Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Templates

We should think about templates. Proposals:
 * A project notice like template:philosophy, to be placed at the top of Talk pages. That will direct people here.
 * Done. See template:comicsproj.
 * Infoboxes (similar to those found on album pages {example})
 * "Comic book series" with picture, publisher, dates, notable creators, &c.
 * "Comic book character" with picture, publisher, dates, notable creators, first appearance, powers, group affiliations, real name, & all that trading-card stuff. (Template:Superherobox)
 * "Comic book character" which is not Superhero-specific. (Template:Comiccharacterbox)
 * "Comics creator" with picture (if legal?), dates, and most important works.
 * An infobox for graphic novels. I have been using the one for comic serieses (example: Watchmen), but I think a more standard one is needed. - Stephen Goldmeier, Columbus, Ohio 05:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

-leigh (φθόγγος) 01:57, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Possibly a "comics" template, similar to template:The Beatles, which appears at the bottom of every Beatles-related page and contains links to top-level articles on the Beatles.

We should also develop an fair use image copyright tag for images that consist of a few comic panels. - Lifefeed 14:19, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it should look like (a shorter version of?) this. -leigh (φθόγγος) 08:27, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

"Marvel Comics" vs. "Marvel Comics universe"
One of the two terms above is used in most entries for Marvel Comics characters, which generally say either "so-and-so is a fictional Marvel Comics superhero" or "so-and-so is a fictional superhero in the Marvel Comics universe" (as it says, for instance, in entries for S.H.I.E.L.D. and Ego, The Living Planet)

The two terms each link to separate Wikipedia entries. They mean different things -- one entry is about a comic-book company, the other about an internally consistent fictional setting, ala Tolkein's Middle-earth -- yet they are used interchangeably.

For consistency and clarity, it might be good to establish some sort of standard language for these Marvel Comics entries and, by extension, those for DC, etc. -Tenebrae, Sept. 6, 2005, 8:34PM ET

Team-Up Titles
Just wondering if there should be a specific template for such titles, one that would allow the listing of the guest stars (appropriately linked, naturally) in any given issue.

I ask because I was thinking about putting together one for Ultimate Team Up, but the format could be more generally applicable. Lokicarbis 06:08, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

Template:Superherobox
I've created a superherobox template which should act as an infobox for comic-book characters. Because not all comic books deal with superheroes (eg Archie), this template was created and named specifically for them. See more info about this template on the main page.

Please make any suggestions here, but refrain from simply changing the template without posting about the changes here first. Feel free to add comic color codes to the list, but choose colors that are easy on the eyes.

Comic book covers might not work too well as images in the template, due to the large height, so the Wolverine example would have to be replaced with something less tall, as would all other images. Maybe this one could just be cropped. -- brian0918   01:30, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * A cover is probably fine. Just shrink the image.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 04:45, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Alright, the instructions will read that the image can be at most 300px wide. -- brian0918   05:19, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't really like that at all. It's huge, the colours are all wrong and there is far too much information there.  Keep it simple would be my opinion.--Hiding 22:28, 3 May 2005 (UTC)


 * What happened to the "Status" tadbit in the SH Boxes? Kanjilearner 11:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Non-vertical lists and punctuation
Better to keep the discussion at: Template talk:Superherobox.

comics-stub
564 articles in here and counting. This really needs broken up into several sub-categories soon - looking through it, and from what I was talking about above with BTfromLA, Marvel-Comics-stub, DC-Comics-stub and comics-creators-stub are three I would make immediately, with a few others like DC-Thompson-comics-stub possible if there are still a lot left. I don't know how to make them into actual sub-categories of comics-stub though, so I'll leave it to someone who does. Any takers? SoM 20:13, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Have added Comic Book Publisher stub, to help tidy up a bit more. Not sure if you want the DC and Marvel stubs moved there or not? --Hiding 01:29, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Original, Moved Thread

 * 'The following was originally posted at Template talk:Marvel-Comics-stub. As it applies to more than that single template, it has been moved here & reformatted, for the sake of a coherant discussion. --Jerzy•t 22:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I've just removed the text saying 'please consider joining WikiProject:Comics'. This does not need to be in a stub which is seen by everyone who visits the article, some of whom may not even know what a WikiProject is. Maybe it's useful to someone who edits the page, but otherwise, no. Please do not re-add it without explaining your reasoning on Template talk:Marvel-Comics-stub.  s p l i n t a x  (talk) 09:34, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I've added it back, a lot of other projects do it and I fail to see what harm it does. If people do not know what a WikiProject os they will learn by clicking the link, part of the principle upon which both wikipedia and the web are based, I believe. The reasoning is that people may be more inclined to join wikipedia if they feel there is a community within which they would feel comforatble. If they are reading articles about comics, and feel inclined to edit it, it lets them know such a community exists and is full of like-minded people who can give them any help they need. Hiding  talk 23:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Bravo, Splintax. Spam is rude. Spam is self-centered. Spam sucks. The article pages are for readers, and only seconarily for editors, and the stub-tag exception to that was controversial and based on the fact they serve as an apology for an inadequate article as much as they serve as a simple solicitation to edit; this is emphasized by the stub notice providing a lk to edit the stub in question (by which they can finish & return to reading the same article without even learning to look for the "edit this page" tab). People who are ready to join a project are already editing, and will find out abt projects by other, editor-specific, means. It doesn't appear that other projects do it, and if they do, name them so they can be stopped as well. (See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates.) Wiki-projects should not suck. Stop it. --Jerzy•t 20:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm always a little unclear on the distinction between readers and editors in an encyclopedia anyone can edit. Please could you source your argument that consensus dictates these links are spam, I'd appreciate it.  As to other Wikiprojects doing it, see Australia-gov-stub, cricket-stub for starters.  There are probably others out there, but given I'm unclear as to the sourcing of your argument I'm not going looking for them. Hiding  talk 20:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * A separate question of civility was raised on the other page. I will respond to it on Hiding's user-talk page, in the belief it needs no attention by third parties (who of course may nevertheless want to monitor it there and/or comment). --Jerzy•t 22:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Second Independent Thread
_ _ I looked here and Template talk:Comics-creator-stub and Template talk:Comics-stub for discussion to justify spamming, via the stub tag, abt the project. Nothing. I looked at history of Template:Comics-creator-stub and found that 6 different editors had left it there for 10 months. I Google searched and found (searching the result page) that the 39 hits included only the following instances of Template: pages: I conclude that this is a comics-only aberration, and that WP and the comics articles will be best helped by removing from these templates these invitations to regard comic-project editors as self-centered and rude. I have edited the two templates accordingly. _ _ At the last moment (before doing the template edits and saving this), i decided to be more thoro than i had when i was sure only that there were more than one and none outside this project, and checked Template talk:Marvel-Comics-stub, to which i am responding. --Jerzy•t 20:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Template:Comics-creator-stub
 * 2) Template:Marvel-Comics-stub
 * 3) a redirect to one of these, probably visible only when i retrieved the hundreds of Google-omitted dupes.
 * I have responded to these comments at Template talk:Marvel-Comics-stub, where all discussion would be best placed to follow. Hiding talk 20:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Discussion in which Everyone Knows About Both Previous Threads

 * _ _ That is by no means the place to discuss this. This talk page, since the issue affects nearly all the templates for this project, would be the place to discuss it, if it were a problem of this project alone (as i explitly assumed when writing my comment above).  Hiding, contrary to my expectations, has indeed cited other projects that it affects, so this is the place to discuss only
 * what is the proper place to discuss project solicitations in templates as an any-stub issue.
 * _ _ I would suggest, off-hand, the stub-sorting Wiki-project, as the narrowest stub-only area i can think of, but someone may have a better idea. --Jerzy•t 21:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Another option, if there isn't already an established consensus reagrding this matter, is Village pump (proposals), to get the broadest input possible. Thoughts? Hiding  talk 08:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * _ _ My next thot was also VP, but VP(prop) is (formally) for new proposals to do something other than address policies; in practice, VP(pol) includes policy matters that fall short of the statement of an explicit policy. IMO, even if you call for "adding WikiProject invitations to templates" (instead of arguing against my call to recognize your doing so as something we throroughly disapprove of), you are still looking for approval, rather than seeking ideas about, or organizing, an effort to do it.
 * _ _ In any case, i've pretty much worked up a statement of my position from scratch, with more civility as you suggested, and avoiding the red herring of any reference to spam. Would it make sense for me to put it on yr talk page, and you to post it somewhere on VP, along with your response to it when you're ready? --Jerzy•t 21:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, after a period of reflection, I've come to the conclusion it's not something I need to get so worked up over. I'm sure you'd agree we both have better things to do, and I apologise for wasting your time over this.  On reflection I see the merits on both sides, and so I can't summon the strength to prefer one position over the other. I can't speak for anyone else, but then again, no-one else has spoken up, so I'd reckon we could save a whole heap of bother.  Is that alright with you? Hiding  talk 21:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

_ _ The above, our user-talk-page discussion before and since, the continuing absence of the WikiProject solicitations from the comic-related templates, and the lack of any other defender of that practice here leave this discussion moot IMO. My view is not perfectly stated above, but not substantially changed; i expect to look into other instances, and can't know now whether the practice might still end up on Village pump (policy). _ _ I can't leave without acknowledging that i erred with regard to WP:CIVIL and was by far the worse offender; i also thank Hiding for the tone and substance of his guidance in that regard. --Jerzy•t 00:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

DC Thomson
Is there any template for DC Thomson comics like the Beano, The Dandy and their strips? --GingerM 15:58, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Editor Publisher templates
There are numerous Comics Editor Publisher. A template could be useful with the following information:
 * Logo
 * Country
 * foundation year
 * end of activities year (if any)

What about a template for comics magazine (especially relrevant for EU comics ?) with:
 * Logo
 * Publisher
 * Starting date
 * Ending date (if any)
 * Periodicity
 * number of published issues

Lvr 16:53, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * By Comics Editor do you mean publisher? Also, I don't see the point of putting number of published issues on an ongoing publication, as it will constantly need updating.--Hiding 22:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * You're right. Corrected. Lvr 08:41, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

More Templates
Superherobox is great, and I think we should start looking at what other infoboxes would be useful. I personally would like to see boxes for the following categories (with a proposed list of fields) :


 * 1) Non-superhero comic book characters (for whom alliance, status, powers, aliases are not really relevant), i.e. Jimmy Olsen, Lois Lane
 * 2) * Name
 * 3) * Publisher
 * 4) * First appearance
 * 5) * Created by
 * 6) * Notable relatives


 * 1) Comic book titles, i.e. What If
 * 2) * Publisher
 * 3) * Created by
 * 4) * Duration (ongoing, limited)
 * 5) * Year of first publication
 * 6) * Publication frequency (monthly, bimonthly, intermittent)
 * 7) * Main character(s), team(s) (limit to maybe five)

Any ideas/suggestions? One interesting thing that will come about with the introduction of these other boxes is that we will have some overlap, for example, most titles are either also the name of a superhero or team. We could either establish a precedent in these cases (title loses), or we could create additional boxes for comics that meet both criteria (superherotitle, teamtitle). --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:15, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Superhero teams, i.e. X-Men, Top 10 (if a team is also a title, I think the team should take precedence)
 * 2) * Publisher
 * 3) * First appearance
 * 4) * Created by
 * 5) * Alliance
 * 6) * Status
 * 7) * Base of operation
 * 8) * Notable members (limit to maybe five)
 * If no one else has any suggestions for fields to add, I'll mockup these boxes this weekend. There is some ongoing discussion about the table width on Template talk:Superherobox so I'll wait for that discussion to figure out which template to use ultimately. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:54, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Just finished another infobox, one for Graphic Novels --Goanookie 14:47, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, your template Template:ComicBookBox seems like it should cover my category #2. However, can we add a field saying if the title is ongoing, limited?  Also, can we put a "last issue" field in there somewhere?  --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:34, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

Superteambox
What do you think? Formatting wise, it's as straight an adaptation of (the new) superherobox as I could make. Colours are as-SHB.

General code:


 * This looks great, however I would add two things (and I'll change the template accordingly). I think that there should also be a field for a "base of operations", as most teams have a base of some kind (X-Mansion, 4 Freedoms Plaza, The Carrier, etc.).

Fair enow - although, for disbanded teams in particular, that may be... problematic. Not to mention teams that are in a different base from their historically IDed one (Avengers being an obvious example)


 * I would also say that the former members should be limited to maybe 10 characters max, as teams like the X-Men will have a ridiculous number of former members.

Maybe...


 * I also moved the fictional information all into the inner box, like in SHB, and retitled it from "Roster" to "Details". --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:16, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

BAD idea - the formatting doesn't work, with the centre-left/right-centre (and, given the size of the lists, left/righting the rosters like the others doesn't work. I tried it). Maybe if you put a statistics bar above the roster bar, and colour-coded the roster bar according to the status of the team... - SoM 18:49, 6 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Hmm, with SHB, there was a debate as the "real name" and "aliases" field were originally in the top part. They were later moved into "statistics" as it was decided it would be best to have the "real world" information (creators, title information) in the top section and then the "comic book world" information in the bottom section.  I still think it's useful to have that distinction, but you're right, the formatting is funky.  What if we were to abandon the center alignment altogether, and make it more like SHB?  --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:02, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * I tried (but didn't save) it. It looks awful - think about it: narrow box, with a huge list in only half the width. A SHB doesn't (well, shouldn't) have such a list- SoM 19:38, 6 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Well... we can try it like this for now. Also, another thing I would be worried about is that if a team has a large roster and a large number of former members (X-Men)?, it might be a good idea to have a policy about the total number of people that can be in the combined roster, so the boxes don't get unsightly huge.  I'm thinking max 15 or 20.  Sound good?  --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:11, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, there are three sub-teams of X-Men right now (the AXM team, the UXM/XSE team, and the XM team. Of course, that requires mentioning Wolverine three times...). And even with that, there's only 15 or so members, plus, tops, another 4 or 5 that really need mentioning. I think we can shunt the Ultimate X-Men listing out to that article.


 * The one that really scares me (figuaratively speaking, oc), is Legion of Super-Heroes. Not only is the team huge, but there's two reboots to contend with on top of that, with according multiple versions of characters to bother with, and only one article. There, I'm all for giving in and just linking to the sections of the "List of Legion of Super-Heroes members" article, and not bothering with an actual list at all (which might be an option for replacing or appending to the "Former Members" list in other not-quite-so-long cases). - SoM 21:07, 9 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, I've been adding it to a few teams, but small ones (FF, Authority). I guess we'll discuss the problematic large teams as we get to them; Other than that, this template looks pretty good.  I was hoping to get some of the other templates done this weekend too, but I haven't had time.  What do you think is a good name for comic book characters with no powers or affiliations?  Template:Nonsuperherobox sounds overdone; maybe Template:Comiccharacterbox? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:25, May 9, 2005 (UTC)


 * I just did what I suggested on LSH, but just had one block-listing for current X-Men members, although someone may want to rethink that. Other than LSH, I've been linking to "List of... members" articles at the base of the "Former members", where available.


 * A thought - do we need an infobox for fictional races (Inhumans, Eternals, et al), or even just non-team organisations in general? I don't think putting superteamboxes on them would be a good idea, since they don't have "rosters," per se, but if nothing's done, inevitably someone'll end up STBing them.


 * Oh, and I'd go for Template:Supersupportingbox myself, to keep the naming consistancy. - SoM 17:12, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Supporting characters infobox (supersupportingbox)
What d'y'think? - SoM 15:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Here's the code. If there are no objections, I'll start using it tomorrow.

General:

Specific:



SoM 28 June 2005 14:39 (UTC)

It is just for notable superhero supporting characters? Otherwise, some supporting characters the box is going to be longer than the entry, which would look silly to my eye. Hiding 28 June 2005 22:38 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I think every entry worth having should have a box of some sort. Interpret that as you will. - SoM 29 June 2005 00:20 (UTC)


 * Is this where I reply "frankly, I think any entry not worth having should be listed on WP:VfD. Interpret that as you will." Hiding 29 June 2005 07:09 (UTC)


 * Yes. - SoM 20:04, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I like this box a lot. If you've already started using it, make sure to include it on the main WikiProject Comics page. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) July 6, 2005 15:41 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I was just looking at this box again, and something bothered me. It's fine if internally, we refer to this box as the "supporting character box", but what does that mean really?  Does it just mean that they don't have super powers?  For example, Mary Jane has had a comic book title in which (as I understand), Peter Parker was barely in at all.  I might suggest actually removing the "Supporting character of" field.  The "first appearance" should cover that topic enough without being incorrectly vague. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 14:41, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Nope. Look at Rick Jones (comics) for a possibly better example. He's been a supporting character of the Hulk, two Captain Marvels (all three for lengthy periods), ROM, Captain America the Avengers as a group, and possibly a couple of others I've forgotten. Plus the characters who debuted in titles like Strange Tales, Amazing Fantasy, Tales of Suspense or Tales to Astonish.


 * And of course it's not "no powers" - after all, by that definition Batman would be a supporting character :). It's "characters who aren't superheroes/villains/etc themselves but are recurring characters in superhero comics". And, while I haven't read it, as far as I know the Mary Jane comic is off in a continuity all of it's own (and is there anyone who would argue that Lois Lane isn't a a Superman supporting character, despite Superman's Girlfriend Lois Lane running for a couple of hundred issues?) - SoM 20:04, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Hmm, it just seems like a vague distinction to make. Also, the shallow reason is that the linebreak makes "Supporting/Character Of" look kind of weird.  Is there any way we could change it to "Features in" or something along those lines?  I'm not really sure exactly how to do it either, just something seemed a little off.  If no one can think of a way to get around it, it can stay as is, it just kind of bothered me. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:00, July 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that did bug me a bit. "Features in" goes with the comic though, whereas you'll often have supporting characters guesting with their "featured" character in other comics. - SoM 21:47, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh, and now for the fun geeky semantics part: Doesn't the fact that Rick Jones had powers and was a superhero for a while make him qualify for the superherobox?  --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:02, July 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * Knew someone would point that out :)


 * There's no one, single, definition which works, more a combination of other definitions, where one "wrong" answer doesn't automatically disqualify it. In Rick's case, the powers were (a) strictly temporary and (b) revealed not to be specific to him - so, unless you want to list "Destiny Force" under Wasp, Cap, Hawkeye, Songbird, Hank Pym and Libra's profiles :). And as for his "disturbingly necrophiliac in retrospect" (quote from Captain Marvel v4 #14 :)) spell in Bucky's costume, that's to be measured against the huge period of time in which he hasn't used a costume or been an active superhero, and he never used the Bucky name - he's almost always been a supporting character. Unless you want to move Jimmy Olsen to Elastic Lad to give him a SHB... - SoM 21:47, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Comics Creator
I would like to see an infobox for comics creators. It could have information like:


 * Name
 * Date of birth
 * First publication: Title #xxx (Year)
 * Field: (Writer, penciler, colorist, jack of all trades...)
 * Notable/Best known work:
 * Latest work: (for people like Ann Nocenti et al who haven't published anything in years it seems...)
 * Current status: (deceased, hospitalized, working for DC, working in sports...)

Any viability to the idea? --Samy Merchi (Talk) 2 July 2005 01:21 (UTC)
 * All of this information should be presented in the article, and almost all of it within the first paragraph, which makes an info box entirely redundant. Hiding 3 July 2005 04:30 (UTC)
 * Same thing with superherobox. --Samy Merchi (Talk) 3 July 2005 10:54 (UTC)
 * Actually, no, there is a difference. If you look at the Superman article, which is a featured article and in my mind the standard we should strive for in superhero character articles, most of the information is scattered throughout the article.  Wikipedia's Manual of Style dictates, however, that a person's name, their date of birth, their occupation and their reason for notability be defined within the opening paragraph, along with their living status. However, I'd be quite happy to deprecate the superherobox myself, although I think the consensus here is that most people like them, as evinced by the discussion at Template talk:Superherobox.  Hiding 3 July 2005 20:56 (UTC)

--AjaxSerix 20:14, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I think the comics creator box could be located in the article about that character myself. Say your in Batman there could be a box for Bob Kane and Bill Finger. In that use I don't see it as redundant at all, That kind of information about the creator will not likely be repeated in the article but, would be of interest to someone researching the character.  The short listing of other notable creations could act as a good way for the viewer to browse similar characters.
 * That would make the creator entries somewhat redundant and actually stop people clicking on the links to the creator's own articles and learning more. Information should be placed where it is most relevant.  To view similar characters one should use the category feature, and your idea could be implemented via the category structure. Hiding  talk 07:42, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 * An info box is too narrow in scope to accomodate the monthly staff changes that can occur with these books. Articles on specific titles should accomodate a Current Creators section and attempt to maintain sufficient information about current and past creative teams, allowing for better cross-article linking between comic titles and their current and past creators. Tiredgamer 12:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Which Template to Use
I just made my first ever Wiki Article (well stub) for Miss X (Comics) I am wondering if --AjaxSerix 15:24, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * A. I did this right for the most part.
 * B. If I should have used the comicproj template instead of comics-stub?
 * C. If I spelled anything wrong?
 * Looks OK, you just need to categorize it. Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l ✎☠ 12:40, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Aliens
I'd like to see a template for alien races, like Kree, Kryptonians, Shi'ar, etc. Maybe something similar to the Klingon page. Ideas?--StAkAr Karnak 22:59, 3 August 2005 (UTC) [Moved from main templates page by SoM 23:07, 3 August 2005 (UTC)]

Locations
I was wondering is there a template, for locations? I've been contributing to Asteroid M, these past couple of days. And I don't like the way it looks. - -- LEC20 22:31, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Err, well among other things, the section titles of that article don't look very standard. Instead of "First one" and "Second one", I'd recommend "First version", etc., or mention the story arcs to which they were pertinent.  I'd also stop referring to the asteroid as "it"; the pronoun is used excessively in that article and makes it difficult to read.  As for a location box, I don't think it would be a bad idea.  There are a couple other location articles that could use them, such as Baxter building. --DDG 16:22, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, for your thoughts, on the subject. - -- LEC20 16:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Supercbbox
I see several major problems Template:ComicBookBox as it stands:
 * 1) It's too wide. Superherobox is already too wide, probably the widest infobox on Wikipedia, and needs to be cut down. Adding another TWO of the same width isn't the best of ideas.
 * 2) What does "Scenarist" mean? Rename or remove.
 * 3) Authors - is this a complete listing of writers and artists to have worked on the book (the box might get scarily long) or current listing in the case of ongoing books? And if the latter, what about cancelled/completed comics that have had multiple writers/artists?
 * 4) Leading on from that, is this ONLY for ongoing comics?
 * 5) ISBNs - no, comics don't have them.
 * 6) Publication frequency is often variable, between writer/artist lateness and occasional fortnightly issues of monthly comics.

I think this needs some serious rethinking. - SoM 17:54, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

I think it needs serious rethinking too. If I'm honest, it's ugly. I agree that it's too wide, and the information seems wrong. --Hiding 22:25, 3 May 2005 (UTC)


 * For the Comic book titles a Series status ex. Active, Cancelled, Finish.


 * 1) Comic book titles, i.e. What If
 * 2) * Publisher
 * 3) * Created by
 * 4) * Duration (ongoing, limited)
 * 5) * Series status (Active, Cancelled, Finish, Hiatus)
 * 6) * Year of first and last publication
 * 7) * Publication frequency (monthly, bimonthly, intermittent)
 * 8) * Main character(s), team(s) (limit to maybe five)
 * 9) * Graphic Novels,

1st time making a box !--Brown Shoes22 18:06, 4 November 2005 (UTC)


 * "Creators" would be filled in as "[name] (script) [name] (pencils) [name] inks [name] (colours) [name] letering"? Anke 07:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Breakdown of parameters:
 * image=
 * caption=
 * comic_color=
 * Series Name=
 * publisher(s)=
 * creators=
 * Duration=(ongoing, limited, oneshot, maxiseries, hiatus)
 * alliance_color=
 * year of debut=
 * last year=
 * schedule=(monthly, bimonthly, intermittent)
 * Main character(s), team(s)=

Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l ✎☠ 06:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * There should NOT be spaces, let alone commas, in the parameters. And don't list members of a team, just the team itself (that's what the STB is for). It's a mess- SoM 21:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I've just had another look, and this is as fatally flawed as Template:ComicBookBox. Let's try thinking it over rather than charging blindly ahead, no? For one thing - how many articles will this actually be used on? - SoM 00:42, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


 * So what do people like it !--Brown Shoes22 04:45, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Dear SoM you heed example and instructions for your BOX--Brown Shoes22 20:46, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You misunderstand - (1) It's not my box (2) It was discontinued from use because of all the reasons listed a couple of sections above. Your version shares most of the same problems, plus additional ones I listed below Cyberskull's post. - SoM 21:20, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Is there even any need for this box? The way I see it it is filled with information that generally is covered in the article's lead section anyway. --Fritz S. (Talk) 17:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I now put this up at Templates for deletion.--Fritz S. (Talk) 13:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, since it was voted to keep and improve the template, I did some changes to it. Let me know what you think. --Fritz S. (Talk) 21:10, 24 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I Like what Iam seening, Good Work !--Brown Shoes22 23:18, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Fritz's redesign
Ummmm... yeah. I see the rationale behind a lot of the changes, but it adds up to an unholy mess in a lot of ways.

Let's take a look at the box as it appeared on Spider-Man/Black Cat: The Evil That Men Do under the redesign.

We have six lines in total, notwithstanding a couple spilling over. Of that:
 * 1) Three are bold in their entirety and have dark-pink backgrounds. As a one-line highlight on an open box, as on Superherobox and Superteambox, that's fine. When half a claustrophobic box is that way, it's not.
 * 2) Of the remaining, cramped, lines, half of each line is bold and the other half are links. This means well over half the box is bolded. Bad.
 * 3) There is no consistancy with WP:CMC's other boxen, Superherobox (973 pages), Superteambox (103 pages) and Supersupportingbox (51 pages), all of which are used on far, far more pages than the 27 of this one, hence this one is the one which must fall into line.

(Crossposted with Template talk:Supercbbox) - SoM 23:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It was mostly designed to match templates such as the album, film or tv series infoboxes (which are even more widespread)... The many colored lines are pretty much identical to those of the album infobox (used on ~6000 articles), and I think they look fine. I also think the other comic boxes are too wide in contrast with most other templates on Wikipedia... But if there's consent to change this, I don't mind. --Fritz S. (Talk) 10:45, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, the album template you linked to below has the same problem for the simple reason that you clearly cloned this one from that, and thus looks similarly amateurish. The film box doesn't though, although consistancy would have to be weighed up. If you had to clone one of the two though, clone the frelling film box... - SoM 01:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

++--=More templates needed=--++
Ones for non-superpowered comic book characters, anti-heroes, villains etc --Chaosfeary 10:01, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * What do you mean "non-superpowered" characters? And why separate templates for anti-heroes and villains? If you could clarify your position that would be great. Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l ✎☠ 12:39, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Templates' widths
All these infobox templates seem a little wide to me in contrast to other infoboxes like Template: Album infobox, Template: Infobox Film, etc. Shouldn't we reduce the width on these to 20ems? (And the suggested image size to 225px or 200px?) --Fritz S. (Talk) 21:30, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

2000 AD
I started a little to do list on the 2000 AD talk page but was wondering if there were specific things for it (or at least the general class of anthology publications): (Emperor 20:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC))
 * I was wodnering if 2000 AD could have it own colour for info boxes as part of WikiProject Comics/Color scheme
 * As it is an anthology the Comics Book Title infobox doesn't seem to quite work - I think this was also what someone mentioned above about the DC Thomson titles. That infobox could be used or slightly changed for the needs of an anthology - the publication it appears in, etc.

New spoiler warning template
When adding sales information for a yet-to-be-published comic, you may wish to precede it with Spoiler-solicitation. This expands to:

'Spoiler warning: Promotional information about upcoming comic book storylines follow. Details and publication status subject to change prior to publication.'

References info section?
I'm not sure I understand why this section is here. Can anyone enlighten me? --Chris Griswold 15:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * It seems to me that the References info ought to be on the main WP:COMIC page, not here on the templates page. GentlemanGhost 06:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Crossover
We totally need a crossover box Exvicious 17:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I totally agree. At first, I was all like, "What?" And then I was all like, "Yeah!"--Chris Griswold 10:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Equipment
Can we add equipment to the Heroboxes? A number of heroes have notable equipment, but there's no way to document it in the current system outside of the 'powers' box, as I found when I tried to add it to Ex Machina. Given that unlike powers, equipment can easily be taken away, or a hero caught without it.ThuranX 03:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That seems like overkill. Why can't it just be part of the article? --Chris Griswold 05:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Uniform artwork crediting convention
Throughout all of the articles I've seen, I keep seeing different styles for listing whoever drew a piece of art, where it's from and when it's from. Y'all need a style convention for these captions so that all of them list things the same way. These are hypothetical examples:
 * Magneto manifests his powers in Magneto #0 (January 1993), art by Chris Bachalo.
 * JLA #12 (Feb. 1997): Batman throws a batarang; artist, Howard Porter
 * Beta Ray Bill, depowered, eats some hay. Pencils: Mike Allred.

Can we propose some sort of convention. For example...? I leave it up to a consensus to decide what to use, but from my POV, I did like the more formal/specific designation of "pencils" being used as a credit rather than "art" or "artist" and think that should stay no matter what. I also think the "pencils" credit should always be a seperate sentence after the description of the picture, and not joined to the description by a comma. Anybody that can point to broad Wiki conventions to assist in this would be appreciated. I just see that a lot of work has been done to improve the art captions in WikiProject Comics, yet there's no convention in place. - Liontamer 02:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Wolverine, from a cover of New Avengers #3 (Feb. 2005). Pencils by Oliver Coipel.


 * There's a fairly uniform de facto style in place. At its most basic, it seems to include:


 * For covers in a comics-company or comics-character article such as All-American Publications:
 * All-American Comics #16 (July 1940), cover art by Sheldon Moldoff.

==I
 * For covers in a comics artist article such as Sheldon Moldoff:
 * All-American Comics #16 (July 1940), cover art by Moldoff.
 * For a cover representing a major character change or important event, such as in Al Hartley:
 * The teen-humor heroine gets serious in Patsy Walker #116 (Aug. 1964). Cover art by Hartley
 * For a cover illustrating a style or historical element, such as in George Tuska:
 * Tuska's cover of Iron Man #18 (Oct. 1969) displays a panoply of character faces, as well both old and new Iron Man armors.
 * And in what I think is established ComicsProject style for promotional art including covers without text treatment and trade dress, such as in Spider-Man:
 * Promotional art for The Amazing Spider-Man #500 cover, featuring Spider-Man's wife, Mary Jane Watson-Parker, and many of his antagonists. Art by J. Scott Campbell.
 * ...which, in similar entries without the descriptors, would be:
 * Promotional art for The Amazing Spider-Man #500 cover, by J. Scott Campbell.

-- Tenebrae 16:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I moved this over from the project's main talk page, as I think it's more relevant here for infoxboxes and most other art captions.

Even the art captions of the example infoboxes on this talk page don't have a uniform style. I propose the following conventions when providing an art caption in character pages (other pages might need to be modified for some reason):
 * The description must give the name/issue of the art, followed by the month (not abbreviated) and year of the street date (i.e. the release date, not the cover date; use the cover date only if you can't reasonably find a street date).
 * Rather than "Art by...", whomever pencilled the art is then given credits with "Pencils by XYZ." in a seperate sentence. Using "Pencils by" rather than "Art by" is in keeping with the notion that the penciller has specifically handled only one aspect of the art, and serves to not imply that the entire process of creation was done by only one person. If inkers/colorists are to be credited (or if the penciller also inked/colored the piece), then "Art by ABC and XYZ." is fine.
 * If available, relevant details/info on the art's content should come before the comic book name and date when describing something at length, and after when merely providing a picture featuring a character.


 * Some examples:
 * Cover to Batman #608 (October 2002). Pencils by Jim Lee.
 * Cover to Superman #204 (April 2004). Pencils by Jim Lee.
 * Cover to Teen Titans #33 (March 2006), featuring Nightwing and Superboy. Pencils by Tony Daniel.
 * The various incarnations of Dick Grayson, from Nightwing #57 (May 2001). Pencils by Rick Leonardi.
 * Lois and Lana Lang acquire super powers and fight each other for Superman's love in Superman's Girl Friend, Lois Lane #21 (November 1960). Pencils by Kurt Schaffenberger.

I'm open to anything that provides further streamlining of this potential standard, but would like to see something a lot more consistant in use. I will be continuing to edit articles with these standards in mind in the effort to be bold. --Liontamer 18:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that it would be nice if the comics-related articles had a consistent look and feel. To that end, standardizing captions would be a good thing. I don't agree with all of your conventions, however. Although it seems to be the norm for the articles of the most popular characters, I don't like to merely credit the penciller. I think that if the inker is a different person, we ought to credit that person in the caption. (I can live without the colorist; I imagine that they're used to getting the short shrift anyhow.) At the very least, the full credits should be listed on the image page.


 * Also, I don't think that the "street date" is the right date to use for the image caption. For one thing, determining the street date for a comic book more than 20 years old is an arduous, sometimes impossible task. ("Let's see, they published the Christmas story in the March issue, and the Halloween story in the January issue, so the street date for the August issue must have been May.") Moreover, the cover date is what appears on the indica and that is about as close to "official" as we are going to get. To my mind, using the street date instead of the cover date is counter-intuitive, likely to cause confusion, and adds nothing of value. If there is an instance where it is important that the comic book was actually published before cover date, that can be addressed in the article. (For example, "Although it may seem like the writer was commenting on current events, this issue was actually published three months prior to its cover date; thus the writer would not have known about the assassination attempt.") So, those are my two qualms – credit the inker and use the cover date. Other than that, it sounds good to me. --GentlemanGhost 04:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * A related discussion on cover dates took place here. --GentlemanGhost 05:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Cool. Thanks for the link to the cover date discussion, Ghost. I specifically used street/ship date because most of the date information on major characters (at least that I myself saw) were done the same way; thus I felt I was following a de facto standard of sorts. I ultimately don't mind deferring to cover date. But at the same time, for most stuff released after around 2000-2001, their street dates are fairly easy to find via web search, whereas cover dates are harder to find since you either have to find a good scan of the cover with trade dress or need to actually have the comic in question. For more recent stuff from the past 5-6 years, which is where most of the art in the project's articles seems to come from (especially for infobox art), I'd argue on some level that cover date is actually more cumbersome and less practical. I'm down with either way provided there's consensus for this project, but would love to hear more discussion/debate on the matter. Personally, I'm in favor on ship date because post-2000 that particular information is more accessible on demand.
 * As for Pencils credits, honestly the reasons why I don't cite inkers are many. Not to bash inkers, but the general fan doesn't seek out art according to inker, and inkers simply aren't as prolific, regarded or known as pencillers. There are thousands of covers and other art used that would need to be updated with that kind of information, and most casual goers honestly don't need to know anything beyond the penciller. If you started adding inkers to the captions, it would bloat the captions with little meaningful informational gain. --Liontamer 05:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I need an infobox for a single issue
Don't worry I'm not impliying that every single issue should have one. But there are some exepcional cases. You't now, like graphic novels or extemely popular sagas. Right now I'm working on For the Man Who Has Everything. It needs a lot of improvement, since I'm foreign, but it'd really look better with an infobox.

Navboxes
Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates/navboxes. We're discussing the need, use, and style of navbox templates with the goal of creating a WP:CMC guideline. --Chris Griswold 05:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Relatives section in superhero template
The relatives section on the John Constantine page doesn't seem to work anymore. Has that been taken off of the superhero templates? It doesn't seem to be on the Susan Storm example on the project page either. --Mister Six 18:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was removed a month or so ago. See the talk page for that template for details. --Chris Griswold (  ☏  )  03:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics/templates page
I updated the example templates, but now the page display is all funky, any way to fix that? --Basique 11:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

marvel stub template
check it out; the word wikipedia links to some russian site (i haven't clicked it and i wouldn't advise anyone else to try). anyone know how to fix that?
 * no worries - sorted it out myself in the end 212.139.211.44 21:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Non-free comic
I recently became aware of Non-free comic. It's not listed on this page, although it looks like some project members have helped to shape it. Is there currently a plan to incorporate it into WikiProject Comics? --GentlemanGhost 21:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

DCAU Wiki
I requested an external link template to the DCAU Wiki unaware of the Reliable sources/Examples WikiProject Comics policy. I suppose it needed consensus to before taking such course of action; for that I apologize. I proposed it wasn't a big deal because there were already a few links to that Wiki on article that tackled those subjects. So I figured that a template would confer tidy consistency.

I think those links are useful for potential fans looking for more details on the subjects, which Wikipedia doesn't necessarily offer, per What Wikipedia is not. A simple link like this would avoid and confine fancruft to that wiki alone. --217.129.169.136 14:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You are the one who unilaterally added all these links without consensus. First, I would like to know if you contribute to or are connected to this outside open wiki. Second, please see WP:EL &mdash; the policy against linking to open wikis, except in narrow, consensus-agreed-upon circumstances, applies to External Links. Please read the External links policy page. You cannot, personally, by yourself, decide that any particular outside open wiki meets the high criteria stated. --Tenebrae 15:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I think I already recognized that I shouldn't have requested a template without concensus, but I already explained I didn't add all those links.


 * "we're TALKING about External links"


 * Indeed, but you're the one who removed dozens of External links while quoting Reliable sources/Examples. --217.129.169.136 16:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)