Talk:Virgin Comics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Edit the article attached to this page or discuss it at the project talk page. Help with current tasks, or visit the notice board.
???	This article has no rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and provide comments here.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's importance scale.

Business and Economics Portal

This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject.

Start

rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale

rated as No-importance on the assessment scale

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Virgin Comics article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

[edit] Press release

Reads like a press release from the company. DavidJohns 07:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Thats mainly because their press releases are our only source of info.

Well there are also articles in the press and such like. This problem also extends to the other entries on various releases which break the plot down into per issue details which is unecessary and against the guidelines of the comics project [1]. This might just be over enthusiasm of course but if all one can do is quote press releases and precis the contents of the comics then one could just step back and leave it for someone else to provide a more encyclopedic (Emperor 23:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

I did another sweep through removing uncecessary links (external to minor news items and previews - better off on the more specific page if at all) and the list of comics which is already listed. It still needs more substance as it still has a bit of a promo feel about it. I also think there are far too many pictures on this page - I'd suggest all those down the right hand side aren't needed - they are handy for the specific entries but just weigh the page down without adding much to it. (Emperor 18:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Category

I was thinking things around here have grown enough to justify some categories. Under Virgin Group - "Virgin Comics" and under that "Virgin Comics creators" and "Virgin Comics titles" (Emperor 23:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Employees

I think that we could include an employee section of the article for artests and office staff. The office employee names and artests are on the inside cover of each comic. (JALsnipe 19:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC))

There is a small section [2] but I'd rather have a category than a lengthy list (see my suggestion above). I'd also say no to office staff they just aren't notable enough. As a rule of thumb I tend not to mention colourists and rarely letterers. The publications editor is usually notable but other staff don't get a mention unless they later move on to other things. If they deserve a tip of the hat then Virgin can mention them on their site. (Emperor 22:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC))

good enough answer for me. Thanks for the responce! (JALsnipe 02:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC))

That, of course, is just my opinion but I can't think of an example where the backroom boys get a mention beyond the editor. (Emperor 02:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC))

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../v/i/r/Talk%7EVirgin_Comics_a038.html"

Categories: Unassessed Comics articles | Unknown-importance Comics articles | WikiProject Comics articles | Start-Class business and economics articles | Unassessed-importance business and economics articles