Talk:Inverloch (webcomic)

This article was nominated for deletion on April 23 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep.

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Webcomics.

Da'kor

WTF is up with the Da'kor race description? Either modify ALL of the race descriptions to be pseudoscientific, or keep it short. Honestly, I don't think having a full screen of jargon is very 'encyclopedic' in this context.

Aimed at women?

"The comic is aimed mostly at female audience because of its lack of action."

Where in the website does it say that? Or does the author of that particular comment feel that us men only like things that have big trucks, explosions and hot lesbian action? Crimson Shadow 12:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Sarah said it in one interwiev, I'll try to find it.

Here it is: [1]

Cheers. I've taken the liberty of re-wording that statement however, as in its current form I feel it can be mistaken for sexist stereotyping. Crimson Shadow 18:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.

Story

Can I write more in "Story"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.152.216.221 (talk • contribs) 03:52, May 26, 2006

I noticed that a lot of this page was copied from the Inverloch website.

I agree. It should be changed.

Characters section is definitively copied from Inverloch website. This whole article should be rewritten. Even Croatian article is better than this. Keaze 13:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it is a good idea, but there should be first appearance for characters. Keaze 02:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spoilers

The character and race sections have a number of spoilers for events later in the comic (perhaps ignoring the fact that a character list is a spoiler in itself. :) ) Perhaps these sections should be cleared up a little to not be quite so revealing or clearly labelled as spoiling. --Aspectacle 08:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is a spoiler warning on the page. Crimson Shadow 11:29, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd noticed. :) It's just that it seems attached to the plot only as it is broken from the character section by the awards section which is clearly not spoiler material. And if you look at the character/race section it reveals far more about the plot and interesting events from the story than the plot section does! --Aspectacle 12:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've popped in an endspoiler tag and plaed the award section outside of the spoiler warning's range. Does this look better? Crimson Shadow 15:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes - lovely. Thank you. :) --Aspectacle 06:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure athkatchus need spoilers? I mean the only appearance is on the beginning when Acheron is trying to kill one of them.Keaze 05:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When the comic is updated

I think if you consider the author being in Australia the comic is updated on Mondays and Thursdays (East Coast Australian time). I consider this to be somewhat more consistent, and perhaps understandable than saying Sunday/Monday, Wednesday/Thursday in an undescribed timezone? --Aspectacle 08:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Characters

Whoever changed Lei'ella section should do the same with the rest of character profiles. I also think character pictures should be deleted or changed because they're pretty much outdated. Keaze 06:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones are outdated? I can understand Varden, but the rest? Crimson Shadow 11:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures should be different than the ones on the Inverloch website. I don't think those pictures are even needed.

Fair use rationale for Image:Inverloch logo.JPG

Image:Inverloch logo.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Da'kor ears

The Da'kor description says their ears are "triangular and apparently immobile", but in the comic Acheron moves his ears at a number of places; for example, he lowers them when he's sad. 81.226.252.221 (talk) 12:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to Characters section

Hey, I'm probably going to be making some major edits to the Characters section soon. A lot of the information there is either trivial (for example, the fact that Acheron was trained to use a bow instead of a sword--that's not important to the article, he doesn't even fire the bow in 24 out of the 25 chapters), or inaccurate (where in the comic does it say that Acheron loves ancient stories?), or simply would be more appropriately placed in the Plot section. So, in addition to trimming the Characters section, I will probably also be working on expanding the plot section.

So, yeah, that's just a warning to anyone out there who's watching this article, if you see some big edits happening then that's probably what's going on.... and if anyone else wants to work on these tasks as well, you're more than welcome to help! --Politizer (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've started working on that; I have also made changes to the Races section, written a much bigger Plot section, and will probably remove the World section soon and integrate some of that information elsewhere in the article.

It is possible that other editors might want to still be able to get at some of the information I've deleted, either to reintegrate it into the article, or to split this article (for example, adding a "Characters of Inverloch" article) and use the more detailed information in the new article. For that purpose, I have saved the last version of the article before I started editing, at User:Politizer/Inverloch. If there is any information that I took out of the article and you'd like to put back in or use somewhere, you can find it there. --Politizer (talk) 23:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As no one has voiced any concerns in several weeks, I'm going to delete that page from my userspace. The old version of the article is still accessible in the history (in fact, I'm not sure why I didn't think of that before...oh well). —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 18:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remaining tasks

As you can see, the footnotes I've been putting in are sporadic at best. It would be very helpful for someone to add more footnotes pointing to the strips in which certain things are revealed...this is most important in the Characters and Races sections, and less so in the Plot section. It's not desirable to have so many primary source references, but until I can track down some good third-party sources (reviews and interviews, mostly) we will have to just go with that.
A section needs to be written to establish Inverloch's real-world notability. The Awards section can be integrated into this; it should detail reviews and reception of the comic, how much it has been read/recognized, and the fact that it's been published, and whether or not it is Ellerton's primary source of income, etc.
The Trivia can be gotten rid of pretty easily once the section mentioned above has been written. The fact that it has fanfiction websites and the it's been translated into 7 languages can both be mentioned in the section on real-world notability, reception, and publication. The fact that it will not have a sequel but that Ellerton is working on a new comic can also probably go in there somehow. The thing about how its target audience is women would probably best be situated in a [not yet written] section on the style and format of the webcomic (to write that section, we will need lots of reviews and interviews to cite, otherwise it will all be original research).
In general, working in more third-party references to offset the large proportion (currently 100%!) of primary source references in the article. The more we work on the abovementioned sections (real-world notability, style/format), the easier it will be to have those sorts of references available and cite them.

For some examples of what I'm talking about (and the sorts of articles that I am trying to emulate), check out the articles on Questionable Content, Megatokyo, and Gunnerkrigg Court.

--Politizer (talk) 23:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just been put on to this comic, and there seems to be a fair bit of information from interviews and reviews etc that could really bolster this article, particularly in discussing how it was received and any criticism or praise directed at it, as well as possibly some information about development, art techniques and so on. I'll try to hunt around for references when I get a chance, but will probably add this on my stack of articles to provide resources for. Hope this helps, Gazi moff 12:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great. This article has pretty much nothing on reception, development, or style, but interviews and reviews would provide some information on all that stuff. Most good comics articles seem to have a lot of information on that, and less primary-source info on story and characters. Whenever you find interviews and reviews and stuff, if you stick them in the EL list or something I'll try to check them out and work on adding stuff to the article. --Politizer (talk) 13:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews and Interviews

I did a quick google search and came up with some interviews and reviews that should be useful for writing about the comic's reception and style. I'm not going to put them in EL yet because I haven't closely read them, but here they are for now; sometime soon I'll try to get around to putting the stuff in the article, but feel free to add stuff to the article on your own if you beat me to it:

ComixTalk interview with Sarah Ellerton (CT is a good and reliable resource, their stuff should hold more weight than some of the lesser known links below)
Review at Digital Strips
another review at Digital Strips (mp3)
Review at KillBoredom
KillBoredom interview with Sarah Ellerton
Review at Inkspot
Review at Webcomics Weeder (appears to be a personal blog and not widely read, use with caution)

--Politizer (talk) 19:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, and there's also this squib at ComixTalk...could be useful for writing a section on how the comic was written and prepared, and how it was received at the very beginning. --Politizer (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inverloch (webcomic). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5p9JJLQxp?url=http://www.ccawards.com/2005.htm to http://www.ccawards.com/2005.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Inverloch (webcomic). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]