Talk:Ryan North

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	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]

An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Ryan North, has edited Wikipedia as Ryan North (talk · contribs)

An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Ryan North, has edited Wikipedia as Qwantz (talk · contribs)

	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.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
More information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related work groups (general): Comics creators work group Webcomics work group

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 1 Semi-protection 2 Family 3 Notability 4 Globe and Mail reference quote

[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)

Why can't people keep that stuff in the Chicken article? :P 24.34.51.87 (talk) 10:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC) (sorry)

[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)

How does the National Post sound? "Ryan North, an Ottawa native now based in Toronto, created the hugely popular daily webcomic (at qwantz.com) from boilerplate clip-art, like David Rees' Get Your War On." from Sarah Silverman hired by Hallmark, Nathalie Atkinson, National Post Published: Thursday, February 07, 2008 -- 99.236.158.42 (talk) 07:16, 5 March 2008 (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)

Looks like the case has already been made on the talk page. The quotation is excessive, and referencing "link rot" isn't very persuasive, as under that argument footnotes everywhere would be festooned with extensive quotation. Again, all the relevant content from the Globe and Mail article is already included in the article; the footnote merely restates it in a large chunk or redundant text. JDoorjam JDiscourse 20:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I do 'festoon with extensive quotation' my articles. It is a valuable and thorough referencing practice. And link rot is persuasive when we're talking about something which won't be archived in the Internet Archive, and which is hosted by an entity with a vested interest in not having it remain public.

I don't know what you think you're saying in the redundant bit; of course references are 'redundant' with the article, they're supposed to be! That's the entire point! --Gwern (contribs) 22:30 19 May 2007 (GMT)

That "links die" isn't really a problem with stories in major newspapers. I had no problem finding this article at my library. We don't need quotes in references unless they add something that isn't already in the article. --Dragonfiend (talk) 23:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Quoting everything is not necessary. The link may die, but the article won't. People will always be able to get it. Yes, they will probably have to pay or go to the library, but that applies to many references and isn't a problem. Superm401 - Talk 20:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)