Talk:Photo comics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Photonovel)
Jump to: navigation, search

Marginalized peoples' lives?[edit]

I just cut a section from this article, but I'm including a copy of it below in case anyone wants to clean it up and restore it.

The article is about adaptations of movies and TV shows. The paragraph that I cut comes out of left field--it has no connection to the rest of the article. It has no sources. It isn't at all clear to me what it means to say that a photonovel is used to "create meaning and voice about an issue important to marginalized peoples' lives." The phrasing, the lack of context, and the apparent irrelevancy combine to make me think this was probably meant as a joke.

If it wasn't, then please do the following:

1. Restore the section, but put it at the end of the article instead of the beginning. Even if this material is true, it's definitely not what most people are talking about when they refer to photonovels.

2. Add sources.

3. Add a sentence or two of introductory context, explaining why and how photonovels are used to achieve these goals.

4. Explain what the phrase "international research" has to do with anything.

The paragraph I removed is included here:

In the international research arena, photonovels have served as an empowering tool for marginalized groups to think critically about their realties and then engage in cumulative action to express their political and social realities to wide ranging audiences. Directed, written, acted, and photographed by participants themselves, photonovels have been used in America (Rudd & Comings, 1996, and Susan Auger), China (Wang & Burris, 1994), Canada (Laura Nimmon, 2007) and South Africa (James and Colleagues, 2005) to create meaning and voice about an issue important to marginalized peoples’ lives. For example, photonovels have been used by Chinese rural workers to create social meaning in order to inform policy, by ESL speaking immigrant women in Canada order to express their health concerns, and in AIDS education interventions; uniquely developed within South Africa by South African people. Photonovels are a different genre than photovoice as they are formed using a comic book style.

--Elysdir (talk) 21:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

This article shouldn't be about only TV/movie adaptations, since that's not what "photonovel" means; such adaptations are a narrow subset of the topic. Note: Sources were obviously added; it's not that they were missing, but rather that the citations were incomplete, and need to be expanded with {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, etc., as appropriate. I.e, I agree with you that there's a sourcing problem here, but it's just a different one than no sources. Namely, our readers don't know which "Wang" or "Burris" or whoever is being cited, and mostly only academics and students would be able to easily find these sources, through journal archive search services that their institutions have access to. And I also agree with you that the entire passage needs cleanup if it's to be restored. It's rather difficult to figure out what that prose is going on about. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō Contribs. 08:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Merge proposed[edit]

The Fumetti article is simply a content fork of the Photonovel article, and is a violation of WP:NOT#DICT, by creating a redundant article simply to cater to the specific term, instead of redirecting that term to the extant article and listing that term there as an alternative name for the topic. That said, the content at Fumetti is more developed in some ways than here at Photonovel, though in other ways it is full of cruft and trivia that needs to be deleted or at least cleaned up. It is tagged with {{examplefarm}}. The history material, however, is probably keepable, though it needs better sourcing. The lead is also far superior to the one here. Fumetti should redirect to Photonovel (or both to Photographic comic, or whatever - the point being, there should be one article about this). A {{redirect|Fumetti|the Italian meaning|Italian comics}} hatnote should be retained. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō Contribs. 08:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Agree with the merge. Use the best of both articles. Sir Rhosis (talk) 20:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Decide on the best term, then go ahead with the merge, including correct Interwiki links. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:03, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Another merge: Fotonovela[edit]

Basically the same as fumetti, save the nationality... -- megA (talk) 22:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree: that article should be merged into this one. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 15:42, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
And I have done so. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Rename: Photo comics[edit]

The name used for this article doesn't properly cover the contents. It's really two articles: one about comics made using stills from movies/TV, and another about comics made using original photography. A title that covers both subjects would be "Photo comics", with photonovels and original works being two examples of the medium. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 22:45, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I haven't renamed the article (yet) but I've added a new lede that briefly covers the two major kinds of photo comics. The body of the article still needs work, reorganizing the information to talk about the medium in general. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 13:28, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
I've now done most of that work, and it's a single mostly-coherent article. The coverage of modern photo comics still needs some scrutiny about notability: I removed a few obvious cases of self-promo (some of it heavy). -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm unable to move the article due to an edit history for Photo comic. Before I request a move by an admin, I'd appreciate some statements of support. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 21:17, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
I think the preferred term is the plural "Photo comics". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 06:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I grew up only hearing of Photonovels (or Fotonovels). I prefer Photonovels. Sir Rhosis (talk) 09:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
But this article covers both photonovels and comics made with original photos. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 18:12, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
I know. I would keep the comics made with original photos separate. Just mho Sir Rhosis (talk) 20:49, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't think there's enough material to warrant two different articles. And photonovels might be a more British phenomenon, the article should have an international scope. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 00:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't think the topics can be separated cleanly enough for multiple articles: too many fuzzy boundaries. For example, what about comics that use film stills to create original stories? That's why the consensus was to merge them. We need a single term that fits the technique no matter what it's used for, and "photo comics" – which is English and genre-neutral – seems the best to me. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 15:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Article moved, and redirects updated. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 11:14, 11 June 2017 (UTC)