very active love life. She is a great fan of Jimbo's romance novels.
  • Angus McPhee, or "Argument Guy".[12], comes into the "Coffee of Doom" for the sole purpose of arguing and bickering with Faye.
  • Sven Bianchi is Dora's tall, skinny older brother. He is a musician with a very active love life and libido, though he has claimed to have calmed down. [13].
  • Natasha is Ellen's roommate, Amir's girlfriend, and a member of the band "Deathmøle" with Amir and Marten. Formerly had Marten's position at the Smith library.
  • Amir Afridi is Natasha's boyfriend and a member of "Deathmøle".
  • Jimbo is Marten's drinking buddy. He is a former construction worker who has found success writing romance novels..
  • Winslow is Hannelore's AnthroMac.
  • Amanda Whitaker is Faye's lesbian younger sister. She recently dropped out of college and moved in with their mother in Georgia.
  • Mrs. Whitaker is Faye and Amanda's mother. She is very protective of both of her daughters.
  • Veronica Reed is Marten's mother. She is divorced from Marten's father, who subsequently came out of the closet. Ms. Reed was once a famous fetish model, and now works as a professional dominatrix. As a side job, Miss Reed works on a website, making "erotic films" of herself stomping on fruit in high heels. Her Vance persona was something of an idol of Dora's.
  • Scott was Marten's old boss when Marten worked as an "office bitch" in an anonymous office. He was fired along with Marten.
  • The VespAvenger is a woman who attacks men for their percieved ill treatment of men. She has been arrested for multiple assaults.
  • Alan Turing works as a Special Agent with the Robotics Defense Agency. He tried to confiscate Pintsize because of a laser in his eyes, and arrested the "VespAvenger". Was beaten up by Dora in grade school.


Looks good to me. Would it be redundan.t to note that Faye's mother is a widow?

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 18:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Excellent point, I'll get right on that.Rmj12345 18:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
One minor detail regarding Pintsize - the laser actually came from his torso, around strip 60 or so. And do we want to consider giving Pizza Girl a brief bio, considering that she's made as many, if not more, appearances than some other minor characters, like Alan Turing and Scott?

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 18:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed on Pintsize. I'm just not sure what to say about Pizza Girl - you want to give it a shot? Rmj12345 18:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I corrected vespAvenger, now reads "attacks men for the percieved ill treatment of women". Before it said "of men". I don't know QC well enough to say whether Ellen should be on the list, but if you describe Natasha as Ellen's roommate, shouldn't either Ellen be on the list, or the roommate description be dropped? Ambi Valent 21:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll give Pizza Girl a shot. I also added a "gluing other people's hair to his face" as a favorite activity of Pintsize.

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 03:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


Hey DasBooch, I think we should maybe try and find that LJ comment and leave it in - it struck me as the one thing in the "duration" session that wasn't OR. Can you try an edit without this, and then I'll look into citing the LJ comment tomorrow. Thanks for all your edits - they look great! Rmj12345 04:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey RMJ. I tried fishing around Jeph's LJ (both of them), but I simply could not find that quote. I struck it for the time being. Maybe you'll have better luck than me.

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 17:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. I found it. Amazing what searching for things while not sleep-depped will do to you. ;-)

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 18:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

You chose a quite different approach to the one I did when partially rewriting the El Goonish Shive article. For instance, I added a history section with subsections for art and storytelling, and put in whatever I could attribute to the comic about earlier versions and changes since then. I also put in a long section for the plot, actually the second longest of the entire article. The longest section of the EGS article is the cast section, which has been cut only a little. I'm not sure whether your or my approach is the better one; I just wanted to tell you and ask you what you think of my approach. Ambi Valent 13:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm concentrating on this for right now, because the cast section is the most out-of-control section in this article. I think I'm going to put the secondary characters into paragraph form, and then I'm going to work up an art section and a plot section and try and cut down on the external links and focus on more third-party sources. I also need to add something about all of the awards it has won before I'm done. I focused on the characters because they had spun the most wildly out of control, with speculative nonsense like "Dora is bisexual" and other non-notable crap. Thank you for you suggestions - the article looks good, though I would cut down the plot sections a little bit to avoid cries of "OR". Rmj12345 14:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I know the problem with out of control edits - that was the situation around the time of the AfD discussion, mainly in the sections of secondary characters, technology and aliens, all of which are gone now. When you cleaned up from time to time, the deleted stuff would be edited back in, and maybe more. After a series of massive edits and partial rewrites by me it has become much quieter now. Unfortunately, my series of edits seems to scare away possible peer reviewers as well, so I'm not quite sure how near the article is to following Wikipedia guidelines... Ambi Valent 18:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll try giving it a peer review when I'm done with this article. Thanks! Rmj12345 23:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I split up the old "Overview" section of the article. I basically just moved stuff around. Parts moved into the head of the article, the main part of "Overview" is now the "Setting" section, and the last two paragraphs became a new section "Non-canonical strips" (for the lack of a better name). The new grouping of informations made more sense to me; if it doesn't make sense to you feel free to revert back. Ambi Valent 00:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I like the change from Overview to Setting, but I think maybe the non-canonical strip paragraph should be mostly deleted - I think it constitutes OR. I would, however, like to merge the OMG turkeys part - I think it adds.
I'm also going to change the minor characters section to paragraph form - one of the to-dos is to cut down on listing - and I'm going to work on cutting down external links and adding more third-party sources tonight. Thanks for your contributions! Rmj12345 01:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Heh, if by "old," you mean it hasn't been there for more than 48 hours; I know because I revamped it. ;-) It looks better now, nice work. I don't really agree that the guest strip paragraph was OR since each guest strip is stated explicitly in the archives; it was simply a matter of me looking in the archives and writing down what was already there. I won't be heartbroken if the paragraph doesn't get added back in, but I maintain it wasn't OR.

Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 05:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

In the course of editing the "Secondary Characters" section, I cut Faye's psychiatrist, the VespAvenger, and Agent Turing. I deleted them because they were not necessary to understanding the plot or the main characters. Hope that's okay. Rmj12345 02:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey DasBooch, I like your most recent rewrite, but I'm a little concerned about paragraph length. Is there any way you could beef up Tai and the individual family paragraphs without delving into OR? Thanks. Rmj12345 04:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Done and done. :-D Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 04:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I haven't read the entire comic, but it seems to me that the change in artistic style is mainly one to more realism and more details. That the style has "notably changed" says all and nothing, so maybe that could be replaced. Ambi Valent 08:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I have read the entire comic, and to me, it looks like the artistic style changes are mostly due to Jeph's increasing skills at drawing and with Photoshop. But there's no way to back that up....Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 14:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Just added a section about storytelling and the progression of his artistic skills. Tell me what you guys think. Booch, I haven't looked over your Duration edits yet, but I'm wary to have anything in there - I'm kind of tempted to heavily edit and merge with storytelling or setting. What do you think? Rmj12345 15:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I like the new storytelling section. I'm not sure how you're going to merge duration into those sections, but I fully encourage it. I looked over it today, and there's just no way I can justify any of the work I did was not original research. While it'd be a great thing to have, I'm not sure it fits with Wikipedia's standards. Oh, I also tried beefing up the paragraphs under the secondary characters. Whatcha think? Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 15:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the secondary character bios, are we going to cite any of the stuff we wrote? Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 16:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks good! I'm really not sure about the minor characters, I think maybe one per every one (or two, if we can manage it) minor character(s) would be good, plus maybe one each for Raven and Steve. Dora, Faye, and Pintsize can be managed through secondary sources, I think. I'll work on duration now. I especially like your edits to the storytelling and artistic styles btw. I think you, me, and Ambi Valent are really whipping this article into shape, it's looking TONS better. I think we can make it into a GA or FA candidate. Rmj12345 16:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and edited the names in the references by listing the name of the strip instead of the number. Anyone who wishes to know the number can simply look at the number at the end of each URL.

RMJ, was that you? Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 17:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
No...though I appreciate their edits, some of them were non-notable or OR, so I just reverted a lot of them. I want to keep a special watch on the secondary characters section, let's try to keep people from taking it out of paragraph form or adding OR. Also, I noted that somebody basically copied and pasted information from the QC cast page, and we need to stay away from that. I just put it in fairly logical order. Let's also try and stay away from anecdotes, generalizations, and analysis of characters, and just stick to the facts and keep the background information to a minimum. People are going to try and edit this every chance they get with the progression of the strip, so let's stay on top of it so it doesn't get out of control like it did. It looks great though, looking better all the time. Rmj12345 22:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I re-edited the secondary characters section and saved the html onto my computer. If anyone tries to add unnecessary information like they did, I've got a clean version waiting. Oh, I'm also working on the plot summation in MS Word so I can work on it over time, and then just copy/paste it all in at once without doing a straight X hour stint on the editing page. It'll be up soon-ish.Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 15:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

One other thing I noticed....somebody keeps changing all of the references to Smith College to "Smif" college. "Smif" is a minor joke, and needs to be avoided - it has been verified in the canon that Smith is Smith, not based on it, per this strip: [5] Also, apologies if I'm a little cranky. I was away from Wikipedia for a couple days, and got a little overwhelmed by the edits. Rmj12345 22:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plot summary

I know a few other comic articles have plot summations, and I thought that while QC isn't the shortest strip ever, maybe some of us could give a short summation of the major plot advances thus far. The article for Watchmen has a complete summation of the plot, and that was a featured article, so I'm using that to make the case that a synopsis would not constitute OR. What do y'all think? Your friendly neighborhood Booch-Man 03:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking about giving it a try myself, but I wasn't quite sure how the rest of y'all would feel. I say go right ahead. Rmj12345 04:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../q/u/e/Talk%7EQuestionable_Content_1fdb.html"