Talk:Lyssa Drak: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:11, 16 October 2011

Comics: DC Comics Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by DC Comics work group.

Fictional characters Stub‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Untitled

Created by Geoff Jophns and Dave Gibbons, not Ivan Reis. Or is there a citation for Ivan Reis' hand in her creation?

what planet is she from?

It's been mentioned two ways. First as Talok IV(in the tales of the Sinestro Corps), then now in Green Lantern/Sinestro Corps: Secret files and origins they said it was Talok VII..... Which is right?--Marhawkman (talk) 11:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deletion?

Um why? She's actually been used recently....--Marhawkman (talk) 00:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Usage in comics has nothing to do with notability or real world reception. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, which means that merely existing does not automatically imply that a topic is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. In this case, she is a fictional character and fiction in Wikipedia is treated in an encyclopedic manner, discussing the reception and significance of notable works in addition to a concise summary. If she does not have them, then she is not suitable for a stand-alone article. There is also the fact that the article does not provide reliable sources outside of primary sources, which in turn does not show that the character as a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, so that means that she does not meet the basic inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article either. Whether she is used or not in the comic books is not relevant regarding WP:GNG and WP:IINFO. It is the lack of coverage in reliable secondary sources the factor that is measured in these criteria. Jfgslo (talk) 01:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This reminds me of a standard issue with writing on wikipedia about fictional stuff. Secondary sources cannot be used for anything EXCEPT notability. Why? they inevitably fail the reliability test.--Marhawkman (talk) 02:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 Um why? She's actually been used recently....--[[User:Marhawkman|Marhawkman]] ([[User talk:Marhawkman|talk]]) 00:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 :Usage in comics has nothing to do with notability or real world reception. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, which means that merely existing does not automatically imply that a topic is suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. In this case, she is a fictional character and fiction in Wikipedia is treated in an encyclopedic manner, discussing the reception and significance of notable works in addition to a concise summary. If she does not have them, then she is not suitable for a stand-alone article. There is also the fact that the article does not provide reliable sources outside of primary sources, which in turn does not show that the character as a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, so that means that she does not meet the basic inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article either. Whether she is used or not in the comic books is not relevant regarding [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:IINFO]]. It is the lack of coverage in reliable secondary sources the factor that is measured in these criteria. [[User:Jfgslo|Jfgslo]] ([[User talk:Jfgslo|talk]]) 01:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
+::This reminds me of a standard issue with writing on wikipedia about fictional stuff.  Secondary sources cannot be used for anything EXCEPT notability.  Why? they inevitably fail the reliability test.--[[User:Marhawkman|Marhawkman]] ([[User talk:Marhawkman|talk]]) 02:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)