Talk:Ramba (comics)

Image

Resolved

 – New image in infobox and main image moved further into article. -- Banjeboi 18:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

You can't have an image of that size or of that level of violence/sexual explicitness on a wikipedia page for obvious reasons. I've hence removed it. If you want an image use a front page or some other appropriate image do not revert the image breaches guidelines. --222.154.160.14 (talk) 07:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

The image size is not the problem, the template display size is the problem. Fix the template. Reverting your edit. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 11:06, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Size is a side issue, wikipedia may not be censored but that doesn't mean that the possible offensiveness is not taken into accout when selecting images. Policy: "Words and images that would be considered offensive, profane, or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if their omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternatives are available."[[1]] It is my belief that a cover is the encyclopedic standard for the main image (or main character possible)and therefore the above image is nonessential. If you want an example of content I'm sure it would be acceptable for a reduced version to be placed lower down the page. --222.154.160.14 (talk) 04:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Since I cannot assume good faith about you as a Single-purpose account, I have put this up for a third opinion. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 04:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with 222.154.160.14. While "obvious reasons" aren't really obvious to me, it does make sense that a cover is sufficient to represent the style. The article makes it clear that the material is violent. We don't need to witness a murder. HalJor (talk) 05:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps, instead of simply removing an image that does make the article more "informative, relevant, or accurate", you could provide an image that is an "equally suitable alternative"? If not, then this image may be the best one we have. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:16, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Agree with 222.154.160.14, a cover image or single frame is sufficient for an encyclopedia. Lumos3 (talk) 09:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

If a better image can be found add it, but don't just remove a whole infobox. However, the image should properly reflect the content and style of the cartoon - which I guess this one does. I that respect, as Satyr says, does make the article more "informative, relevant, or accurate". Paul B (talk) 10:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it's telling and disturbing that – despite the fact that the scene in question includes several murders of naked and semi-naked men – the image included here ends with a gruesome image of a naked, spread-eagled female corpse. I'm in favor of a single panel or a less hideous (some might say misogynist) page. Perhaps this one? Scartol • Tok 11:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't find the cartoon deaths of naked women any more or less disturbing than the cartoon deaths of naked men. That the cartoon is built around a pornography of violence is clearly central to it. Your own argument seems to imply a double standard: women shooting men is acceptable, but women shhoting women may be "misogynistic". Paul B (talk) 12:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipeida is something "that anyone can edit." If editors don't like the current image then the solution is really very simple - upload a new one and use that instead. Until that happens, I have to agree with SatyrTN - this image is the best (only) one we have.

Cheers,  This flag once was red  19:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. I don't support removing the image but I have a suggestion that may help. The current 8 frame image is too small as is for the infobox and, arguably, overwhelms the prose in the lede. I suggest sending it to image lab to pull out and improve - quality-wise - the image of the protagonist firing the gun (in comic-book style). Use that for the infobox and use the full image further down so the reader has to actually get down to it. -- Banjeboi 03:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Per request the image lab has been asked to attempt this. -- Banjeboi 10:51, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

• Update. new image installed. -- Banjeboi 00:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for being so pro-active - the cropped image is great, and I think the article benefits from your change. Cheers,  This flag once was red  00:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thank you! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk)

You're very welcome. -- Banjeboi 18:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Possible copyvio

The plot summaries section has a significant overlap with what Google Books will show me of European comics in English translation: a descriptive sourcebook By Randall William Scott. I'm deleting the whole section pending clarification. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 21:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Parts were derived from the source, and reworded to be Wikilike, but it is against WP:AGF to shoot first and ask later. Reverting, you can discuss it here. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 09:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Copyright violations: If some, but not all, of the content of a page appears to be a copyright infringement, then the infringing content should be removed, and a note to that effect should be made on the discussion page, along with the original source, if known. If the copyright holder's permission is later obtained, the text may be restored. Which part of that are you objecting to? Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 17:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

My contention is that what I can see of the book is essentially identical with the text I removed. Five lines on #1 are the same with the exception of "some fun" for "sex"; five lines on #6 are word-for-word identical; five lines on #8 are identical with the exception of "a session" for "to relax afterwards"; five lines on #10 are identical with the addition of "not just any classmate but one". This is far too close, unless you are the copyright holder. Are you? If not, please be more careful in future. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ramba (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070807071501/http://www.lib.msu.edu:80/comics/rri/rrri/ram.htm to http://www.lib.msu.edu/comics/rri/rrri/ram.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:31, 23 February 2016 (UTC)