Skip to main content

Tweaking Comixpedia.org Template for Webcomics

The Webcomics Encyclopedia (aka The Wiki) is rumbling along. I have decided not to recreate the library function from the Postnuke site (dot net) -- ultimately the wiki has much greater potential to provide complete information on creators and their webcomics. There are a few tweaks to the page template we've inherited from the Wikipedia that I'd like to standardize on though:

  • Listing the Update (i.e., RSS) Feed
  • Describing the Format - is it completed, serialized, 24 Hour...
  • Describing the Publisher - is it Keenspot, MT, Wirepop or independent...
  • Is it Free or $$$ - what does it cost to view/read...

Towards the bottom of a webcomic page I'd like to make sure we are consistent on two major headings: right before External Links I would like to include "Reviews" (this would be "Interviews" on a creator page) and above "Reviews" I would like to include "Books and Other Collections". Reviews (and interviews) would include all articles from Comixpedia.com but also substantial articles from other publications (if we start to include articles from offline publications we're going to need to decide how to cite them since we can't link to it)

Comments? I've updated Clan of the Cats' entry per the above so folks can see the changes.

 

Also just a style note, webcomic titles should always be in italics - not BOLD.

Sort by Field

There should be a parameter to make the sort by in the Category.

E.g.

Comic name: The Comic

sort by = Comic

And in the template: [[Category:Webcomics|{{#if{{{sort by|}}}|{{{sort by|}}}|{{{name|}}}}}]]

And it will render it as so in the Category: C {...} The Comic and in the template: [[Category:Webcomics|Comic]]

Working on fixing templates

I'll be working on fixing the template. I'll also edit article along the way.(In progress)

 But I got other project going on too. (My own open source software project) so I cannot spend all my time on comixpedia.org.Â

Question: Does the publisher also categorized print publisher who publishes indepedent authors' comic books or graphic novels but have little to do anything with webcomics?

Just the webcomic

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

For the infobox the publisher is supposed to reflect the publisher of the webcomic only. We might want to discuss/debate this. My intent is to highlight things like Keenspot or MT or Wirepop publishing certain webcomics. We might want to also include affiliations or collectives like Blank Label Comics (although I tend to think of those as groups of people and not necessarily groups of webcomics).

____

Xaviar XerexesÂ

I am a Modern Major Generality.

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

Well, currently, our

Well, currently, our category cateorized publisher and webcomic collectives as simply webcomic collectives.

 

I think we should either change the category or make the infobox be consistent with the category.Â

Some entry like Megatokyo

Some entry like Megatokyo are vastly different in their layout, because they got so much other information. It would not to be wise the change the entire layout to "Others" because they are in fact improtant section like History, books, and criticism. Others entries are however, do not contain the vast quanity of information you could report about them other than their characters and plotlines. I believe the wikipedia standard is perfect for this article. In fact, I believed Megatokyo is the best webcomic entry in both comixpedia.org and wikipedia.

 

We should add references section as a standard in webcomic entries. Because no serious encyclopedia or reference work could be complete without it. Reviews and other publicication are good source for reference material. They contain crisitism and praise in which we can use to verfiy opinions as major and not someone's else super long soap opera.

Megatokyo Entry is Lengthy

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

My quick reactions:

Megatokyo entry is lengthy but poorly organized - it's a bit of a mess and a poor template for to standardize on.

References would be what the article is based on? Correct? That should go at the very end of the entry (much like endnotes to a book). I agree that would be a good thing to add.

But other parts of the Megatokyo entry:

Forums? That could be an single link - actually that could be either something to add to the Infobox or something that should always go in the External Links section.

I suppose we could add a standard "Swag" or store section - not sure that's really worth including in an entry about a webcomic. Might be preferable to just include that in the External Links section.

I dislike the Plot, History and Criticism sections here - I'd prefer to separate Cast (Characters) and Storylines (Plot). The "History" section is kind of meta-information about the creators. Not sure how to treat this but it's only going to come up for a some entries so I'd propose putting that type of discussion in the Other section.

Criticism is interesting. I would much rather streamline the amount of criticism included in the Comixpedia.org article in favor or referencing other reviews and essays about the webcomic (which would be in the Reviews section). As it is right now the Megatokyo criticism section reads like an independent review of the webcomic. It would be much more web-friendly to immediately support statements with links (or cites to offline work) to reviews.Â

____

Xaviar XerexesÂ

I am a Modern Major Generality.

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

Comixpedia.org's entry is

Comixpedia.org's entry is vastly outdated. There are massive changes on Wikipedia's article. When I get around to it, I'll update it. It is very hard to keep up with the pace of change.Â

Some of the major changes include deleting the swags stuff and merging them into History. They also add more references and end notes too. The forum link is competely gone. So they basically reorganize the whole article. I think they might have address some of your concerns if not all. ( I could be wrong about that)

Perhap Review should be under the section references since we are going to use it to highlight major critiism and praise generally recevied by the comic. I agree that comixpedia.org should not be a review site.

History should be the history of the webomic(s) in question, their evolution and events. If history is too short to be a section itself, so I think it should go to others section.

As a general rule of thumb, I think anything shorter than two paragraph should go to other.(Unless they are subsection of a section.)Â

Last Idea from me today

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

I noticed that there had been a suggestion to add a "language" line to the Infobox template. That might be a good idea to note the language. Any reason why we shouldn't add that now to the revised template?Â

____

Xaviar XerexesÂ

I am a Modern Major Generality.

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

Just Tweaked CotCs Entry

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

I just tweaked the CotC entry to reflect my most recent comment.

Let's sort out the best approach here - if you don't want to register for the forum here please email me instead at xerexes AT gmail

Thanks!

____

Xaviar XerexesÂ

I am a Modern Major Generality.

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

Filling Out A Standard Approach to a Webcomic Entry

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

Besides making the infobox template more webcomic-specific, it would be useful to try and standardize a bit more the typical entry for a webcomic.

I'd propose something like this: (1) overall summary, (2) characters, (3) storylines, (4) Banners and Buttons, (5) Books and Other Collections, (6) Reviews, (7) Quotes, (8) Other (anything else) (9) External Links (other websites).

A suggestion for another category would be "Storylines" for longer-running webcomics where eventually we might fill in details on specific plotlines.

I realize we may need to revisit our image policy but assuming we can sort that out it seems to me we have two kinds of images we'd want to add to entries - one would be samples which could be added to the characters or plotlines sections but the other type would be promotional banners and buttons which I think would be better off in their own subsection (which I labeled above Banners and Buttons).

I'd also like to encourage the inclusion of memorable quotes from webcomics in their entries -

My thought is that we should work out s revised very webcomic-specific approach to entries (I'll do another post on creator-entries soon) and then come up with some kind of summer of editing the wiki contest to encourage all of us to improve comixpedia.org

____

Xaviar Xerexes

I am a Modern Major Generality.

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

True But Better Sooner Than Later

Xaviar Xerexes's picture

True but I think it's best that we do it sooner then later. Thanks also to the person who cleaned up the template last night after I made my changes.Â

Someone more expert in the template code might try to revise it to show the new parts of it only when there is something to show? (like the "ending" entry). On the other hand having it there to fill it in would be a visible reminder to help fix all of them.Â

____

Xaviar XerexesÂ

I am a Modern Major Generality.

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

We're going to have to fix a

We're going to have to fix a tons of articles because of that template. Since the template is widely in used, we going to have to look in 1400 + articles, the majority of them are webcomics with that template. I havn't contributes ton of edits i a long time, so this might be a good job for me.

We are closing in on the 1500 articles milestone btw.

 Thanks Adashiel for his effort bringing in deleted webomic articles from wikipedia.