Talk:Vince Colletta/Archive 1

Reason for deleting wikidate overlinkage
It's per Wikipedia style guidelines. This from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29#Avoid_overlinking_dates


 * Avoid overlinking dates


 * If the date does not contain a day and a month, date preferences will not work, and square brackets will not respond to your readers' auto-formatting preferences. So unless there is a special relevance of the date link, there is no need to link it. This is an important point: simple months, years, decades and centuries should only be linked if there is a strong reason for doing so. Make only links relevant to the context for the reasons that it's usually undesirable to insert low-value chronological links.


 * Usage of links for date preferences


 * year only. So 1974 → 1974. Generally, do not link unless they will clearly help the reader to understand the topic.
 * month only. So April → April. Generally, do not link
 * century. So 20th century → 20th century. Generally, do not link
 * decade. So 1970s → 1970s. Generally, do not link (Including an apostrophe [1970's] is incorrect)
 * year and month. So April 1974 → April 1974 Generally, do not link
 * new year and month. So April 2000 → April 2000 Generally, do not link unless they will clearly help the reader to understand the topic. Presently, articles only exist for combinations from the year 2000 to current
 * day of the week (with or without other date elements). So Tuesday → Tuesday. Generally, do not link.''--Tenebrae 16:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Eddie Campbell on Colletta
He has some interesting things to say about hsi current reputation (and this entry). Worth a quote. Something like:

"My personal theory about the decline of Colletta's reputation ... is that none of the reprints of the work have ever been adequate. ... In the years when I attempted to 'reconstitute' my collection of the Lee-Kirby-Colletta THOR, I noticed how poor the later reprintings of the stories always were. ... All Colletta's charming qualities, the softening lines and subtle textures tended to go blank. The finest lines disappear, unless they're close to other fine lines in which case they congeal into one thick line. Second generation versions of those great favourite books of mine never satisfied my longing to re-obtain the experience of my first readings. A fair assessment of Colletta can only be made on those first printings."

I'll leave it to the experienced editors to call that one but it'd give it some extra balance. (Emperor 00:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC))


 * I'd have to agree. Campbell is notable, and his point isn't pure opinion but an analysis. What do other editors say? -- Tenebrae 00:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've gone over Campbell's essay, and I just can't kind find any analysis that Baeza and Comtois don't already say. The one quote that might be useful ends vaguely and without really saying what he means, but what he doesn't mean. ("Colletta augmented the inherent strength of the design by contrasts of texture, of flesh and hair, wood and fur and steel, looking forward to a different kind of heroic epic that would become popular later. I'm thinking of the Lord of the Rings. A return to that kind of old-worldly adventure was unglimpsed at this stage in our progress, when we still thought we were all going for a trip to the moon, and the ideal was all shiny and perfect and automated.") Campbell's remark about Colletta's work suffering in reprint would have been good, except that, as he says, he hasn't seen the Masterworks (which are, in fact, due to glossy paper, modern printing equipment and computer-enhanced color, actually far better than the originals, which I own).--Tenebrae 17:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Erik Larsen on Colletta
Again I'll leave this for the experts to decide what to integrate into the article, but it is an interesting piece - he had some work inked by Colletta and was outraged but, with hindsight, he sees how he softened some of Kirby's art and helping with the focus of the art so when it works (as in his work on Thor) it works well. The bottom line is that he was a hack but a professional hack and could ink a whole comic book overnight when it was needed. (Emperor (talk) 15:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC))

The Thin Black Line
Just got Robert L. Bryant Jr.'s Colletta book in the mail today. Looking forward to referencing it in the article! (Also, Blake Bell's Bill Everett book arrived with it). --Tenebrae (talk) 21:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

"Bullpen Bulletins" article on Colletta
A while back, I read a 1980s Marvel Comics "Bullpen Bulletins" which was focused on Colletta and claimed he has more credits to his name than any other person in any field of the arts and entertainment. For some reason I think it was from just before the New Universe debuted, which would make it 1986, but I can't remember the date. Is there by chance an online database where I could run a search for the article, or am I just gonna have to go through my Marvel Comics month-by-month to find it?--NukeofEarl (talk) 14:03, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Even if this is found and it does say this, that's an unquantifiable claim and certainly sounds like casual hyperbole and not meant to be taken seriously. The Guinness Book of Records and other sources give talk-show hosts with tens of thousands of credits, and even a cursory look at the Grand Comics Database show far, far fewer for Colletta. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:03, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. I had suspected the claim was probably not true, but might be worth mentioning anyway just as an indicator of how prolific Colletta was. But if it was indeed no more than "casual hyperbole" as you put it, then I'd agree it's useless. I might still try to find the article, though, just because it included a short interview with Colletta, and that might have some useful tidbit.--NukeofEarl (talk) 16:43, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * An interview with him? Cool! --Tenebrae (talk) 20:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * This might be it.     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTorwKJNW3M  38.124.23.2 (talk) 22:35, 21 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm just seeing someone turning the pages of The New Mutants (1983) #3. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The text description for the video includes "Bullpen Bulletins page features an interview with Vince Colletta"


 * At this blog post someone mentions, "Vince Colletta, in a "Bullpen Bulletins" interview that ran in the May 1983 editions of Marvel comics" http://bigglee.blogspot.com/2010/08/in-praise-of-vince-colletta-silver-age.html


 * Check out some May 1983 Marvel Comics. I don't have ready access to my collection right now to verify first hand but I found these through Google.  Mtminchi08 (talk) 02:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! It happens I have a copy of The New Mutants #3, so I found it! Though I have to admit I misremembered the claim; they call Colletta "the man who has more copies of his work in print than any other human being in the history of the world", not more publications with his work. Anyway, as I expected the interview is entertaining but only has a couple bits which seem potentially useful from a Wikipedia perspective. The first is he says he worked for a while as a professional photographer for actors and models, something I don't see mentioned in the article at present. Unfortunately, he doesn't give even a rough indication of when he was doing this, so I don't know where I should put it in the article! The second bit is the following comments, made by Colletta when asked what his philosophy of inking is: "Well, first of all, some inkers like to pick and choose... and they'll take their time, no matter what the deadline is, even if the editor is in a jam, or a colorist is waiting for pages to come in so they can earn a living, too. I can't be that way." Does that sound like it would be a good addition to the "controversy" section?--NukeofEarl (talk) 00:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I think the quote does belong. We have other people talking about Colletta, but this may be the only time he addressed the issue directly in his own words. (The "more than any other human being in the history of the world" line, however, just sounds like the Stan/Marvel hyperbole we all know and love.)--Tenebrae (talk) 00:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not Stan... This was under Jim Shooter. The problem I see with the claim is that getting even an approximation of who has the most copies of his work in print is a task that would daunt even Guiness Records, never mind a comic book publisher trying to get out this month's bulletin article. Anyway, obviously I was delayed a bit, but I finally put the quote in. Wasn't sure where to fit it in the section so I just put it in the end. If anyone sees a better place for it, please move it there.--NukeofEarl (talk) 23:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

FYI but certainly not "official" is an item that was sent to me supposedly showing an accurate count of creator credits. Colletta 1590, Swan 1414, Ayers 1324, Kirby 1317, John and Sal Buscema 1600. Regards, Franklin222Franklin222 (talk) 20:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tenebrae, Hope you are enjoying the weekend. A while back, at your suggestion, I obtained Marvel's permission to use a high resolution scan of the cover of Secret Story #7 which appears on the Vince Colletta Wikipedia page. After forwarding the document to the powers that be at Wikipedia, they apparently decided against using it anyway. Just wondering if you made any inquiries about it? Thanks and take care, Franklin222Franklin222 (talk) 16:52, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, Franklin. This is the first I'm hearing of it. Did they write back and say no, or you just haven't heard from them? --Tenebrae (talk) 22:22, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

After they said no to my request, I forwarded their reply to you. I'm guessing that I messed up the communication somehow. Franklin222Franklin222 (talk) 22:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I had an e-mail change. Try the contact link now. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Full name
I removed this source as there is no page number (citations without page numbers are useless, see WP:INTEGRITY): Colletta, Vince, in. (By the way, there seems to exist another version of this book: .) --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)