Talk:Jim Davis (cartoonist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Archives for the Jim Davis (cartoonist) talk page | |
|---|---|
 |
1 |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group. | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Indiana, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Indiana. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Cats.
This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
|
| ??? | 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. | |
Contents |
[edit] Opinion without a source
From the article:
"The strip has continued on a downward spiral over the last decade. The barley funny premise that it began with has run out of possible humor and is slowly choking itself to death. Although it seems to still be lucrative with its merchandising deals and whoring itself to hallmark. The public will only appreciate it for so long before even they realize that it is no longer funny. It appears its time to put this kitty to sleep."
I don't see any sort of source given to indicate this might be a quote and as such the comment is little more than one person's opinion about this strip. I'm not up on the Wikipedia writing conventions and don't do much editing myself, but if anyone else finds this passage out of place I really think it should be removed. The comment might be right, but I don't think it belongs in an encyclopedia article.
No, clearly such a subjective comment (regardless of how much I agree with it) does not belong in an encyclopedia. I did a search for the word "spiral," and it didn't come up, so presumably that comment has already been edited out. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 10:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Jim Davis: Unpleasant/hostile towards his critics?
Obviously, it would take more than a single, anecdotal reference from yours truly to justify characterizing Mr. Davis as, well, not a very nice man, but I will present my anecdote. If this turns out to be indicative of some sort of pattern (meaning that other people report similar experiences), however, it might well justify a mention in the main article.
What happened approximately 15 years ago (probably early 1990s), is that I wrote a letter to the San Jose Mercury News, requesting that they no longer carry the "Garfield" comic strip, on the basis of my belief that it was no longer funny, and hadn't been for some time. About a month later, I received a letter from Jim Davis' attorney(!), threatening me with legal action if I continued to defame his client in such a manner. This behavior struck me as pretty damn outrageous at the time, and like I said, if its indicative of a pattern, would perhaps warrant a mention in the Jim Davis main article (although perhaps I am the only person to have this unpleasant, albeit somewhat comical, experience). KevinOKeeffe (talk) 11:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Garfield section
This is an obvious copy-and-paste of http://pressroom.garfield.com/releases/dsi.html, and thus is plagiarism. Dothefandango (talk) 22:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- I pulled the section as a copyvio. Feel free to remove any copyright violating material you see :) Shell babelfish 23:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Garfield Minus Garfield
The comics here -- http://garfieldminusgarfield.tumblr.com/ -- are in Davis's style and signed with his name, so I assume they're his work. Is there a reason not to include this information in the article? JamesMLane t c 19:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
- They are his - they're old Garfield comic strips that someone has photoshopped Garfield out of. The site owner has a post elsewhere of what Davis thinks of the website [1]. So, cute stuff and interesting commentary on the strip, but probably not a good fit on this article unless it gets rather famous or is covered in a reliable source somewhere. Shell babelfish 04:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- It's covered in this article in the Washington Post. There might be other people like me who encounter the site and wonder whether someone's ripping off Davis's style, or these are strips Davis himself did deliberately omitting Garfield, or it's been photoshopped. The Post article, by providing that information and Davis's reaction, sheds light on the article subject and his work. JamesMLane t c 05:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
