Talk:Ghost (Dark Horse comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and provide comments here.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] New name for article?

This was his rationale for the move, and it was supported? --Basique 21:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
It's as valad a reason as I've heard lately and he followed Wiki procedures and brought it up for discussion, had no objections, and made the change. Just like he's suppossed to. Kant2k6 00:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments
  • That's fair. I would just like people looking up entries to be able to see how these characters are related to other characters in their "universe". This is a disambiguation between the two comic book characters. Please cross-reference other similar situations with characters of the same name: Ares, Nighthawk, Murmur, Fury, Destiny, Controller, Epoch, Thinker, Inertia, Guardian, etc... I think fair representation of both characters can be achieved. Thanks for the input. Also, check out The Ghost (as it is called now), and let me know what you think. I'd like to change it to something like "Ghost (Marvel comics)" --Longshot72 16:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support move, to help disambiguate between two same named comic books, whichever name is more commonly associated. In this case a redirect may be warranted for whichever name you decide not to use. HGB 01:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
This article has been renamed as the result of a move request.

I went with the proposal since there was no clear indication of which was the better choice. If Ghost (Comics Greatest World) is felt to be correct, then any user can make that move and the redirect will be automatically generated. Vegaswikian 23:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ghost (superheroine)

I've removed the link to the separate character page as it is redundant, and turned that page into a redirect to here.Hiding 19:29, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] when?

How about some dates for Ghost appearances in print? —Tamfang 21:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bloated

This entry has recently really bloated. I have taken a run at Wikifying it and fixing the most obvious problems but it needs hacking back massively. (Emperor 18:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC))

I'm not sure what to cut. I mean, I get that Wikipedia serves as a sort of general fansite (Have you seen the Doctor Who episode synopses? No, really, have you seen them?) but throwing in synopses of the whole of volumes I & II is more than I would have thought to do outside of a dedicated fansite (& one from a fan more fanatical than I). I feel sorry for the Ghost/Batgirl mini, not getting a detailed recap like that; it's left out & stuff. Ventifax 22:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I am currently working on streamlining the synposes. In some instances, there needs to be a level of detail so that the entries make sense. Plot points that were either minor, singular or dropped have been my main focus of editing. The work continues and I should have this cleared up within a short period.

Hm. I think a lot of this would fit better on a dedicated comics fansite. But that's an argument about how in-depth Wikipedia should be for things of this nature; storage space is a bit moot now that the synopses are in the logs, but there's a question of how much bandwith we want Wiki to pay for every time someone opens the page. At least, let's get a clearer, more efficient page with subheadings, rather than the ugly sea of text it is now. Ventifax
I'm afraid I agree. It doesn't need fine editting - it needs big chunks of text removing or someone is going to remove the lot because as it stands it might be easier to take it all out and start again. It also needs work doing on the structure as there seems to be replication of some plot. Bottom line is a blow by blow plot outline isn't required. It depends on the story of course but 2 or 3 issue story arcs don't need big blocks of text explaining what happens in each one. (Emperor 01:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC))

After reading the suggestion here, I have decided that as the first book lasted three years, a good format would be to condense each of the years into a section, trying to give a good broad view, rather than a bloated bow-by blow. I will try to do this as soon as I can. Writersblock81 02:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Unless there is a natural break I'd really recommend striping it right down and touching only on major developments and story themes. Try and keep it down to a paragraph or two per year and these shouldn't be big blocks of text either. (Emperor 03:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC))
I'm going to have to agree. I think your fuller breakdowns would be fine, on your own site. There are a lot of comics-fan sites that go into this kind of thing. Look at http://www.amazonarchives.com/ or http://www.comicbookdb.com/title.php?ID=4753 . I think you could do the kind of page you want on Angelfire or Geocities without having to pay anything.
Wait a minute, maybe I've found what you're looking for: There's a site called comicbookdb.com, & they want issue synopses, & they seem to have a lot of Ghost unfinished. http://www.comicbookdb.com/title.php?ID=4753 On second thought, I hadn't looked through it that extensively; they may be looking only for very brief synopses, but understand, they still have more than what we're going to get away with here (e.g., all the cover art; on Wikipedia I would expect deletion threats for that).
You may just need to start your own site if you're wedded to the long synopses. (And look at what other personal sites do with this sort of thing. Some of the more interesting ones really take time for intelligent examination & criticism of the work. I love this sort of thing, but it's way way beyond what Wikipedia can do.)
So, anyway, I suggest copying your earlier, longer recaps to some other site. Meanwhile, over here, we can strip it down to a really brief overview of the different arcs. Ventifax 04:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I have taken it upon myself to condense it even further, breaking it by year, which also works out to the three general arcs of the series, which was Elisa loosing her last ties to the human world, Elisa uncovering the secrets of her death and then starting a new path as the protector of Arcadia, even as new information about her past surfaces. There are now three paragraphs, none too long and all give a broad overview of the series general arcs.Writersblock81 19:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant. That should work. Ventifax 22:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
That is much better. I was casting around for a similar entry and the best example is Hitman which breaks the story arcs down into a couple of sentences. One thing I noticed - is the "Comics" section now redundant? It seems to be doing a similar job to the material above it just not so well. (Emperor 02:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Spoiler policy

In connexion to the recap bloat issue is the spoiler issue. The secrets of Elisa's personal mysteries, as they go to the evolution of the character, should be included, I think. The 1st series had a lot of "mystery" which was resolved very fast in the 2nd series, since (in my opinion) Eric Luke had turned the 1st series into a bit of an endless tease. So what's a "spoiler" for Elisa in the early stuff becomes a premise in the later stuff (& Mike Kennedy's shocking revelations about Elisa's father in the final issues would have been premise/backstory in the new issues if the series had continued). But in Specials #2 & #3 & the Batgirl crossover, the spoilers are for the self-contained suspense stories of those issues. I don't think we have to spoil those stories here. Ventifax 03:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

OK makes sense. If need be separate entries can be made fro the various crossovers (makes sense as neither would quite fit here or in the otheer's respective entry). One thing though currently the Special issues have the type of header that makes it fall under Volume 2 and I think they should be moved up to a H2 style header (unless I'm mistaken) and it'd be handy to have a bit more informaiton about the dates of publication and how they fit in. Another thing that is missing and someone will add a tag for it if not present are links to sources as well as reviews and other information. If we can box that off then the entry should be looking pretty solid. Good work all round. (Emperor 03:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC))


I agree about adding some details surrounding her personal mysteries and that was the point of the longer summaries, but here is a suggestion-beyond slightly expanding the summaries-we could make a new section, something along the lines of "Elisa's personal Journey" and make it a corrallary to the plot boxes. It would not need to be long, perhaps two paragraphs. I will attempt a shot at it and see what everyone thinks. If it approaches the issue before of too much information, we can skip it or discuss a way to integrate it into the plot section. Writersblock81 15:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You'd need to be careful as that could verge inot origianl research territory unless you can provide reliable sources. (Emperor 03:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC))
Argh. I really think you need to do this work offsite. (Then we can cite you. ;Þ ) Ventifax

[edit] Pix!

On the other hand, I'm going to burn up even more storage; I'm uploading a few images:

300 px

I don't intend to put them all on this page; special #3 went to H. M. Baker; but I'm mentioning them here. Ventifax 00:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Citations

I know that some of us, including myself, have a concern about the citations or lack thereof, in this section, but my question and comments are this: Information such as release dates and art teams, easily found by looking in the issues themselves...must these have citations and if so, would a mere note pointing to the first series-or even the issue itself-suffice? This goes for most of the "general" information which has been added to the section. In my opinion, a general citation might not be a bad idea, in order to guard against accusations of plagarism or outright theft. I am eager to get input on this. Perhaps someone has a good thought on this. If needed, could someone with more experience than myself, please try to arrange a good citation section for the entry? Writersblock81 15:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

The comics as published are their own citation. Ventifax 02:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
That isn't good enough for the purposes of WP:V. Secondary sources are required, they provide a more rounded and balanced outlook. The topic has come up a time or two over on the comic project tak page. (Emperor 03:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ghost 17.jpg

Image:Ghost 17.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ghost 17.jpg

Image:Ghost 17.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Comics Project naming conventions are that this should be at Ghost (Dark Horse Comics). I'll lave it a couple of days in case there is anything I've missed. (Emperor (talk) 15:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC))