Skip to main content

What About Primarily-Print Comics With Web Presence?

Here's a part of a wiki discussion arising from the question of Garfield:

Quote:
What about comics such as Garfield? They're mostly print comics, but they do have comics printed online, and even an archive. Lots of people only read comics online (in fact, I only knew about Dilbert because of it's website). --JohnLynch 05:00, 18 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Quote:
To me, if a print comic has a web presence, I see no reason why it shouldn't be mentioned. --TheNintenGenius 15:07, 20 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Quote:
We should only list comics in print only that are related to webcomics like Reinventing Comics, otherwise let the print comics to the wikipedia folk.--Kiba 19:39, 25 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Quote:
Problem is, what is an online comic? Not too sure if you're saying Garfield should be in or not (or if it should be in, but it's associated pages out), but going with the definition of "comics with a significant online presence" (i.e. more then just an advertising website with no strips), Superman is out, while Garfield, Dilbert and Sheldon are in. However if Garfield is in, shouldn't it's associated articles also be included? However going by that definition all of these comics should have articles on them. And the associated articles of them should also be in (given that the only reason they're not in the main article is that the main article is too large). I find it difficult to create a criteria that excludes print comics with a web presence, without the criteria excluding webcomics (e.g. Comics that are mostly in print, then Alpha Shade goes as the website is just an advertisment for their books. Comics that first appeared in print, Roomies! goes, and Dewclaw is excluded from ever being included). I tend to go for a more loose inclusive definition when it comes to wikipedias. Whether something is a webcomic is fairly abritrary (not that I want the article to become focused on print comics with superman, batman, etc included, although if they started updating strips on the web then I would ;)) --JohnLynch 00:22, 31 Oct 2005 (EST)

Quote:
Also, having articles on television shows based on (web)comics with articles already, to me that makes sense. After all, if You Damn Kid gets a television show, then I'd expect it to be covered here. So going by that, I'd expect to see the Dilbert teleivision show included as well. --JohnLynch 00:24, 31 Oct 2005 (EST)

Quote:
That is diffcult. We may need an inclusion guide to what qualify as webcomic or should be inlcuded after all.--Kiba 18:51, 31 Oct 2005 (EST)

Quote:
Well for now I'll leave off adding any non-obvious comics (I figured adding Garfield would get some discussion on it ;)) until some guidelines can be drawn up, they would be fairly helpful (as I can see someone adding a non-webcomic by accident). Xerexes and Kelly from Comixpedia touched on this subject in their recent podcast where the distinction isn't anywhere near as clear as it was as little as 12months ago.--JohnLynch 04:17, 1 Nov 2005 (EST)

What About Primarily-Print Comics With Web Presence?

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

Here's a part of a wiki discussion arising from the question of Garfield:

Quote:
What about comics such as Garfield? They're mostly print comics, but they do have comics printed online, and even an archive. Lots of people only read comics online (in fact, I only knew about Dilbert because of it's website). --JohnLynch 05:00, 18 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Quote:
To me, if a print comic has a web presence, I see no reason why it shouldn't be mentioned. --TheNintenGenius 15:07, 20 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Quote:
We should only list comics in print only that are related to webcomics like Reinventing Comics, otherwise let the print comics to the wikipedia folk.--Kiba 19:39, 25 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Quote:
Problem is, what is an online comic? Not too sure if you're saying Garfield should be in or not (or if it should be in, but it's associated pages out), but going with the definition of "comics with a significant online presence" (i.e. more then just an advertising website with no strips), Superman is out, while Garfield, Dilbert and Sheldon are in. However if Garfield is in, shouldn't it's associated articles also be included? However going by that definition all of these comics should have articles on them. And the associated articles of them should also be in (given that the only reason they're not in the main article is that the main article is too large). I find it difficult to create a criteria that excludes print comics with a web presence, without the criteria excluding webcomics (e.g. Comics that are mostly in print, then Alpha Shade goes as the website is just an advertisment for their books. Comics that first appeared in print, Roomies! goes, and Dewclaw is excluded from ever being included). I tend to go for a more loose inclusive definition when it comes to wikipedias. Whether something is a webcomic is fairly abritrary (not that I want the article to become focused on print comics with superman, batman, etc included, although if they started updating strips on the web then I would ;)) --JohnLynch 00:22, 31 Oct 2005 (EST)

Quote:
Also, having articles on television shows based on (web)comics with articles already, to me that makes sense. After all, if You Damn Kid gets a television show, then I'd expect it to be covered here. So going by that, I'd expect to see the Dilbert teleivision show included as well. --JohnLynch 00:24, 31 Oct 2005 (EST)

Quote:
That is diffcult. We may need an inclusion guide to what qualify as webcomic or should be inlcuded after all.--Kiba 18:51, 31 Oct 2005 (EST)

Quote:
Well for now I'll leave off adding any non-obvious comics (I figured adding Garfield would get some discussion on it ;)) until some guidelines can be drawn up, they would be fairly helpful (as I can see someone adding a non-webcomic by accident). Xerexes and Kelly from Comixpedia touched on this subject in their recent podcast where the distinction isn't anywhere near as clear as it was as little as 12months ago.--JohnLynch 04:17, 1 Nov 2005 (EST)

I run this place! Tip the piano player on the way out.

Be As Inclusive As Possible

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

My sense is that a web presence is sufficient to get a comic or creator in the door of the Webcomics Encyclopedia. Once they're in the question of how far to follow all of their related activities is probably an individual call. Personally I wouldn't want to stop people from including more then less.

For example, Scott McCloud is clearly connected to webcomic because of his book Reinventing Comics and his online work. However, a great deal of his work is in print or about print. McCloud clearly gets an entry in Comixpedia.org. How far do we go in including material on him then? I'd say as far as the community goes in writing up the entry on him. His non-web stuff will certainly be informative.

That's my take on it right now...

I run this place! Tip the piano player on the way out.