Talk:Oktober Guard

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. Prolog (talk) 15:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

---

On all the official Hasbro-licensed merchandise, the name is spelt "Oktober" guard - that should be the article's title, with October as the redirect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.200.195 (talk • contribs)

• Move page. This website makes clear the name was changed to "k" (see the "3 name changes" section). Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
• Support Reason? Even the template {{Template:G.I. Joe}} from 18 November 2006 states "Oktober Guard", so this seems to be the correct name even in English. (I don't know nothing about this G.I. Joe, and what to put into the search field - but if I read this comic, I would search for the name mentioned in the comic. All others would take the redirect.) Greetings. [P.s. I've added this move request to the project talk page.] Sebastian scha. (talk) 05:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
• Support move: Definitely Oktober Guard, as the website above and several others confirm. The move should make the Creation section clearer, :-) Maedin\^talk 14:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose Neutral Insufficient supporting evidence to determine; fansites are not reliable secondary sources, and making a self-reference to Wikipedia proves nothing. --Rogerb67 (talk) 02:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hasbro "file card" confirms "Oktober Guard" (complete with ™) here. Amazon.com are selling an anniversary edition action figures comic book and the plot is, "The G.I. JOE team and the OKTOBER GUARD are trying to recover a laser modulator from a speeding train." That, combined with numerous references on collectors and toy sites, means I stick with my previous support. Maedin\^talk 08:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm removing my opposition, however I'm still concerned about a lack of reliable sources per Wikipedia's definition for this article; certainly self-published fansites and eBay auctions are not considered reliable sources. Amazon.com may be used for basic facts, not sure if text deep in the blurb would count however. --Rogerb67 (talk) 12:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate you striking your oppose, and I actually agree with your reluctance regarding the sources. I wondered myself if whoever blurbed for Amazon would know what they were talking about. But it occurred to me that, as we spell October with a c normally, people would almost certainly have to be encountering a different spelling for it to influence how they present it. Same goes for fansites (I found several; people who collect the action figures and the comic books): I would generally be dubious about those sources, but they do at least have the merchandise and something is compelling the majority of collectors to present with a k instead of a c. Unfortunately, I think the nature of the subject means that reliable sources will always be hard to find. If we can't make a simple spelling change based on sources such as those available, then one gets into murky ground where one could try to argue that the article shouldn't exist at all. Maedin\^talk 12:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Member write-ups

The Characters section needs extensive rewriting. Some do not adequately distinguish between events from the comics and those from the cartoon. It is unclear what criteria are being used to define "original", as the section even admits that Dragonsky debuted years later. The distinction between "Replacement members" and "New members" is also unclear. The usage of flags to indicate each character's nationality is probably not in compliance with our MOS. Details about preliminary/developmental names are dropped in at random with little regard to how this affects the flow of the text. I suggest adopting a standard format something like the following:

Codename - Civilian name. Military specialties. Personality description. Activities in the Marvel comics.... In the Sunbow cartoon.... In the DIC cartoon.... In the Devil's Due comics.... In the G.I. Joe Renegades cartoon... In the IDW comics... Developmental notes....

--Khajidha (talk) 21:45, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

I've removed the flags and rephrased some of the worst of the prose. I'm not familiar enough with the source material to do much more.--Khajidha (talk) 22:19, 20 October 2018 (UTC)