Talk:Warlord (DC Thomson)

Comics: British 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by British comics work group.

Image copyright problem with Image:Warlord 1979.jpg

The image Image:Warlord 1979.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Modern language

The article says that "much of the language used in the stories was modern, and terms given used to describe the enemy reflected commonly used descriptions." I'm not sure, but I think this is a roundabout way of saying that the Germans were referred to as krauts and the Japanese in particular as nips or Japs. I understand the reluctance of the article's writer to openly discuss this; perhaps it could be illustrated with a scan of one of the covers, e.g. this, from 26Pigs, which is so very wrong on so many levels that it resembles a parody. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 08:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I might be misreading it but it seems a mistake - "modern" should really be "period" as it reflects the terms used relevant to the time the story is set in. (Emperor (talk) 16:20, 3 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Not sure there really needs to be a section about the sort of language used in the comic anyway. Surely an encyclopaedic article should simply say when it started, when it ended and describe a few of the stories. Why are British adventure comics always unfairly treated in this fashion, with unessescary attention being drawn to any un-PC aspects? I remember some columnist once complaining that Air Ace Picture Library was "not historically accurate" because it didn't mention 5000 French civilians being killed in an air raid on Calis. Yet I doubt he applied the same standards to Inglorious Basterds, which depicts Hitler being assasinated in a 1944 theatre fire! 81.135.97.69 (talk) 18:55, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Real name of Harrier Squadron

I am pretty sure that the squadron was called Holocaust squadron, but I wont change it without evidence. 95.223.119.137 (talk) 20:42, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Main characters not considered major?

"Spider Wells" and "Bomber Braddock" are listed in the infobox as "Main characters", and both are mentioned in the into, yet neither appear in the 'List of major characters.

Surely if they're "main" they should be listed in the "major" section? 155.190.60.34 (talk) 02:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]