Talk:Jhonen Vasquez

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mexico Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jhonen Vasquez article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
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.
This article is within the scope of the San Francisco Bay Area WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of San Francisco and the Bay Area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Mindless Self Indulgence

So yeh. On 2 seperate occasions I've been told by both Kitty, and Steve Righ? (From MSI) That Jhonen is doing there next albums C.D cover —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.121.194 (talk) 21:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Go to MSI's website, I personally think it is Jhonen's work. I, most likely, am wrong. 76.254.194.101 (talk) 03:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DA Account

This could be a simple rumor, but supposedly Jhonen has an account on www.deviantart.com, as Jhonen-V. Could someone look into this? TigerDude 21:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I can say with 100% confidence that that is not the DA account of the real Jhonen. Number one, he knows how to spell to the word "too". Number two, he has never and probably would never actually use his own face as an icon/avatar - and he especially would not use such a dated picture. Number three, the signature is EXACTLY the same in every picture - same curve, same size of the letters, same "E", etc., which points to it being 'shopped in. Number four, the style and quality (not as in sketch versus finished, I mean quality as far as the talent of the hand that drew it) varies greatly. One of the drawings looks remarkably like an Aaron Alexovich design or otherwise an official production sketch, another is obviously fanart. This is not Jhonen's DA account, and, as far as I know, he does not have a DA account; rather, it's someone pretending to be Jhonen for kicks. I would report the account to the administrators for identity and art theft. megumi 07:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eisner Award

I don't know how to add a citation, but this was mentioned by Dan Vado (President/Founder of SLG) in the 2005 Jhonen feature panel at San Diego Comic Con. Video of this panel can be readily found on youtube. Rubberducky 11:03, 14 October 2006

I don't think we can use YouTube as a source, though... --InShaneee 15:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
But the panel itself should be able to be sourced, shouldn't it? I don't think where the video of the panel is hosted should be an issue; I mean, whether it's hosted at a personal website or at YouTube, it's the same video. But if the location of the hosting is a big deal, I can offer to host the videos on my personal webspace - or if video itself can't be cited for whatever really strange reason, I can also type up a transcription. Rubberducky 12:30, 15 October 2006
That's exactly the problem, actually...Wikipedia can't link to content of questionable copyright status, and we have no idea who holds the copyright to that video. --InShaneee 18:22, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
What about the transcription idea, then? Does the questionable copyright status on the original video transfer over to that, as well? Tracking who originally filmed the video would probably be nigh impossible. Maybe I am just ignorant as to the workings of Wikipedia and etc but it seems... very odd to me to not be able to use things that Jhonen is saying, on video, as a source just because we don't know who taped the video. --Rubberducky 21:32, 16 October 2006
I think if you quote from it and then mention it was said in a panel at Comic Con it would be okay, and then people could check for themselves if they had any doubts.--68.35.94.119 01:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I would very much like the editor who deleted the passage about the Eisner Award nomination for JTHM to let me know how we can cite the panel - the video of the panel in which Jhonen and Dan are talking - as a source on Wikipedia, so that the information can remain in the article. If the panel video is unable to be cited simply because it is on Youtube, or because we don't know who originally filmed it - which I, personally, think is ridiculous - then please let me know some manner in which the statement can be cited, whether this is through transcription of the entire panel or whether a referral link would be enough. Thank you. Rubberducky 2:10, 24 January 2007

We can link to non-copyrighted YouTube material; I saw the specific policy yesterday, though I didn't bookmark it and lost that page in the mire of policies and guidelines. Given the length of some YouTube videos, it'd be best to also supply the exact quote in article text, so that someone searching through the video knows what he or she is looking forl
NOTE: Unless it's an official on the Eisner Awards committee saying it, or some other official source, then it's not confirmed. A creator or a publisher claiming he was a nominee, as seems to be the case here, is not confirmation. Is that the only evidence?--Tenebrae 18:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response, Tenebrae. According to the dialogue in the panel, it's not so much that JTHM was actually nominated, but rather that it was considered for nomination, but passed over because there was a judge who found the lettering too difficult to read -- does being considered for nomination still require a direct-from-Eisner-people source? While lists of nominees stay around on the internet for awhile, I don't think that lists of almost-nominees do; in this case I would think that Dan as the predisent of SLG would be a viable source, but I'm not well-versed in journalistic practices. Either way, the exact quote from the panel is as follows:
Dan: ... 4 of the 5 panelists who nominate people for Eisner Awards had wanted to nominate Johnny the Homicidal Maniac for Best New Comic. And the fifth judge - I guess it needs to be unanimous - shot them all down simply because he found some of the lettering difficult to read, and said that a comic that should be considered for an award shouldn't be hard to physically read. (This is 20 minutes, 40 seconds into the second part of the panel video, which was originally distributed in three parts. I can time it out compared to the youtube clips if that's needed.)
Again, thanks for your prompt response.Rubberducky 20:33, 24 January 2007

[edit] Stick Figure

This is a pretty good article..BUT: 'His characters are thin to the point of almost being stick figures.' I've got alot of Jhonens work and as far as I can see there arent many stick figures at all (...Not including Happy Noodle Boy). So just wondering if anyone else feels the same... I could be totally wrong though :P Kokiri kid 11:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I suppose a more accurate sentence would be "Jhonen's main characters are often thin to the point of almost beign stick figures." As Johnny, Devi and of course, Happy Noodle Boy are all very thin. In one of the Johnny comics, Johnny mentions that he was called Happy Noodle Boy as a kid, for being very skinny. It is unclear whether this has any bearing on Jhonen's own youth. Weenerbunny 18:59, 08 June 2006

Is The Bad Art Collection a TV show? If so, it can be merged with the list in the previous paragraph.

Also, add his date of birth if possible.

Molinari

The Bad Art Collection is actually a small comic-sized book which contains just what the title implies: bad art. 16 pages of... bad art. --Kakosenas 03:29, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hm... isnt his name pronounced Ho-nin Vass-Kezz? Not, Jo-nin? 68.147.195.99 19:31, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It is a hispanic name but only if your speaking in spanish would it be Ho-nin. --BerserkerBen 3 July 2005 15:24 (UTC)
So, should I start pronouncing San José, California to rhyme with rose? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 21:19, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
To your rebuttal, a rebuttal: So do you pronounce "Los Angeles" like "Los Anheles?" I would say however he chose to pronounce it (introduce himself) would be correct, though personally I don't know how he does.--Lord Shitzu 23:51, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
No, I say "Loss Anjehliss", but I wasn't the one trying to be prescriptive about how the man's name was pronounced. ;) --Dante Alighieri | Talk 15:41, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
All my Spanish speaking relatives (the majority of my relatives) call me "ben-hum-ing" (phonetically written, attempting to at least) while my English speaking relatives call be “ben-ja-men” so please tell me which is the correct pronunciation? If you can do that then we can figure out Jhonen's name. --BerserkerBen 02:09, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Again, *I* was not the one being prescriptive about pronunciation. *I* am making no statements about "correct" pronunciation, *you* were. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 19:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

The problem with that argument is that you assume that just because he is a Mexican-American that his first name is automatically Spanish, and should be pronounced as such. It's "Jo-Nehn". And the last name would be pronounced "Bass-kes(with the S trailing into a light 'z')" in Mexican Spanish.

In an interview on G4's "ScreenSavers", the announcer pronounced his name "yo-hawn". Jhonen corrected this by saying, "It is jo-nen, by the way. I hate you, whoever said that." So, regardless of how his name was originally intended to be pronounced, Jhonen prefers jo-nen. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.51.251 (talk • contribs)

According to Spookyland/Roman-
Jhonen (pronounced: Joe-nen)
- YES you pronounce the "J", and it's a hard "J" (like "joke" or "job")
- The "H" is silent (like "ghost" and "rhyme")
- The "E" is a soft/short "E". (like "pen" and "hen"). --—Preceding unsigned comment added by BitterSunrise (talk • contribs)

okay first of all it is JO-nen he says so himself in the comentary for Invader Zim. if any of you were ture Zim fans (or jhonen fans watching the show because it was his work) youd know that Note i an not being arrogent i just want to clearify that he says his name is pornounced jo-nen not ho-nen. --dino-amie october 14 2006

Dude, wow. No offense, but spell check. >> --SquidMoose (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.234.126.182 (talk • contribs) signed with name at odds with identity recorded in History

[edit] Nobody Expects Jinji

What does "Nobody Expects Jinji" even mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ace Class Shadow (talk • contribs)

Umm... what is this "Nobody Expects Jinji" from? Am I missing something here? Maybe you should be a little more specific. DreamsofTacos 18:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism from months and months ago. Moving on... --InShaneee 20:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

I found a picture of Jhonen here: http://www.supersnail.com/images8/3__ape_05_01_juaxss.jpg. But, I don't know the licensing! Help me! Red Alien 22:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

  • If you wanted to use it, you'd have to ask the person who runs that site (who also appears to claim copyright over all its pictures) to release the pic under a copyright licence such as Creative Commons. --InShaneee 22:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • The persone how complaned that the photo was old can explane him self,It's not like if he is 80 years old now.--Pixel ;-) 19:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • No, but he does look quite different in that photo, which was taken in 1999, I believe, than he does now. I would think that it would make sense to use a recent picture, not one from almost eight years ago. http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y266/dreamsoftacos/the%20night/Jhonen.jpg is a very recent picture, from his signing at Chicago Comics in late August. --Rubberducky
  • Hehe, that's actually from my Photobucket, I'm glad I can help spread the joy of Jhonen. --DreamsofTacos 11:33 8 November 2006
  • If it's your photo, do you mind if we use it for the picture in the article, instead of the horrendously old one? --Rubberducky 7:22 14 November 2006
  • Go for it! Jhonen is so hard to find, anything of his, actually. And pictures of Jhonen in my account are good for use. DreamsofTacos 20:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Ok, so, InShaneee, what would be the correct procedure for posting the new picture, since evidently I've done it incorrectly? --Rubberducky 15:23 18 November 2006 (EST)

[edit] New Comic

well ... the character design looks like ... and .. it is about love .... and has goths...


http://iamjapanese.blogspot.com/

for a better layout ... try http://www.groggie.com/w1k/strippers/ and go to "meowza"...


the article mentions that rikki is the voice of gir and on the coloring team twice-chris june 28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rubberducky (talk • contribs)

Ok, Not sure what that last part was about, but its very possible that Jhonen is drawing that comic. He might be trying to throw his fans off again, hence the romantic style. And please, everyone, Sign your posts. Thanks. ;) TigerDude 21:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not hisTheplanetsaturn 21:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Definitely not his. Why would he be posting shit on the net for free, if he could sell, especially considering his legion fanbase. I'm afraid that this is someone ripping off his art stile, which is something he despises. JackorKnave (talk) 22:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jhonen to Jhnen?

There's a rumor going around that Jhonen has changed his name (at least the spelling) to Jhnen. Even his official journal seems to prefer this spelling, so it well might be true. Does anyone have more information on this matter? It seems a worthy thing to mention in the article if it is fact. --68.35.94.119 21:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

No, Jhonen has not changed the spelling of his name. The 'Jhnen VEE / Jhnen V / VEE' thing is just a funky little abbreviation he uses sometimes on the interwebulous. --Rubberducky 19:42, 23 October 2006 (EST)

-- I believe he started writing his name as jhnen to try to throw people off his scent, so they couldnt figure out his instant messenger contacts. Chris Furniss - weeklygeekshow.com 23:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Please

Please stop putting back that whole "critism of Goth culture and lifestyle," section. It is not nessecairy. --—Preceding unsigned comment added by User:The Powerful (talk • contribs)

No, you need to stop blanking it. The section is sourced and relevant, and removing it again will be considered vandalism. --InShaneee 17:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me? Where are you to come and tell ME what to do? As for vandalism, that's not for you to accuse. --—Preceding unsigned comment added by User:The Powerful (talk • contribs)

I'm an administrator and a long time user. It wasn't an accusation, it was a fact. --InShaneee 19:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Whatever... :(

Here, let me bring up an argument with that segment. People don't have the right to label him however, it should not be listed that he has spoken against the goth culture. If he HATES us then why are so many of his friends (such as Roman Dirge and musician Voltaire) are Goth, the victims of NNY's are not even considered actual Goths, but mallgoth posers. For example, in one of the MEANWHILES the letter from the stereotypical masonite obviously suggested he did not have the passion for the subculture as most goths, but only did that to fit in. Also, he uses Goth charecters and heros such as Devi (who is NOT a goth depiction), Tess and NNY. Sure, the charecters learned from their expirences but you never see a dramatic word/message or crappy phont "change". Jhonen has never spoken against the subculture in general but how many people don't apperciate the true meanings. -The Powerful -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:The Powerful (talk • contribs) (redlink to nowhere; improperly signed)

What we have is what is verifiable. Removing it again will be considered vandalism (again). --InShaneee 15:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
How come you did not acknoweldge any of the things I mentioned? Why can't you just put some POSITIVE things in there that he's done for the goth subculture rather than continually critqueing it negatively AS you people ALWAYS do. -The Powerful -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:The Powerful (talk • contribs) (redlink to nowhere; improperly signed)
Reread the section. It says nothing negative. You're being hypersensitive.Theplanetsaturn 03:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm really fucking tired of people saying he hates the subculture. If he's so NOT Goth, then how come he's never denounced himself in the subculture? Sure, he's said it about his comics but he's really fond of the culture. Read Suicide Girls interview. Also, the fillerbunny thing was bullshit. The guy was critizing the culture as well as Vasquez, that's why he died. Plus, if there's any catergory he fits under it would be hippie. Goth forever. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.144.174.133 (talk) 02:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC).
It has always been my impression that Jhonen is not fond of the current form of the goth subculture - that is to say, Hot-Topicky Mallgoths - or people who are in it for the dramatics or to try and fit in by pretending to be isolated. Unfortunately, that seems to be about 90% of the 'goth' population at the moment - something that he sees fit to comment on in a humorous and satirical (and sometimes annoyed) manner. But really, this whole 'goth or not goth' debate is pretty much pointless and stupid - why does anyone give a shit? Leave him alone and let him draw, or play WoW, or whatever. Meanwhile, reread the section, because it says absolutely nothing about Jhonen hating goths, just comments on the 'issue'.megumi 05:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
The section says nothing about his "hating the subculture". Producing satire does not equal hate. Reread the section.Theplanetsaturn 03:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Vasquez hates the lable "goth", for both himself and his works. The article does not suggest that he hates the goth subculture. Many of his works do contain satires of goth, as the article states, but satire is a form of constuctive criticism, not hate, as Theplanetsaturn pointed out. Vasquez would probably puke all over himself if he knew anyone viewed him as a "hippie". He just hates lables, and people who apply them to him or his work, especially when his work obviously has absolutely nothing to do with the subculture, such as Fillerbunny. Ecto 04:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU ECTO??!!!! Who gives a shit, ducky? I do! Because he does not hate the subculture and where has he denounced himself as Goth? WHERE??!!! -72.144.174.133
Hating the label and hating the subculture are not the same thing. You need to relax. Jhonen does not hate the subculture, but like most artists, he dislikes an inherently limiting description of his work, and has said as much himself.Theplanetsaturn 02:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh for the love of Jimmy this sure is getting violent. Jhonen's hate of ANYTHING is not the issue here, at all, what so ever. It would be extremely presumptuous for us to say what Jhonen HATES because we are not JHONEN. What we can say, is that his work often pokes fun at the things that are commonly labeled as goth in today's society, such as fat girls wearing 'Nine Inch Heels' shirt, and oh, let me think... ANNE GWISH?! HELLO? If that's not goth satire, I don't know what is. Quit trying to act like you're representing all of Jhonen's personal sentiments accurately in his defense and quit deleting the goth satire bit. Christ. --SquidMoose (talk) 21:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] what's with the crummy, dated picture?

Pretty sure he looks nothing like that now; do you think we could get a more recent one? 87.244.71.96 05:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like him to me.Theplanetsaturn 05:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I have a more recent one, as mentioned above in 'Picture', but when I tried to upload it it got removed for "incorrect licensing." I'm not too familiar with Wikipedia, but the license is "This guy who took it said right on this page here that we could use it" - if someone can translate that and post the picture above, it would solve the problem. megumi 05:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Like I said earlier, I have no problem with my pictures of Jhonen being used here. I just can't post it here, because I don't have internet at home, which means I don't have time to do crap on the intarweb. So, someone go for it. DreamsofTacos 19:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
I've found two recent photos on Flickr with Creative Commons licenses that seem to be compatible with their usage here: 1, 2. Perhaps one or both should be added? MysteriousStranger 20:14, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hardcover

I went to the page Rubberducky cited, at Mars Import here. The hardcover is listed as out of stock, and the publisher, Slave Labor Graphics, simply does not list it at the Slave Labor store] nor mention it on the Slave Labor creators' page. Publishers frequently announce books, and even send out art for them, but for one reason or another the book never comes out. Honest to goodness, I have tried to confirm this book's existence, but without it being available to buy, or if sold out there being an ISBN number, there isn't any way to verify that it actually came out. And WP:VERIFY is one of the cardinal rules of Wikipedia.

Look, keep at it. I have no personal stake in this whatsoever. I'm just saying that Wikipedia is very careful about telling us that we can't put in material that can't be verified. If it exists, we can find it. --Tenebrae 01:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It's listed as out of stock because it's out of print. But it certainly does exist.Theplanetsaturn 03:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
That's great. But I apologize for being unclear. How do you know it exists? An encyclopedia can't just take somebody's word for it.--Tenebrae 03:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
An encyclopedia cannot hamstring itself to the point of absurdity either. I know the book exists because I have a copy. Because I have unpacked boxes of them and I have spoken with the publisher on this matter. If you are overly concerned about veracity of this, you could simply call the listed phone number for the company and ask. Flip through back issues of the Diamond catalog and view the solicitations for the book. Evidence of all things does not, and will not exist on the internet. Websites come and go, with little concern for historic record. That does not mean an encyclopedia should cease listing the facts. Particularly over such a small matter.Theplanetsaturn 03:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Here's something. But I doubt it will last.Theplanetsaturn 04:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

http://www.mothcomix.com/html/BrowseSearch/Results/Artist.asp?prdArtist=V

Don't get huffy. And don't ask other people to do research for your claims.
"Hamstring to the point of absuridy"? What, an encyclopedia should just take people's words for things? There are pranksters a'plenty who use Wikipedia for fun — go online and read up on some of these things ... The New York Times has even written about it. Nobody has any way of knowing who you are or if you're telling the truth about unpacking boxes, etc. Think about it, and I'm sure you'll see I'm telling the truth.
As it happens, the site you provided — that of a reputable dealer offering a rare hardcover book for sale — is a credible source. We can't list it in References or in a footnote because Wikipedia disallows links to commercial sites, but you've convinced me the book exists. Add the hardcover info — I myself will leave it in even without the specific cite. Other editors might not accept that; they may insist on an ISBN, which would be within their rights to do so.
Don't mean to take a shot, but I always find it ironic when people say, "Oh, this is a small thing" ... and fight you like it's a big thing! :-) All good here. --Tenebrae 04:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
The trick with print is that it lacks intonation. I assure you, nothing in my previous post falls under the designation of huffy. If I were so minded, I would speak plainly of my irritation. With that said...
Should an encyclopedia simply "take people's words for things", of course not. And I never suggested they should. But you found evidence entirely suggestive of the existence of the book, and choose to dismiss it. You did not search very deeply for proof, as a simple Google search of "Jhonen" and "hardcover" revealed a picture of the book in question. If you want to discuss reliable journalistic practices, look at your own actions first.
And for the record, many SLG books (particularly earlier ones like the book in question) are unlikely to have an isbn number. The inclusion of comics in bookstores is a more modern practice. If that is a necessary criteria, many factual things will be lost in the quagmire of verifiability. So no, I don't think the aforementioned editors would be within their rights at all to casually delete in the manner you suggest. Bare minimum, it would be irresponsible.
And yes, it is a small thing. But words are cheap and my alternative would have been a reversion without explanation. Would that actually have been preferable?Theplanetsaturn 04:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
We need a reliable source. It's either leave the warning, or remove the passage altogether. --InShaneee 05:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
This is getting absurd. A cursory search for the title reveals it for sale on eBay. I already pointed to a website that carries it. The source on the article includes a picture of the printed product. The book exists. End of story.Theplanetsaturn 06:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Ebay is not a valid source. A publisher is needed. --InShaneee 06:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I added a reference for the hardcover's existence and availability from a review by Revolution SF. Hope that helps, Theplanetsaturn. Ecto 07:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

In response to Theplanetsaturn:
  • "You did not search very deeply for proof" — because it wasn't my claim. It's every editor's own responsibility to provide confirmable, verifiable documentation for his or her edits. You don't put it off on other people.
  • "you found evidence entirely suggestive of the existence of the book" — and your own word, "suggestive", means it wasn't confirmable. "If you want to discuss reliable journalistic practices..." Please don't quote journalistic ethics to me: That field is how I make my living. Are you a journalist?
  • "many SLG books (particularly earlier ones like the book in question) are unlikely to have an isbn number" — and you know this how? ISBN #s have been in use since the early 1970s. The trade paperback has an ISBN #. A hardcover edition of the same book not having an ISBN # would give any journalist worth his or her salt some doubts.
I'll look at Ecto's reference. The fact that another editor, InShaneee, wants to hold Wikipedia to the same standards as a print encyclopedia is valid. To call that kind of care "irresponsible" is just turning logic on its head. --Tenebrae 00:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


In response to Tenebrae:

It's unfortunate that I have to spell this out for you.

  • "It wasn't my claim" — Your claim, specifically, was that the book was unavailable for purchase through a simple Google search. That has been shown to be patently false. It is your responsibility to research your claims before you justify the deletion of information with them. You clearly did a poor job of it. Bare minimum, you should have opened this up for discussion here before enacting your deletion.
  • "It's every editor's own responsibility to provide confirmable, verifiable documentation for his or her edits." — And you failed to do so with your edit. You made false claims while ignoring substantial evidence.
  • "Please don't quote journalistic ethics to me" — That field is how I make my living. Are you a journalist?" Nice appeal to authority. There is a reason that is considered a logical fallacy. Regardless, I've been a professional writer for 15 years, and as long as you continue to exhibit a lack of understanding of the principals of journalism, I'll continue to quote journalistic ethics to you. As for your supposed career, who cares? It's your actions here that are relevant, and you made edits justified with patently false claims. This field is how you make your living? Forgive me for finding that difficult to believe..
  • "it wasn't confirmable" — There is a photograph of a physical copy of the book on the Mars Import website. You want to claim that photographic evidence is not worth being considered a form of confirmation, be my guest. But it is plainly a ridiculous claim.
  • "The trade paperback has an ISBN #:" — I already made this clear for you. The trade paperback has continued to be reprinted where the hardcover is an earlier release. The adoption of ISBN #'s is relatively new to the alternative comics industry. SLG rarely used ISBN numbers before 2000, as without a substantial presence in the book market, it was considered an unnecessary expense. End result: an ISBN number cannot be the end all be all of proof for this category. To use your own approach: I know this because it's how I make my living. You call yourself a journalist? Investigate. Seriously. Just try it. It's really not that difficult.
  • "The fact that another editor, InShaneee, wants to hold Wikipedia to the same standards as a print encyclopedia is valid." — Your claim ( and the claim that InShaneee persisted in reiterating) that this book is unavailable for purchase through a Google search, and therefore likely does not exist was obviously incorrect. A simple Google search of the title shows multiple websites where the hardcover edition can be purchased. These websites show copies of the book through photos. Photos taken from multiple perspectives. The same Google search also shows the book for sale on an earlier version of the publishers own website. The book exists. End of story. Insisting on verification past this point is unreasonable and deleting information from the page based on this incorrect information is blatantly irresponsible. But hey, rather than discuss this, why don't you agree to let the matter lie, then run along and tattle once more. Good show Mr. Journalist.Theplanetsaturn 07:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


In response to Theplanetsaturn:
  • It wasn't my claim that a hardcover existed, no.
  • RE: "every editor's own responsibility..." One can't prove a negative, that is, the non-existence of a fact. That's a standard in everything from debate class to courtrooms.
  • "Forgive me for finding that difficult to believe." Calling someone a liar is considered a personal attack.
  • A photograph of a book isn't confirmation the book was published or released. Look up Godzilla! The Complete Guide to Moviedom's Mightiest Monster to see picture of a book that was announced and written about, but was never released.
  • RE: The ISBN issue, all you're doing is giving reasons why a released book might not have one. That's not the same as providing verifiable confirmation that a particular book was released.
  • "then run along and tattle once more"? Grownups call it whistleblowing or "reporting something to the authorities". --Tenebrae 22:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


In response to Tenebrae:

  • It was your claim that the book was unavailable for purchase through Google. Yes.
  • "That's a standard in everything from debate class to courtrooms." ---- Pay attention please. Or are you unable to keep track of your own claims?
  • "Calling someone a liar is considered a personal attack." ---- Calling someone "huffy" is a personal attack as well. One you indulged in repeatedly. it is inflammatory and unnecessary. Comment on content, not on contributors. You failed ot do this. Your glass house must be chilly indeed.
  • "A photograph of a book isn't confirmation the book was published or released." ---- Multiple copies available for sale, multiple pictures from independent websites, evidence of the books existence can be found in multiple websites. When these facts are considered, one picture is sufficient for proof.
  • "The ISBN issue, all you're doing is giving reasons why a released book might not have one. That's not the same as providing verifiable confirmation that a particular book was released." ----Pay attention. When did I ever hold up the lack of ISBN number as evidence that this book might exist? I introduced this as something conversational, not as a form of evidence. Strawman argument.
  • "Grownups call it whistleblowing or "reporting something to the authorities". ---- When you act like a grownup, I will treat you like one. You began our exchange with a blatantly condescending manner. You ignored my explanation that you had misinterpreted my tone. You made hypocritical claims on more than one occasion. 23:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Theplanetsaturn

In response to Tenebrae:

While we are here, lets take a look at your lies, and how they pertain to this discussion, Mr. Journalist. Below is the information you posted about this exchange elsewhere on Wikipedia:

  • "He was reverting two editors, myself and User:InShaneee, even though he wasn't providing a confirmable, verifiable cite for a claim that seemed fishy." ---- A claim that seemed fishy? Really? That's funny. You already agreed that I had found a "reputable" and "credible" source, and that I should re-add the hardcover publication information. Something is fishy here, oh yes. Perhaps it is the stink of your hypocrisy.
  • "On the talk page, he wanted other editors to take his word for the claim." ---- No. I used my word for discussion. I used a site you agreed was both "reputable" and "credible" for the claim.
  • "When two editors tried to explain the need for verifiable content, he got huffy and argumentative." ---- I was quite clear before that if I had indeed been "huffy" you would know. And now you should be all to aware that you have pushed me to the point of ire. If you cannot see the difference, you are a poor judge of character and should rethink your career, Mr. Journalist.
  • "Still, the editor in question made continuous reverts, as cited, all because he couldn't find a valid cite and accused us of somehow being "irresponsible" for asking for one." ---- By all means, in the relevant discussion, show me where I ever claimed you or InShaneee was "irresponsible". Do you understand context, Mr. Journalist? You purposefully misquote me when I point that holding this medium to a criteria not universally utilized would be "irresponsible". To simplify so that you may better understand, If comics do not always use ISBN numbers, and an editor deletes information because no ISBN number can be found, THAT would be an irresponsible act. That is what I said, and you took it entirely and purposefully out of context. Lowest form of reporting right there. You should be ashamed of yourself. But I suspect as you had to go behind my back to make this argument, rather than discuss it with me yourself, you already feel said shame.Theplanetsaturn 08:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
In response to Theplanetsaturn:
  • RE: "a claim that seemed fishy" — I said I had trouble with the claim's veracity from the very first posting.
  • RE: "the stink of your hypocrisy" — First, I've placed a template warning on your talk page. Personal attacks and that kind of language are prohibited. Secondly, in the interest of compromise I said only that I was convinced (though I have reservations, clearly); I also said your evidence might not be enough for other editors, as in fact it was not. There's nothing hypocritical in believing personally something exists, and still wanting proof — because my own personal belief doesn't matter.
  • RE: "show me where I ever claimed you or InShaneee was 'irresponsible'." Where you made reference to exactly the kind proof for which I was asking, and said, "Bare minimum, it would be irresponsible" to require that. Nothing's taken out of context.
  • A compromise solution was offered. Compromise is important in conflict resolution. Others would prefer the specificity of trade paperback, you would prefer to mention the hardcover. Saying that the comics were simply collected as a book is a fair compromise.--Tenebrae 23:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

In response to Tenebrae:

  • "I said I had trouble with the claim's veracity from the very first posting." ---- Funny. In our discussion in this very section you agreed that the source was credible and reputable. Without further discussion, you labeled it in your act of reporting me as "fishy". This is why I call your position hypocritical. Because these two arguments do not match.
  • "Where you made reference to exactly the kind proof for which I was asking" ---- I should not have to keep track of your arguments for you. You asked for an ISBN as a POSSIBLE source of proof. You also asked for an alternative, a website the book could be purchased through. As we had already come to an accord on this issue, it should be implicit due to context that I was not talking about you, but about the supposed editors who would ONLY accept an ISBN. So please pay attention in the future. Because if you ACTUALLY take the time to both read and comprehend the discussion, you will see I clearly made no such charge of you or InShaneee. Again, you failed to take context into proper consideration, and instead overreacted and misreported my actual words to moderation.
  • "*A compromise solution was offered." ---- I never said it was an unreasonable compromise. I said it should be discussed here first, BEFORE making such changes. As this is an obviously contentious issue, that would be the reasonable and responsible order of events.Theplanetsaturn 01:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Theplanetsaturn, you are advised to calm down and treat other editors with respect. This means stop making Personal Attacks. If you don't stop, you will find yourself blocked more and more. So just give it up, relax, live and let live a little, and edit cooperatively. Please. Hu 02:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I began this exchange with respect. In return, I was met with condescending manner, my words taken completely out of context, incorrect intent behind my posts attributed repeatedly despite clarification, my opinions on the topic dismissed through a fallacious appeal to authority, and my attempts at reasonable discussion ignored in favor of a moderation report. Respect comes from both directions, and Tenebrae has acted in an inflammatory manner from the inception of our dialog. So no, I will continue to return his unwarranted attacks with the derision they are due. If he ceases his behavior, I will be more than happy to return to the civil discussion that he aborted through his blatant misconceptions.Theplanetsaturn 02:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Know that any more of this abusive behavior, here or anywhere else, will result in the temporary removal of your editing privileges. This is simply not allowed under any circumstances. --InShaneee 03:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps you should have considered the rules before you began blanking information agreed upon through consensus without a word of proper discussion on the talk page.Theplanetsaturn 03:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

In response to Tenebrae:

  • Tenebrae: "Where you made reference to exactly the kind proof for which I was asking, and said, "Bare minimum, it would be irresponsible" to require that. Nothing's taken out of context."

I felt this required reexamination, as you managed to miscomprehend it so horribly. You claim I referred to you and your motives as "irresponsible". Let's take a look at what was actually said, rather than what you imagined. Keep in mind, this is after you had already agreed the source I provided was sufficient for your tastes:

  • Tenebrae: "Other editors might not accept that; they may insist on an ISBN, which would be within their rights to do so."
  • Theplanetsaturn: "(as not all published books will have an ISBN number)I don't think the aforementioned editors would be within their rights at all to casually delete in the manner you suggest. Bare minimum, it would be irresponsible."
  • Tenebrae: "Still, the editor in question made continuous reverts, as cited, all because he couldn't find a valid cite and accused us of somehow being "irresponsible" for asking for one."

I give you the benefit of the doubt that you understand the basics of the English language. To understand what the qualifier "other", that you supplied means, and what the qualifier "aforementioned", that I supplied, means. Which leaves the probability that you purposefully misunderstood my words, and purposfully reported my words out of context. I never accused you of being irresponsible. Not once. If you still don't understand the roots of our conflict, take another look at the above exchange. Read it closely. And when you're done, take responsibility for your own ill conceived, unnecessary and inflammatory moderation report. With that, hopefully we can put an end to this.Theplanetsaturn 03:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Comment: Book format

At the recommendation of Admin Luna Santin at Wikipedia:Personal attack intervention noticeboard#User:Theplanetsaturn (talk • contribs) is a Request for Comment regarding dispute about the publishing format(s) of the book Johnny the Homicidal Maniac.

Statements by editors previously involved in dispute
  • "Vasquez's first comic, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac, ran for seven issues and was collected as invisible embedded comment: no hardcover appears on Google for sale, Slave Labor Graphics doesn't list or mention a hardcover, and no ISBN can be found end invisible embedded commenta trade paperback book, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac: Director's Cut". -- Tenebrae 01:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • "Vasquez's first comic, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac, ran for seven issues and was collected as a hardcover and a trade paperback book, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac: Director's Cut". -- Theplanetsaturn 04:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Comments
  • "Vasquez's first comic, Johnny the Homicidal Maniac, ran for seven issues and was collected as the book Johnny the Homicidal Maniac: Director's Cut". -- Compromise added by User:69.22.254.111 with this edit summary: "compromise solution, problem solved. Now you boys play nice. When mature people compro[mi]se, no one gets all they want, but everyone gets something they can live with."
  • Tenebrae notes books can be announced and art sent out for books eventually unreleased. Theplanetsaturn notes that the evidence provided is sufficient. User:69.22.254.111 believes he split the difference. Request comments by additional, outside editors per WP:RfD guidelines. --Tenebrae 03:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Tenebrae: "A compromise solution was offered." ---- Again (and for the record), I never said it was an unreasonable compromise. I said it should be discussed here first, BEFORE making such changes. As this is an obviously contentious issue, that would be the reasonable and responsible order of events.Theplanetsaturn 05:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Honestly, I think here the fault falls with neither of the "offending" parties, but with Wikipedia's policies of what qualifies as a valid source. Apparently, photographs and offers for sale of existing books (I say existing because I have held the book in my hands, contemplated buying the book when it was still available, etc) are not valid for sourcing. Neither, as seen previously on this discussion page, is video of the creator and publisher of the book saying it was nearly nominated for an Eisner but missed out - because the video is on youtube. Neither party is wrong here. User:Tenebrae is trying to uphold Wiki's policy; User:Theplanetsaturn is frustrated that under that policy, a book's existance can be called into question when there is plenty of evidence that it does, indeed, exist. I respect that Wikipedia wants to remain a reliable source of information, but there is a point where it becomes ridiculous to not accept certain evidence as valid - and I mean this simply as an observation, not as a slight on anyone or anything.
That having been said, I believe that the compromise by User:69.22.254.111 is a reasonable one. Rubberducky 1:29, 14 December 2006 (EST)

Hello everyone. It has been requested that I review and comment on this discussion as a neutral third party. Based on what I've read above, it looks like everyone here has Wikpiedia's best interests at heart; no one is at fault for wanting to uphold our verifiability policies. The hardcover edition of this book appears to be somewhat rare — not found on Abebooks, AddALL, Amazon.com, or the Library of Congress — but does appear to be verifiably available for purchase from their primary distributor, Slave Labor Graphics [1], listed (but out of stock) at Mars Import [2], and has recently sold on EBay [3] for $60 and change. I believe there is sufficient verifiable evidence to mention the hardbound version, namely the Slave Labor Graphics link, but it would be most ideal if we could obtain an ISBN number as well, if one was ever associated with the item. Hope that helps, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I put in a reference to a Revolution SciFi review of JTHM that states that the book is available in hardcover [4], but that was removed. That citation, plus the reference from Slave Labor, should be enough to back up a mention of the hardcover in the article. Knowing that the book exists, I can understand the frustration involved in this dispute, but I also understand the desire to follow Wikipedia's guidelines to the letter. Hopefully these references will satisfy both parties. As far as I can see, the hardcover has never had an ISBN. Slave Labor will add one if they ever reprint that version, though. Ecto 08:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I own the hardcover, and yes, it is rare. When I go home for the holidays, I will try to find it and extract whatever details other editors request. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 09:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, all, enormously. Theplanetsaturn made the consensus change, I updated it from an inline link to a footnote and link, and the planet and the darkness, so to speak, are aligned and all is well under Heaven. That type of pitching in and discussion is what helps make Wikipedia editing worthwhile. I'm sure my new colleague would agree, and let me extend a hand to say we both let off some steam, but that's in the past, and I look forward to working together in the Comics Project. Happy Wiki-ing! --Tenebrae 01:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Glad we could come to an agreement on this, Tenebrae. Thank you for holding the consensus. For the record, I have looked at the other work you've done in comics on Wikipedia, and you do good work. Apologies for my unkind words.Theplanetsaturn 02:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I was also requested to comment ... sorry, I'm just an Invader Zim fan, don't know much about JTHM. -- ProveIt (talk) 01:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious as to why the publisher selling the book here is not enough verification of the existence of the book. There have to be plenty of books listed in wikpedia that were never given ISBN numbers. Murderbike 02:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

The book was available on the previous version of their website, but not as clearly as it is currently. SLG just overhauled the website and the link you provide did not exist at the time of the debate.Theplanetsaturn 02:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
So the hardcover note could be re-added? Murderbike 02:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed pronunciation

Removed guide to pronouncing his name; it appeared to be incorrect, based on his television interview. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.35.94.119 (talk) 11:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC).


[edit] Pronunciation

There seems to be a demand for a pronunciation guide. I think the tradition on Wikipedia when such things are needed follows a kind of international standard. Anyone know how to render the name in such a way (instead of "JOE-nen" "JOAN-en" etc. as usually attempted? This is, I think, a bit informal for an encyclopedia article.) --76.18.93.72 (talk) 06:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

IPA was what I was thinking of -- International Phoenetic Alphabet. I think Jhonen gets spelled something like ɖʒonɛn. Now does anyone know the definite pronunciation for his surname? I know of 3 different versions -- voss-kez, vass-kez and vass-kwez, and it's unclear which he prefers. --76.18.93.72 (talk) 03:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Official Homepage

Should we perhaps remove the link to his official homepage for now? It's just a link to his Livejournal, which we're already linking to.--209.243.31.233 02:25, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What does Jhonen Vasquez use to do his comics?

Has Jhonen ever specified what drawing stuff he uses in his pictures and comics? Like brands of pens, inks, pencils or just anything he uses?

[edit] Sorry, second post same question: Has Jhonen said what equipment he uses in his comics?

St. Scolex April 10, 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by St. Scolex (talk • contribs) 00:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I think he mentioned that he experimented with brushes in an issue of Squee, but that's it. I'd imagine he uses the standard comic making tools like pens, pencils, brushes, and sometimes Photoshop. I don't think it's important to the article to list what tools he uses though, unless he had an extremely unique method. Ash Loomis

[edit] Great job adding that new photo of JV.

ST. SCOLEX, 10/22/07

Great job adding the new photo of Jhonen, whoever did. It's great. I like his little seal ghost puppet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.120.81.226 (talk) 23:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jellyfist?

I've not gotten my hands on a copy of Jellyfist, but could somebody please start or submit content for a Jellyfist article? 75.130.107.71 (talk) 00:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Was done, however, article was deleted for being unimportant --76.18.93.72 (talk) 05:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mindless Self Indulgence Video

This article links to supposedly the official video of MSI's Shut Me Up. Unfortunately, the link does not go to the official video, but a fan-edited one (if I am not mistaken). The original is distinct in the fact that it never switches between shots of the store clerk and the band, it's 100% the store clerk. Can anybody provide a link to the original, or at least specify in the article that that is not the official music video? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.111.63 (talk) 23:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


You're mistaken. The video was edited by the band themselves, but was still of course directed by Vasquez. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.115.141.189 (talk) 19:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup and Tone

Theoretically any article on Wikipedia should read like a formal encyclopedia entry, and so, this article needs the tone and such to be tweeked a bit. First of all, it's either "Jhonen Vasquez" or "Vasquez" -- never just "Jhonen" unless it's in a quote from elsewhere. Also perhaps the Style and Comics sections should be at least partially merged. --76.18.93.72 (talk) 02:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I shifted some things around myself, so I think it's okay to get rid of the cleanup part. The formal tone could be better however.--Sobekneferu (talk) 20:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Bloody GIR

"It was also cancelled because of the few images thrown in on certain frames of certain episodes. The picture contained the "Gir" robot covered in blood. This was thrown in there because of of Nickelodeon's guidelines which included no blood. He did this to tick Nickelodeon off because he didn't like the guidelines"

While not many people will dispute that Bloody GIR did exist, can anyone really verify that it was a cause of the show's cancellation?--76.18.93.72 (talk) 02:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)