PROFILPELAJAR.COM

Template name

The box has grown since its original version. Shouldn't it have a different name ? -- Beardo (talk) 16:27, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additions?

I have started pages on the Amazing Three and Tri-Man; should these be added to the template or is there some sort of threshold for longevity? BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 22:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If they're notable enough to have their own articles they are welcome in this template. I would only hold off adding them if the pages were in the middle of a deletion discussion. Eopsid (talk) 16:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've added the reviewed additions and will see about Tri-Man when I've got some clarification about the notability. Cheers for your help! BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 08:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template surgery

I am very much leaning towards this template needing some serious work done, sadly.

Firstly, it makes more sense to me that the strips are below the publications.
Secondly, sorting the publications by genre feels flawed to me; Buster wasn't exclusively humour for example. Same goes for splitting humour into pre- and post-war humour but not doing the same for adventure doesn't feel right. Personally I'd be in favour of just having them listed by launch decade.
Thirdly, the Power Comics should really be in the "See also" bit as they were Odhams and not AP/FW/IPC until after three of them had folded.
Notable artists feels very much like a loaded term, and putting it towards artists only means lots of important people (Mills, Wagner, Kearon, Bulmer, Tully, Tomlinson) get covered.

I'm happy to give it a bit of an overhaul myself, but thought I'd check first. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:BoomboxTestarossa/IPCTemplate is what I would propose. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I used the word notable artist because they were artists notable enough for Wikipedia articles. It does make sense to use staff instead to include writers too. Putting comic strips after the actual titles makes sense. We could just change the template title to include Odhams Press stuff specifically. I dont really like sorting the titles by launch decade. I prefer sorting by genre. But yeah I see your point Buster was originally much more of a mixture comic not really a pure humour one. I'm not sure why I split it into pre and post war humour comics when I originally created this template (more than a decade ago!). Eopsid (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did a couple changes. I see you have more publications on your template. I may add them later and include a section for story papers. Though I'm not sure some publications like Petticoat (magazine) belong here, its article makes it sound more like a magazine with no mention of comics. Eopsid (talk) 22:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think Petticoat might be an error [edit: I think I was thinking about Pink]. I'm not sure about adding Odhams outright as they were a separate company for most of their life; if nothing else it could potentially make the template potentially massive; I mean, would we also throw in J. B. Allen's pre-takeover titles? As it is it's theoretically set to expand - I've done Speed, while Jag and Hurricane are on the list, and there are a lot of pre-war (Magnet, Gem etc.) and girls' titles missing - anything with an article at List of AP, Fleetway and IPC Comics publications should probably be in the template, with the potential for the others to be included. As I say, the Power Comics were basically done by the time they were taken over - IIRC Smash! had already largely dropped the format and the others were only used for annuals. I feel at least they should be massively de-emphasised to at least below the titles actually published by AP/FW/IPC.

I'm not crazy-crazy about by decade but I feel genre is too subjective - as well as Buster, Knockout transitioned to adventure fairly solidly after the war (whereas at the same time Valiant led with Asterix the Royal Marine, and all of them have humour strips; we'd possibly face the same problem with story papers, as again there's ones that started off that way and changed). While at various stages Fleetway/IPC etc. had defined departments I've yet to see any definitive timeline or list for this and between the spotty surviving documentation and lack of living staff it's unlikely we ever will. But I feel the titles need some sort of separation as it's just a big pile of words otherwise.

The strip one is already nudging at the edge of readability; that said I feel a lot of those pages are probably sadly going to have to be merged into list or title pages, as it's hard to see some of them standing up to notability. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]