Talk:Resident Alien (comics)

Resident Alien (comics) has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 8, 2018. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Resident Alien (comics) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 June 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the title for the Resident Alien comic book came from a conversation Peter Hogan had more than 20 years prior to publishing it?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Resident Alien (comic book).

Wikipedia

Comics: United States Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by United States comics work group.

Critical Reception

Amazon and Goodreads user ratings are not critic ratings, thus are not considered to be reliable sources of information. Please replace with appropriate information. Zamaster4536 (talk) 15:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Resident Alien (comics)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Fish and karate (talk · contribs) 09:48, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to review this article over the next week or so. Fish+Karate 09:48, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2 issues remaining. Fish+Karate 09:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): Y - now fixed Fish+Karate 09:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"A former lover of the mayor comes to him for financial help" - Who is "him"? The Mayor? Or Harry?

The mayor. Let me know if my revision is still vague. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are the sales figures for issues #0 and #1 given as "about 4800" and "about 5700" when there's exact figures in the references, and book #1 of miniseries 2 is, however, given as an exact number (3,863)? This needs to be consistent; round them all or don't round any of them.

Although the source is the best place for information on comic sales and appears to provide specific numbers, those are not direct from the distributor. The site runner backs into the information based on other facts. Anecdotal evidence indicates his numbers are about 10% too low, but the margin of error is consistent enough to compare and reliably show trends. I rounded off the number for the second miniseries. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the same note, Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Grouping_of_digits asks you be consistent with using commas within 4-digit numbers, this is not the case at the moment

I think I caught all these in favor of a comma. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are so many issue zeroes, I think a table giving a list of issues (which is at most only going to be 24 entries long), with the original publication date and where it was published, details of which compilation(s) they are in, and those publication date would actually be helpful. So, for example, the first Resident Alien story, which was issue #0, was originally published in Dark Horse Presents vol 2 #4 in October 2011. It was then made available in Resident Alien: Welcome to Earth!, which was published on February 27, 2013. It's difficult to tease all this together from the article (and I'm still not sure I've got it right).
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): Y - now fixed Fish+Karate 09:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The first subsection of "Plot" is called Flashbacks. There isn't a miniseries called Flashbacks, the other five subsections are named in line with the miniseries. It would help the reader if it was made clear "Flashbacks" isn't a series title, this section refers to the narrative flashbacks interspersed throughout the books.

I italicized the titles, but left Flashback as regular text. Do you think this is sufficient? Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I added a line explaining that the flashbacks are a narrative device, so it's clearer for the reader. Feel free to rewrite as you prefer. Fish+Karate 09:09, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's three redlinks in the Reception section (and also within the references) - I don't think it's likely these will ever turn blue so are links necessary? Not something to pass/fail a GA on, just a stylistic choice.

I removed most of them but left them in place for Multiversity Comics. This one, I believe, is on the cusp of notability (it was nominated for an Eisner Award a few years ago) and I think a future article is likely. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"When the first series debuted, critics universally criticized the first chapter being released as issue zero instead of issue one" - if the chapters aren't a simple 1-5 then this should probably be added to the infobox.

I believe I've clarified this.

On that note, the "Titles" section of the infobox says the first miniseries is called "Resident Alien". The "Publication Date" and "Reprints" sections of the infobox say the first miniseries is called "Welcome to Earth", which is also used in the "Plot" section. Which is it?

Tricky. When serialized, the first series was just "Resident Alien". The subheading wasn't added until it was collected. I updated the title list to be consistent. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can there be consistency - at various points in the article, the article refers to each collection of 4 issues as "Series", "Volumes", "Miniseries", "Books", "Collected Editions" - pick one (ideally one used in a reliable source) and stick to it.

This is tricky because the terms are referring to different things, but I tried to make things more consistent. "Series" refers to all the Resident Alien comics. "Miniseries" refers to the 4-issue sets that make up the series. "Collected edition" refer to the squarebound reprints that you'd find in a bookstore. I believe I have made this usage more consistent, but not all of the terms can be eliminated because they aren't synonyms. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First chapter was serialized in 2011 (in Dark Horse Presents vol 2 #4-6), but the publication date in the infobox is 2012, and the earliest date mentioned in the lead is 2013.

I'm not sure how best to address this. The content that made up v1#0 was serialized in an anthology comic in 2011, but #0 was published in 2012. The infobox isn't built to handle this kind of complication, and I think the dates shown are the most accurate way to distill the information within the parameters. Hopefully the forthcoming table of publication dates will clarify this? The lead date was a typo, which I have corrected.

Infobox says the schedule is monthly. Is that right? I guess it's monthly for the four months each book in a series has been released, but there are big swathes of time where no issues are released.
When they're published, the miniseries are monthly. The gaps between miniseries are much larger than a month. This is another place where the infobox parameters breakdown.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): Y
b (citations to reliable sources): Y - now fixed Fish+Karate 09:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A number of sentences in the "Publication" subsection are uncited

I added two for release dates. The last half of the first paragraph isn't directly cited, but I believe it's a summary of cited information from the following paragraphs. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to consider formatting the citations using {{Cite}} tags. This is not essential but would help you make sure all the references contain all the information they should (for example, the Variety reference was missing the author; I've fixed that one but I find using the tool makes this much easier (it's the "CITE" button at the top of your editing window). This is stylistic and not something to pass or fail a GA on.

After being told this repeatedly, that is a tool I use now. However, most of this article was written in 2016 and I haven't gone back to update them. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I updated them all myself, it was bothering me. Fish+Karate 09:10, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The little review table at the end suggests the fourth miniseries has an average rating of 7.4. The reviews are all for the first issue of the series (The Man With No Name #1), not for the series; issues 2-4 have no reviews.

I will address this when I put in the publication table. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
c (OR): Y
"Dark Horse Publisher Mike Richardson provided editorial input that helped Hogan and Parkhouse find the right tone for the narrative." This is not supported by the reference provided ([1])

Fixed - wrong source was cited. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's better, thank you. Fish+Karate 13:35, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The title for the first book appears to be "Resident Alien Volume 1: Welcome to Earth!" (note the exclamation mark), this exclamation mark appears to have been been excluded from the article. If the title of the book has an exclamation mark it needs to appear in the article in the same way, consistently.

added. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
d (copyvio and plagiarism): Y - now fixed Fish+Karate 09:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"thought the concept of aliens being monsters and invaders had become stale" is a direct quote from [2] so needs to be in quotations or it needs to be paraphrased. Same for "sympathetic attitude to a nonhuman character", which is directly copied from [3] This was done fine for "Interesting sparks" but needs to be done consistently.
quote marks added. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): Y - now fixed Fish+Karate 09:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's worth mentioning Alan Tudyk (in the lead role), Corey Reynolds, and Alice Wetterlund, among others, have been cast to star in the pilot on Syfy ([4]), and that Chris Sheridan (writer) adapted the comic for this, although I appreciate this has happened a while after you submitted this article to GAN.

I need to investigate this before I add it. Shouldn't take more than a couple days. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
b (focused): Y
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: Y - ok Fish+Karate 09:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why not include reviews from Comicosity ([5]), Geeks of Doom ([6]), Bloody Disgusting ([7]), Bam Smack Pow ([8]) and so on? Also, all the reviews and reception discussed appear to be about the first two books in the series, is there anything on the remaining books?

I'll look into those. I'll see what I can find on the later series, but most of the time any beyond the first six months of a comic is limited to repetitive praise. Critical reviewers move on to other works.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: Y
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): Y
File:Resident Alien 1 partial cover.png - the fair use sections for NFCC#1 and NFCC#2 are marked "n/a", these need to be completed.

Fixed. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine now, thank you. Fish+Karate 13:35, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
b (appropriate use with suitable captions): Y
Overall:
Pass/Fail: ✓ Pass
Nothing major, on the whole a well-written article. Awaiting responses/fixes. Fish+Karate 11:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to look this over. I hope to complete the table and expand the reception section by tomorrow. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Argento Surfer: In that case I'll hold off on passing the article until that's done but it's already basically passed, please ping me once the additions are made. Might not be able to get back to you til Monday now, though. Fish+Karate 13:35, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Fish and karate: I've completed the publication table and expanded the reception and adaptation sections. Let me know if anything else needs to be revised. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
All done, article is a pass! Well done Argento Surfer. Fish+Karate 09:18, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unable

Why is Parkhouse unable to maintain the work pace for a monthly comic book series? 2600:8800:785:9400:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 07:06, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quality takes time? Argento Surfer (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]