Talk:Amanda Conner

Citation needed
The following is a major claim that needs verifiable, confirmable citation, as per Wiki guidelines:


 * (many of Amanda's covers were made into designs for the line of Barbie toys

— Tenebrae 20:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Correction: Palmiotti and Conner aren't married. As far as I know they cohabitate.

Married?
According to Jimmy Palmiotti's blog, Amanda Conner is engaged and not married.

I understand that there are two citations stating otherwise. If I don't see a reply about this in ~5 days, I'll change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.250.24.248 (talk) 04:26, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * His blogspot profile indicates he joined in September 2009. The cited Newsarama and CBR sources, however, are from December 7, 2009 and April 5, 2010. Since people get engaged before they get married, and both of the cited sources are more recent than the blogspot profile, then it is reasonable that the cited sources simply have more updated info. Maybe he merely hasn't updated his blogspot profile since joining. I've sent him a message on his official Facebook page (which is linked at his blogspot page) to ask him for clarification. Nightscream (talk) 06:10, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Images
All images in Wikipedia need to have a rationale, and cannot be there only for decorative purposes. An image of Connor in 2010 and an image of her in 2011, when there is no significant difference in appearance, is redundant. One needs to be removed. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:49, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * All fair-use images have to have a rationale. Not all images. That said, I agree that these two do not serve different purposes. If one were a close-up portrait shot, and the other more a long-shot that showed her sketching, or a line of fans at her table, that would be different. I think the 2011 image is the nicer one. The facial expression in the 2010 image, combined with the angle at which it was taken, makes her look grotesque. (I was so desperate to get a pic of her, and grateful that she posed for me while there were fans on line waiting for sketches, that I didn't examine the pic closely enough after taking it to realize it wasn't that good.) So if a consensus here wants to remove the 2010 one, I'm fine with that. Nightscream (talk) 01:04, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Night. Actually, I like your 2010 image much better than the bland, harsh, full-on 2011 image that gives her a puffy, unflattering face. The 2010 image, in which she's smiling and has her face propped up on her arms has much more personality and conveys more of the subject's demeanor. I would very much vote for the 2010 image. Any other editors have thoughts on this? --Tenebrae (talk) 13:41, 22 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, whatever a consensus decides is fine with me. Nightscream (talk) 17:14, September 22, 2011‎ (UTC)