Talk:Ryan North
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Why would you change Ryan speaks French to Ryan is bilingual? That's less informative.
The author omited the fact that Ryan is a freaking genius, this should be rectified
-XC3N
- It should be rectified if you can find an npov way of putting it :) MosheZadka 01:17, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'm pretty sure Ryan has claimed this several times in one of the "commentary" texts at Dinosaur Comics, so if someone can find one of these we can just demonstrate that Ryan considers himself to be a genius, which is POV-free :-D --Grey Knight ⊖ 19:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
I added a photo as per the request! I hope that is cool. I know you should be careful when you edit your own article! Ryan North 14:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Semi-protection
Due to persistent vandalism against this page, I have put it under semi-protection. I will try removing the protection in a few days and if the vandalism returns, I will block those responsible without additional warning. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 00:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Family
Should we mention that he has a brother named Victor? He mentions him several times in ALT text and in the little blog thing. --Gwern (contribs) 18:02 15 December 2006 (GMT)
[edit] Notability
How notable actually is this individual? Can we find him discussed anywhere reputable other than that one article? Skittle 17:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- How do you measure notability? By mass or volume? --Turbothy 22:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I measure it according to WP:Notability. Specifically "One notability criterion shared by nearly all of the subject-specific notability guidelines, as well as Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, is the criterion that a topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself. Skittle 22:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Oh, okay. There are two (aka multiple) independent sources listed for the article. Muster passed. --Turbothy 13:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Read the whole thing :-) Multiple was why I was looking for more. As far as non-trivial, reliable published works go, the Globe and Mail definately counts. I'm less sure of the 'Tall Poppy' thing. Everything else referenced there is by him. So, since people here seem to follow the guy and his media presence, and since we claim his Wikipedia/chicken thing has been reported in 'mass media', I would expect us to be able to find something on top of the Globe and Mail. So I assume you know of such things? Preferably not just interviews, but they'd do too. Something in a fairly big newspaper perhaps. Two would just barely scrape into the 'multiple' criteria, but if it's only going to be two, they're going to have to be pretty good on all other counts. Skittle 15:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Well, I'm inclined to think he satisfies the critieron "Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work." He has published collections of his works, and he's won numerous non-trivial awards within the webcomics community. However, I should also freely confess my bias as one of Mr North's friends, so my opinion should be taken with the proverbial grain of salt. -- Merope 16:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- So we should be able to find records of these things in reputable sources! It's not enough just to know that he has received reviews and awards, we need to find sources and cite that. It sounds like that should be relatively easy to do, and I assume you know where to look for these? :-) Skittle 16:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
[edit] Globe and Mail reference quote
I took the huge quote out of the Globe and Mail reference, because it was just duplicating information that had already been given in the article, and adding no new information; I wasn't deleting the reference itself. Am I missing something? --McGeddon 20:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- The quote is the reference, and the citation is the reference for the quote. Links die and become inaccessible, and even when they remain available and don't die of linkrot, it may be unclear what is being referenced. --Gwern (contribs) 23:01 19 January 2007 (GMT)