Talk:X (Dark Horse Comics)

Comics 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.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

The "Plot" section

I'm going to start slimming this down pretty drastically if it remains that long, but would prefer somebody do it who has read this more recently than I. The current section goes beyond an encyclopedic article, and really needs to be pruned. Gekedo 15:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is some editing taking place on the section but it is more re-arranging the deckchiars on the Titanic and a vigorous pruning is required. If you are enthusiastic another related entry that needs some serious work is Ghost (Dark Horse comics). I don't really feel that I know enough to give either the heavy editting they need. (Emperor 16:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

This is proving more difficult to condense than I had imagined, mainly because of the density of plot and intertwining nature of the mystery surrounding X throughout the series. I will make a few more attempts at paring this down, but I would like some suggestions as well.Writersblock81 04:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone in and edited the article a bit more, specifically the summary/discussion portion of the article. I would like some input on how it appears now. That is, does it still seem too long? Too detailed? Confusing? Let me know and I will work on it. (Writersblock81 (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC))[reply]

The article is very rambly and the sentence structure and grammar is very awkward. I don't know anything about this series other than Steven Grant wrote it, so I won't make any attempt to clean it up personally. If someone is a fan of this series, however, I strongly recommend cleaning it up.64.222.94.132 (talk) 17:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]