Jump to content

Talk:John Romita Sr.

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by FlairTale (talk | contribs) at 12:47, 7 September 2023. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

Johnny rocks. How does one pronounce "Romita"? I can think of about 10 ways off the top of my head. What's the proper pronunciation? UndeniablyJordan 02:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have always assumed it was in an Italian-like fashion, a lá roh-MEEtuh / roh-MEEtah... 惑乱 分からん 00:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just watching "Comic Book Greats" with Stan Lee interviewing John Romita Sr and Jr (available on youtube) and he calls them "Rom-meeta".(84.236.152.71 (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Deletion

I've removed one sentence because it's not just vague but incomprehensible. I don't know if the editor is a native English speaker, but there is too much here to edit without doing more research into exactly what he or she trying to say. We can start with the use of the WP:WEASEL passive voice at the start, but there's too much more to get into. I can only hope this editor, if he is adamant, will take the time to write this so that, as Wikipedia guidelines require, it is written so that a general-reader audience can understand it.--Tenebrae 13:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For example: "The Romita years cast as parents" -- How can "years" be cast as people? --Tenebrae 13:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'm on deadline, but I'm Wiki-addicted. See that section now. --Tenebrae 14:31, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

600th Spider-Man cover:

John inked the cover of the upcoming 600th issue of Spider-Man. Didn't know if it was worth putting up. Here's the source:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2009/06/oldschool-spidey-john-romita-sr-back-to-draw-cover-of-600th-issue.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.130.65.67 (talk) 05:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spider-Man

To see what Romita brought to comics, look at Ditko's Spider-Man then the first issue Romita did after him. It's like Ditko just did rough pencils which were then coloured in, and Romita did the full inking job with all the detail, which were then coloured in. There was no comparison between the two.(84.236.152.71 (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Page restored to this original title

Marvel.com, the ComicBookDB, the UHMCC and every other source spells John Romita Sr.'s name without a comma. An editor moved this and John Romita Jr. without discussion. Given this documentation — and documentation at John Romita Jr.'s own website that he, too, spells his name without a comma — an admin has restored the original, comma-less titles. --Tenebrae (talk) 05:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on John Romita Sr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:38, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. BritneyErotica (talk) 12:47, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:John Romita Sr./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BritneyErotica (talk · contribs) 07:50, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Will review after plagiarism issues are resolved.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Will review after plagiarism issues are resolved.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Unsure of how reliable TwoMorrows Publishing is especially as it is the most cited in the article.
2c. it contains no original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Significant content is plagiarised as per Copyvios. Please break up all quotes, and where possible, delete redundant parts of the quotes. One violation is from a blog published in 2008. The other "violation" seems to be a blog from 2023, and so it can be reasonable to assume that blog as plagiarised Wikipedia.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Will review after plagiarism issues are resolved.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.

BritneyErotica Is this the 2008 blog you were referring to? Because I checked all of the similarities and they were already on the Wikipedia article before the blog was posted.

TwoMorrows Publishing is one of the most authoritative sources in comic books. Much of it is written by established comic historians and their magazines have interviews with almost every important comics figure. FlairTale (talk) 12:48, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that blog does look like the one I'm talking about. Basically some of the quoted material could be broken up or removed (such as writing around it like leading into the quote). I looked at WP:RSP and couldn't find TwoMorrows Publishing so that's why I had my concerns. If the material used from it was either an interview with John Romita Sr. or something such as a professional review I'm sure there won't be any problems. Once the quotes and other shared material are shuffled around I will try and get a comprehensive breakdown of some other changes (definitely isn't a bad article just needs to be refined). BritneyErotica (talk) 14:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BritneyErotica The amount of quotes has been shortened. TwoMorrows has not only published interviews, it has also published books on influential comics creators, the history of comics characters, and comics history in general. It's one of the most authoritative sources in the topic of comic books. --FlairTale (talk) 23:29, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BritneyErotica Everything okay? FlairTale (talk) 12:39, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry for the delay I must've lost track of this. I'll reply to this comment with a full review soon. BritneyErotica (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FlairTale
Remove citation in short description introduction and keep it in main body
“and the husband of Virginia Romita, for many years...” consider changing to the following for clarity: “who was for many years Marvel's traffic manager."
“Among his instructors were book illustrator Howard Simon and magazine illustrator Ben Clements, and his influences included comics artists Noel Sickles, Roy Crane, Milton Caniff, and, later, Sy Barry, Alex Toth and Carmine Infantino, as well as commercial illustrators Jon Whitcomb, Coby Whitmore and Al Parker.” This sentence has too many inline citations. Number 8 should be placed at the end of the sentence as it’s repeated 3 times for individual names. Perhaps you could break this sentence up to accommodate for so many individual citations (See WP:REPCITE). Consider “Among his instructors, he had the privilege of learning from Howard Simon, a book illustrator, and Ben Clements, a magazine illustrator. He was deeply influenced by a variety of artists and illustrators. In the realm of comics, he admired Noel Sickles, Roy Crane, and Milton Caniff. Later in his career, he also drew inspiration from Sy Barry, Alex Toth, and Carmine Infantino. Beyond comics, he looked up to commercial illustrators like Jon Whitcomb, Coby Whitmore, and Al Parker. Notably, Milton Caniff's work on "Terry and the Pirates" served as an early inspiration for Romita.”
“The collection Marvel Visionaries: John Romita Sr. (Marvel Comics, 2005; ISBN 0-7851-1780-6, ISBN 978-0-7851-1780-3)” Perhaps you should externally link this instead of containing it in the main body.
“At a three-hour meeting over lunch, Romita recalled, Lee promised to match the agency salary if Romita would come work for Marvel, and to give him flexibility to work at home or at the office on any given day at Romita's discretion.” Consider rewording to “At a three-hour meeting over lunch, Romita recalled that Lee promised to match the agency salary if Romita would come work for Marvel. Lee also assured him the freedom to choose his work location, allowing him to work either from home or the office on any given day, based on Romita's own preference.”
“Romita was inducted into the Inkwell Awards Joe Sinnott Hall of Fame in 2020.” Maybe pick the most reliable source for this sentence and/or paragraph instead of having 3 that convey the same thing (Number 91 is directly from the official website which seems to be the best).
“at home” “at his home” sounds a bit better.
Links look good. Some I can’t access like the heavily used citation 8 (a book). Others are fine. Copyvios highlights issues with the already discussed links and so is fine.
I’d rename the Sources section to “General references” and put that as a subcategory within References (See MOS:FNNR). BritneyErotica (talk) 14:20, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BritneyErotica All changes were made, I renamed the Sources section to "Works cited" instead because that was what FNNR called it and I didn't want to call both sections "references". FlairTale (talk) 10:19, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy with all the changes made. Just re-checked copyright and links which are still good. BritneyErotica (talk) 12:43, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Romita_Sr.&oldid=1174278059"