Talk:Don Murphy

2011-12-03T08:48:25Z

108.80.48.29:

I corrected the bit about Moore; adaptations still happen, and he won't prevent them because comics are a collaborative medium and it's not his say, but he refuses to accept any money for them. I recommend that the last, made-up bit should be removed, both for the inaccuracy and because I think it belabors the joke; we'd have a better, funnier article without it. The disambig makes me smile. [[User:Chip|Chip]] 04:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

:He actually ''is'' disallowing adaptions of all the work he has full copyright control over. Much of his work is co-owned with Marvel or DC, or just the artist he was collaborating with under terms such that he can't block the sale of rights from being sold. So he's blocking what he can, and refusing to take money for (and disavowing) the rest.
:The article originally had a note to that effect, but I worried that the level of detail into Alan Moore's business dealings was excessive for an article on Don Murphy. (Really, I can only justify the long lawsuit footnote because the entirely COINCIDENTAL fact that it was ''Don'' on the DVD commentary cheerily affirming the damningly circumstantial production timeline.) I will try to either add it in, or if that doesn't work render the Moore statement into a more general 'left hollywood' that encompasses both states of affairs.
:The Majin Zarak disambig makes me smile too, but I wish I hadn't forgotten the word 'the.' You're probably right about the Ewok joke- it's a holdover from the first draft of the article when I though it was just going to be a 'what a jerk!' joke- before I started reading and realized that the man actually ''has'' left a trail of destruction, chaos and lawsuits in his wake on virtually ever project he's ever been attached to. (Sadly that that poitn it meant I had to be ''accurate'' and fact-checking and researching takes much longer.)
:I'm gonna run an errand- so I'll take a look at article revisions in about 40 minutes. If you want to get in any edits without stepping on my toes before then, now's the chance. ;) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 04:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

::Ah, good to know. I figure what I changed the Moore line to is as succinct and accurate as we can get (I mostly just want to fend off any questions about V For Vendetta and the like), but I'm not particularly attached to it.[[User:Chip|Chip]] 04:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Elaborately cited ''factual'' articles? Going back to templates used on the page and making style tweaks- then stopping to write documentation on them complete with citations, proper interwiki linking and notes on forward-computability and helpful hidden comments for future editors?

This is the ''last time'' I'm taking Adderall before starting an article. From now on I'm only editing the wiki while I'm off my meds! -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 08:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

== Picture ==

So... is there a ''replacement'' image Don Murphy to go along with the removal of the article's main picture?

I realize this is part of a "TF in pop culture" purge, but that wasn't the main image for pop value-- it was the main image because there ''literally'' isn't any other picture of Don Murphy online, so a reasonably representative caricature was substituted, as is in line with Wikipedia's general source-value cascade for biographical pictures.

I object to its removal as a pop-culture purge, because it's not here as pop culture. If you wish to remove it- scrounds another picture. I'm sure Murphy's reared his ugly head at a 'con somewhere. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 08:38, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

:Just because we don't a legal or appropriate picture on hand means we should just use any picture
::And yet, those Marvel Age Bullpen editor caricature would be probably ''would'' be considered an acceptable main image if no photo was available, where does the line lie?
:[...] and you would do well to remember that in light of your uploads of bootleg DVD and youtube screencaps of the movie.
::The moral authority of the speaker should not impede the moral imperative of the word.
:If there's not appropriate or legal pic around, then we just leave the article image-less.
Appropriate ''or'' legal? Why, by that standard the bootleg screencaps are gold, since you only need to meet one of the two criteria in order be considered wiki-ready! (Yes, I'm mocking your rhetorical gaffe because you completeltely ignored my point about wikipedia's availability-desirability cascade, where at some point, ''yes'', a caricature does becomes both a legitimate and desirable candidate as a bio picture, and then passively-aggressively compared this to bootleg pictures, then warned me that a logical argument can be completely invalidated by the source making it. I respond well to none of those things. Fortunately the issue is moot.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 09:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
:Thank you for the link mysterious stanger! --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 08:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

:(Giggle) http://www.latinoreview.com/news.php?id=1502

::I'd have uploaded it myself, but I'm just an IP address. (Rides off into sunset)

:::Then register an account! --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 09:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
::Truly this image possesses that rare quality the Buddhist monks call "Bwehehehehehehe!" -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 09:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Don Murphy