User talk:Dragonfiend

Repeated editing of Webcomics

Hi, Can you give a valid reason why you and your friends from Comixpedia continue to edit out an example of a 3d webcomic? That comic happens to be a 3d comic and I noticed there were no examples in the article. I added it as an example of a 3d webcomic. I would hate to think you are all claiming ownership over an article in Wikipedia which is open to edits and improvements. I might feel the need to consider reporting your over edits as abuse of wikipedia.org User:141.155.205.74 05:41, November 7, 2005

• Hi, first let me say that I'm not one of the people who reverted your edits of the webcomics article; the revert I made was from the edits of User:201.124.131.79 not you, User:141.155.205.74. Also, I am not in any way affiliated with Comixpedia, nor am I friends with any of the other Wikipedia editors except in perhaps the very loosest use of the term (we share some common goals but often disagree on how to best reach them; I've never met any of them offline nor even traded any e-mails with them). I do, however, agree with the recent reverts that User:Nifboy and User:Kiba have made to the webcomics article. I don't believe that the addition of a plot summary of a single webcomic has a place in an article on the general topic of webcomics. I also don't believe that this webcomic you refer to is notable enough for a mention in an article that is this general -- all of the webcomics in a general webcomics article ought to be major works. There has been an attempt to mention major works of differing styles and genres (popular video game comic strips like Penny Arcade and 8-Bit Theater vs. more experimental comics like Cuentos De La Frontera and Fetus-X). Keep in mind that Wikipedia is built upon consensus; I hope that you can take the opinons of three different editors as an indication of such a consensus behind the idea that your addition is innapropriate to this article. If you think that there ought to be a couple examples listed of 3D webcomics, perhaps you could find some more notable examples -- like maybe the webcomics of Modern Tales and American Splendor artist Joe Zabel. For more information on webcomics and notability, see WP:WEB. And I know that seeing your edits changed to reflect the consensus of the community can be hard, but that's the nature of Wikipedia. Everyone here has their articles edited by everyone else. Dragonfiend 02:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

• Hi, Thank you for your polite response. I apologize if I came off rude. I was just confused as to why an example of a 3d comic was being constantly removed. I addressed kiba on his page about the whole vanity thing as I was sure he was confusing my additions to the article with something else for some reason or other. Regardless, I hope that perhaps he can address the questions I have regarding the group of individuals who currently monitor and control the webcomics article. I happen to enjoy webcomics as well and it seems to me that to it seems odd to state "everyone has their articles edited by everyone else" in one breath, yet when someone does edit kiba's articles - they are reverted back to kiba's original article as if he is above edits. Like I said, I'm new to this so forgive me if I'm failing to see why it's not ok to edit kiba's articles but others can be edited. Thanks in advance for any enlightenment.User:141.155.205.74 05:41, November 8, 2005

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia, the greatest encyclopedia on Earth! You seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! You may wish to review the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, as well as the avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages. You may also want to check out Wikipedia:Merge, for information about merging, renaming and moving pages. The Wikipedia directory is also quite useful. In addition, you might want to add yourself to the new user log; if you made any edits before getting an account, you may wish to assign those to your username.

By the way, an important tip: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments.

Finally, here are some open tasks:

You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Fix spelling and grammar

• Delhi
• Arnon Nampa
• Akbarpur, Kanpur Dehat
• List of Scheduled Tribes in Gujarat
• Hinduism in Telangana

More... • Learn how

Fix wikilinks

• Tyrannicide
• Jang Jo-yoon
• Max Fishman
• Hyun Joo-yup
• Miryang

More... • Learn how

Update with new information

• Denbigh School
• High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System
• BAE Systems Land Systems South Africa
• Hexafluorobenzene
• Basgo

More... • Learn how

Expand short articles

• Stronie, Wadowice County
• Tłuczań
• Ryczów, Lesser Poland Voivodeship
• Witanowice, Lesser Poland Voivodeship
• Lipowa, Lesser Poland Voivodeship

More... • Learn how

Check and add references

• Mission Hill, Boston
• Longines
• Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants
• VoteRiders
• Scottish National Party

More... • Learn how

Fix original research issues

• Loss of control (aeronautics)
• List of Mighty Med characters
• Fisher–Yates shuffle
• City chicken
• Fort Jay

More... • Learn how

Improve lead sections

• James K. Beauchamp
• Société pour l'aviation et ses dérivés
• Natural gas in Iran
• 25 Words or Less (game show)
• Caspian (band)

More... • Learn how

Add an image

• Lake Sibhayi
• Lancaster Medical School
• Lions Bay
• Linagpang
• Linden railway station, Wellington

More... • Learn how

Translate and clean up

• Osman Batur
• Timeline of the Front de libération du Québec
• Otto Adolf Weismann von Weißenstein
• Avtokam
• Alsterhaus

More... • Learn how

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.

Other links for reference: Wikipedia:Wikiquette, image copyright tags, Wikipedia:Merge

Hope to see you around the Wiki! Remember to be Bold! with your edits, and if you have any questions whatsoever, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

∞Who?¿? 03:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JDizzle Comics

Hello, you voted on this VfD which I had accidentlally pasted Gillian Slovo instead of JDizzle Comics. I cleared all votes in order to remove any bias because of my stupidity so please vote again knowing that it is about JDizzle Comics. Sorry and thanks. gren グレン 21:31, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Comics Collaboration of the Fortnight

As a member of WikiProject Comics, I thought you might be interested in the Comics Collaboration of the Fortnight we have set up. Please feel free to vote on the articles listed, although bear in mind that a vote for a particular article means you are pledging to help improve the article. The goal of the collaboration is to improve articles to Featured Article status, as we feel Comics is under-represented in that area. Thanks for your help. Steve block talk 15:27, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Request for Comment

User:Snowspinner has opened up a RFC over my general behaviour. You have been commenting on various afds that I have started, and so should have a general overview of my behaviour on those threads. I'm sure you can provide some decent balanced commentary on the affair. Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Hahnchen - Hahnchen 17:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out to me -- I left my comments over there. Dragonfiend 02:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

RfC for Hahnchen

Over at Wikipedia Webomics, Hahnchen is being put on an RfC debate due to his recent purge of the webcomics section. You seem to be knowledgable Throw in your two cents Requests_for_comment/Hahnchen

Also, I took the liberty of adding 8 1/2 by Eleven and Able and Baker to the deleted list on your userpage. Hope you don't mind... wanted to keep it up to date Tedzsee 23:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I just left a comment onn the RfC. Thanks also for helping keep my list up to date -- feel free to make other additions or updates. Dragonfiend 02:24, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Possible compromise

Take a look at Tedzee's compromise proposal at Wikipedia_talk:Websites#A_modest_webcomic_proposal. I'd like to request your support for it, in principle, as a way out of this mess that addresses the potential conflict-of-interest issues. I'd also like to suggest not arguing with Snowspinner's rseponse; let his views on a compromise proposed by someone who's actively working to expand webcomic coverage stand for themselves. -- SCZenz 21:55, 29 October 2005 (UTC) (P.S. Sorry again about the pronoun.)

I just posted my support for the proposal. No problemn with the pronouns -- it's not the first time it's ever happenned. And I'm starting to think that Snowspinner has no idea what "conflict of interest" even means. Dragonfiend 03:11, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

WP:POINT

I am concerned that your nomination of Checkerboard Nightmare for deletion could readily be taken as disruption of Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Perhaps it was just a lapse of research or judgment on your part - I certainly hope so. But in the future, please try to be more attentive before nominating articles for deletion. Phil Sandifer 02:34, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

You have given no basis for your concern that this AfD violates WP:POINT. Your concern is wholly unfounded and far outside of Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I nominated an article for deletion based on the clearly stated reasoning I gave; the only point I was making was that I thought the article ought to be considered for deletion. Reasonable editors can explain their disagreement on an AfD without resorting to personal attacks. Please use wikipedia to discuss the contents of articles, not your ill feelings towards other wikipedia editors. Please familiarize yourself with the policies of Wikiquette, no personal attacks, and civility. Dragonfiend 03:28, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Checkerboard Nightmare

I don't know how else to put this, so I hope you will forgive my bluntness. Your nomination sucked. It was one of the worst and most inappropriate AfD nominations I have ever seen. This, coupled with your insane claims about conflict of interest and insistence that your ignorant perspective needs to count just as much as that of experts combine to make it so that, in my view, your AfD nominations regarding webcomics ought be opposed on sight. Aside from the vast number of notability reasons that had been expressed, that was my primary reason for wanting to keep the article - because you specifically should never nominate another webcomic for deletion again. Phil Sandifer 02:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

• It is important that we discuss wikipedia articles, guidelines, and policy with civility. Accusations of "insane claims" and "ignorant perspective" are innapropriate. See Wikiquette, no personal attacks, and civility. Please keep your assumptions and accusations regarding my webcomics expertise and sanity off of wikipedia. I find your continued personal attacks to be innappropriate. Please stop. Dragonfiend 04:02, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Webcomics

How exactly did you think that Checkerboard Nightmare, a webcomic that's been in both Keenspot and Blank Label, 2 of the 4 examples of syndicates listed as indicators of notability was non-notable?

Anyway, some constructive criticism: having the Alexa rankings, which are unreliable, and often changing, on your page. It really creates the impression you've got something against webcomics. Plus Alexa is decidedly skewed against feed readers, non-IE/netscape and non-windows users. Not to mention those who use anti-spyware, which is decidedly a lot people.

• Hello. I do not have anything against webcomics. I love webcomics. Please don't assume that just because I nominated a webcomic for deletion it means that I have never heard of the comic before I saw its wikipedia article, that I know nothing about the comic other than what's in its article, or even that I don't like the webcomic myself. I've been reading webcomics for almost ten years, I was one of Modern Tales' first subscribers, I read comixpedia regularly, etc. Yet while I love hundreds of webcomics, I recognize that not every webcomic that I love belongs in an encyclopedia because the usefulness of an encyclopedia is hurt by articles on non-notable topics. You specifically asked about "2 of the 4 examples of syndicates" -- that proposed guideline was not part of WP:WEB when I made the nomination (it was just added at 02:40, 21 November 2005). The issue of syndicates was not in the guidelines because, among other reasons, consensus was that membership in a notable group did not automatically make every member of that group notable. For example, the webcomic "Big Dick's Ball" is not notable even though it was once part of Graphic Smash. Also, I know Alexa is not a perfect system, but the reason I made the list on my user page was to see just how accurate it was; the reason I kept it was because it seems extremely accurate and I found it helpful to have all the Alexa rankings in one place. There's no question that if we had the logs to each site we'd probably find that comics 1-50 are somewhat out of order, but I don't think we'd find that the order is so bad that a comic that's ranked 100th really ought to be in the top ten. And, as I've stated on my user page, as I've stated on the Checkerboard AfD, and as it's stated in the WP:WEB guidelines, Alexa is only one thing to be considered. Dragonfiend 05:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

• • Thanks. I'm sorry for everything that's gone in your direction about this, you do seem like you have genuinely made a mistake. I just saw the fact that your page featured a list of "webcomics articles deleted so far", which, along with this nomination and your abrupt tone made me think you were going over the top on this. Websnark's been rather annoyed about wikipedia's deletion policy of late, and seeing this made me think it was too far. I said some stupid things, but I'm sorry for anything bad I've caused. J•A•K 16:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Your general suck-itude

Appears to have gone up seven degrees with the nomination of this last webcomic. Congrats! I'm at a loss as to exactly what it is that you've done so wrong, but perhaps I simply can't see the FNORDs.
I've added a "socks beware" notice to the top of the page, put contribution information on most of the users, and am generally watching this page now. I've also asked a few others to have a look and see what they think of the discussion to date. Regardless of the outcome of this nomination, I'd imagine that re-listing wouldn't be out of line as the process is pretty contaminated. Often things go cleanly the second time around, when passions have cooled a little, e.g. LeveL. Always fun, when things like WP:V seem to be just too hard...
brenneman^(t)(c) 06:20, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, there is some confusion as to the google results, have you mis-pasted the search you used?
brenneman^(t)(c) 06:26, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh², I'd move that list on the main page to User:Dragonfiend/Comics or something, it does give the appearance of a purge...
brenneman^(t)(c) 06:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for helping civilize that AfD. I've clarified my Google search on the AfD -- I was looking at unique sites rather than total pages. I've also moved the Alexa ranking list. It's ironic that Comixpedia keeps their own Alexa rank charts [1] but mine is Exhibit A for how I totally suck and don't know anything about webcomics. Dragonfiend 07:31, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Did you look at the page you linked to? It's on Comixpedia, the magazine, not Comixpedia, the wiki. Those are two separate sites. Factitious 21:31, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

• I went from being angry to mildly amused by the whole thing; the webcomic fandom absolutely loves CxN, anyone outside it is completely clueless. That's basically the deletionist/inclusionist battleline right there. Nifboy 10:28, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Image

Other people have already gone over the absurdity of thinking that Checkerboard Nightmare isn't notable. I'm more concerned with how your deletion attempts are affecting the way Wikipedia as a whole is viewed. Have you seen this recent Websnark post? Trying to delete important webcomics sends the message that deletion at Wikipedia is horribly broken, and that as a result, we can no longer be trusted to provide information. I'm a Wikipedian, and I'm also someone who cares about webcomics. In the past, I've tried to ensure that Wikipedia has useful information about webcomics. Now that the webcomics community is getting disgusted with Wikipedia, I feel like we've failed them. I don't know if it's too late or not, but could you please put more care into your deletion nominations? Perhaps you could even stop trying to delete webcomics altogether, now that you know you aren't able to judge them accurately. Factitious 21:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, indeed

If you'd only stop nominating things with fully explained, carefully linked paragraphs that support your reasoning, all of us whom love web-comics could stop foaming at the mouth. Please don't let your good sense disrupt our attempt to create a compendium of all human webcruft that anyone can edit. I'm going to make entries at websnark, dogg, and adultmatchmaker with links to this page. After all, the weight of an argument is directly proportional to the number of people making it, right?
brenneman^(t)(c) 01:24, 22 November 2005 (UTC)