User talk:Xkcd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Xkcd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some recommended guidelines to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything. Best of luck and happy editing! Tuspm (C | @) 20:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting help
Getting along
Getting technical

Contents

[edit] Question

What if anything does xkcd mean? Lizz612 19:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I added a line to the xkcd.com "about" page [1] that mostly answers this. It doesn't mean anything, it's just a string of letters to refer to a particular comic. Except when I use it as a username, in which case it refers to me. Xkcd 06:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)xkcd

[edit] Thanks

I just found your comic (curse you, Boing Boing) and am really enjoying it. Thanks! (Even if it all is "patently made up". Heh. Nowadays nobody believes you work for NASA until you're arrested and found to be carrying pepper spray and a diaper.) Anyway, I should be emailing you to say I like the comic instead of pestering you here, but I thought I'd come across as ever so much more impressive in my Wikipedia persona than as some random emailer. Yeah, didn't work, huh? (My favorite comic so far: mixing curse levels. I'm going to start trying it.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] COI, other issues.

I'm a big fan of your comic and some of your other work, but I thought it might be a good idea to point out our policy on conflicts of interests in regard to editing stuff related to you. Also, (Striking out earlier, since I see that you've seen that already). I'm attemping to improve the XKCD article and better source things. In that regard, by any chance do you know what reliable sources have mentioned or discussed the comic? Thanks. JoshuaZ 19:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks -- I hadn't actually seen that conflict-of-interest link. I saw some things earlier suggesting that editing articles about yourself was okay as long as you were careful, but I had the feeling that it wasn't good form and eventually decided to stop it completely, putting the note at the top of the xkcd talk page to let people know.
As for reliable sources, there's the Red Hat interview with me linked on the xkcd page, as well as an interview in the February 2007 issue of Physics World (not currently available online) and another at Comixpedia [2]. I'll be giving a talk at MIT in a week or so, and I'm told it will also be available online, so that's another type of source. But then, what's the difference between what I say there and what I say in my blog? And how does that compare to what I say in an interview? It's all pretty tricky. I think maybe things I say shouldn't be counted as a primary source unless I write on cracked and yellowed parchment. That would seem a little more fitting.  :) --Xkcd 20:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)xkcd
Per Wikipedia notability, a topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Your interview comments, talk at MIT, and blog are not "independent" of the subject (you and your blog). However, the interviewer's comments in your interview generally can be used (assuming that the interviewer is independent of you, such as he's not your brother or someone who works for you). In the case of people who publicly express their opinion (such as you through your blog), your interview comments, talk at MIT, and blog may be fair game to some extent when placed under a biography section such as Philosophical and/or political views. It usually is better to cite some independent person's statements regarding the topic's Philosophical and/or political views, but sometimes it's necessary to go directly to the source to avoid ... uh ... mischaracterization and WP:BLP problems. Your interview comments, talk at MIT, and blog can be used as gap fillers for factual information that is very likely to be true, unlikely to be disputed, and not yet available anywhere else. The above are more rules of thumb that I use to develop articles. Policy and guidelines control over these rules of thumb, of course. -- Jreferee (Talk) 15:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

Do you think your webcomic is notable enough to be included in this article? You're either the best person or the worst person to answer this question, and I can't decide.

On a side note, are webcomics all italized nowadays? If that's the case you might want to do so on your user page, unless you like it that way; I never like messing with other people's pages.

...Just something I noticed. Love what you do. - Boss1000 01:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ah, what the hell.

I'm doing the fangirl thing, and, like another before me, felt doing it via Wikipedia would give me a certain cachet. Your comic is awesome. </fangirl>

I also wanted to ask if your whiteboard Wikipedia picture is also released under the same CC license as your work -- I'd very much like to use it on my userpage. You can respond here or on my talk page. If you do the latter, I will be forced to make a separate archive containing only talk page comments from notable webcomic artists. ... you should really do the latter. Cheers! -- Merope 01:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

  • His work is available under a nc only license...which isn't considered "free enough" for wikipedia. -N 21:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] http://xkcd.com/c285.html

Any chance of getting http://xkcd.com/c285.html released under cc-by, cc-by-sa, or GFDL for inclusion here? I think it'd make a nice touch. -N 01:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, I suspect that comic would be used widely withing Wikipedia if it were free content as it captures Wikipedia pretty well. It doesn't matter what the guy says, but do it without a citation and you'll receive a Wikipedia protester. -- Jreferee (Talk) 15:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
It has already been deleted because someone uploaded it under it's original licence (CC-NC), which is incompatible with Wikipedia. --Edokter (Talk) 13:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Randal. I uploaded Image:Wikipedian protester.png a few weeks back (after it was deleted for not having a fair use rationale). Just now, I found it the image is also at Image:Wikiprotest.png, licenced as CC-BY. But I cannot verify that you lincenced it as such. I've asked User:Mike33 to send me a copy of your email he said you sent him, but I would much prefer if you edited Image:Wikipedian protester.png to change the licence (if you do indeed want to licence that particular comic as CC-BY). — Edokter • Talk • 19:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The image has been moved to Wikimedia Commons but currently, there's no verifiable record of the image having been relicensed. (Links are dead, and no proof exists.) I think this might be a problem. (Mike33 should have filed an OTRS report... Maybe you can do it instead?) --Kjoonlee 19:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] xkcd

I added some references to the xkcd article, so it's more likely to survive the AfD ax should someone be so inclined to list it. -- Jreferee (Talk) 14:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] XKCD thanks

I just wanted to say I love your comic. My girlfriend thought the foreplay one was hysterical. Raul654 16:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another request for a license on your work

I was reading the Article / Talk page on Centrifugal force and noticed this comment and thought I would pass it along to you. -AndrewBuck (talk) 08:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

That's one of my all-time favorites, and one of a dozen or so xkcd comics that I have hanging in my cube at work. --Mugsywwiii (talk) 20:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Loose wheel nut indicator

You may also enjoy these bits from Bill Beaty:

—Ben Brockert (42)

[edit] Image:Wikijail.png

I uploaded PNE for my userpage is that okay with you? King Rock Go 'Skins! 22:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)