Talk:Fun Publications

Reception
Why does the article say "The Timelines toy line has proved extreemly popular"? it's still sourced to the Erin Brereton book, which said LANDQUAKE was popular. This was already discussed before. Implicit ≠ True, kinda thing. Also "Critics of the comic have said that the stories play directly to the fans of the Transformers conventions and stories center around the toys being introduced each year" looks, weird in that section. That's pretty much fact and how Fun Pub does things, nothing to do with what critics think. I'm just gonna remove that section. NotARealWord (talk) 18:33, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * ...and I'm going to put it back in. We can discuss alternate wording though. Mathewignash (talk) 23:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not even all that true, they're not always all that popular. Most recent example, BotCon Galvatron sold for £32.90 on eBay. There's also the BotCon 2010 sets BigBadToyStore is still trying to clearance, and Fun Pub had some Descent into Evil sets left over until what, 2009? Seriously, "extreemly popular" is not all that true. Plus, the "extreemly" typo has never been corrected. NotARealWord (talk) 09:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have alternate wording? Propose it. If you see a spelling error, correct it. Mathewignash (talk) 13:37, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not just the typo, it's a factual error, and the source doesn't even say "Timelines is popular". The book said "Landquake is popular", and he was a freebie that came with the magazine subscription, anyway. Also, see previous point about cheap Galvatron and unsold box sets. Get this clear. I am not proposing any alternate wording. It's not in the source, therefore, find another, or keep it out of the article. NotARealWord (talk) 16:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)