Talk:Viz (comic)
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. | ||
Contents |
[edit] Letterbocks
One thing I've always wondered about: Letterbocks. Almost every issue has letters that refer to other letters in the same issue. Are these people psychic, or are the letters faked by the Viz staff? I know that not all letters are, because I myself had a letter in once, but I was wondering if any are. JIP | Talk 21:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
- Its a gag, and one of their better observed ones. The spoof is that similar pages in 'real' magazines are often patently written by staff. Do you realy think there are that many mentals in the popularion writing inane letters to the press? I like to think not, though, that said.... Coil00 23:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- I think it used to be that the vast majority were written by the editors - possibly to the extent of having an entire issue without a "real" letter. I wouldn't be surprised if it was still over 50% "fake" these days. — sjorford (talk) 16:12, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Didn't Viz also have a strip about a park attendant? Din't see this in the entry. Perhaps if someone can confirm they should add him?
Yeah, 'The Parkie'. He's in the list.
Re: The Parkie. I added him a few weeks ago. Perhaps someone can make an article about him if they have the time.
[edit] Wanker Watson
I seem to recall that "D.C. Comics" (publishers of The Dandy and The Beano and Jack and Jill and Playhour etc) instigated legal action against Viz in the mid 90s? Due to Viz's obscene parodies of strips such as "Little Plums" and "Wanker Watson" ("wow! jazz mags!" etc etc). Hilarious stuff. Can anyone with some details make mention of it in the article?--feline1 23:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- It was Little Plumber, not Little Plums. It was not the Wanker Watson episode that got them into bother with D C Thompson, it was the rather provocative "Desperately Unfunny Dan" one - Viz could hardly moan about that one when they'd set out to wind them up in the first place. They tried it again with "Korky The Twat" later, but by then D C Thompson were twice shy Mark Boyle 19:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Seperate article for strips
The list of notable strips seems quite long and there are a lot of red-links to many of them. I'm thinking the whole Viz article would be neater if the Notable Strips section was just a brief paragraph mentioning and outlining the main ones (Roger Mellie, Sid the Sexist, etc), then with a link to the Category of Viz Characters. Otherwise the majority of the article is just a long list. Does anyone agree? Robert Mercer 20:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah.--Crestville 14:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- I agree.--ML5 15:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay, done it. We could do with some pictures of the characters on the individual strips. I believe we can use single-frames of comic strips without running into copyright issues. The problem is, although I've got piles of Viz back-issues lying around, I've no scanner. I'll see if I can hunt some down on the web. Robert Mercer 15:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] For a complete list, see List of Viz comic strips ?
I think the list of Viz comic strips is a little misleading this really amounts to a list of Viz Characters not each comic strip.
Pleas can we have the title changed, but over all agree from previous discussion the list did need to be moved
[edit] NPOV
The opening paragraph features a rather non-neutral take on the modern incarnation of the comic. Also, there's confusion over its popularity, being cited as the third- and first-best-selling magazine in its hey-day. --82.15.46.131 01:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Does this regard the text that keeps getting removed? I agree that it could probably be reworded in a more NPOV manner, but I think perhaps the point still stands. Anybody fancy rewording it...?
- -- Chris (blather • contribs)
16:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey. I removed the text about myself being the reason Viz is shit and the text about the Framley guys work not being as good as Chris Donalds. I think it is unfair and also, in some cases, untrue and unhelpful. Obviously I am a bit hurt at the accusation, but the comic strips in Viz are subjective. You like what you like. Some people like certain stuff, some people hate it. Other people like the stuff other people hate, and vice versa. There is no correlation between my work and a decline in sales. I don't know how Wiki works, so apologies if this editing was underhand of me. But yes, my draftmanship is a bit crude. You're right there.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.179.127.208 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC).
- Okay, that sounds like a pretty good reason, now that you point it out! I wouldn't class your editing as underhand, just that my first reaction to seeing something removed with nothing in the edit summary is that it might potentially be vandalism (especially with an anon IP: might be worth registering an account). I'll revert my revert. Apologies for that.
- I hope you don't take my "the point still stands" comment too much to heart: it's all part of the "not as good as it used to be" ethos. :)
- -- Chris (blather • contribs) 17:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Cheers for that. I have registered now so I don't come across as some sort of devious anonymous pervert in the future. I'm not well versed in all this technology. I just do comics that are good or shit or mediocre depending on your viewpoint. You clearly know your stuff though, so thanks for supporting it. Alex —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alex collier (talk • contribs) 17:16, 29 August 2006.
[edit] First legal action ever taken against Viz
Was that the man who purportedly 'had sex with himself'? ('Fondled his own buttocks') Long time ago, and haven't got that issue to check. Notreallydavid 12:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
