Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:35:48 +0200, nemesis 
> <nam### [at] nospam-gmailcom> wrote:
>>
>> The problem I see is that wikipedia simply lacks common sense.  Ok, so 
>> that's a encyclopedia thing.
> 
> Exactly. Encyclopedias are not about so called "common sense". They are 
> collections of verifiable facts, and as such must cite references to 
> said facts in order to maintain credibility.
> 
>  From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
> "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not 
> truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to 
> Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether 
> we think it is true."

What could be more verifiable than the work itself?

>> The fact that you have to source someone saying:
> [snipped list of perceived similarities]
>> rather than simply lookup such info in the works themselves -- pretty 
>> much a part of popular "inconscient collective" by now -- doesn't 
>> sound credible.
> 
> There is no such info in the works themselves. Nowhere in either movie 
> does anyone discuss - or even point out - the similarities of the two.

First:  I'm not comparing movies.  I'm comparing the movie The 
Incredibles with comic book Watchmen and comic heroes Fantastic Four. 
I'm not comparing their lame movies with Pixar's masterpiece.

Second:  it's not needed words, let alone in the movies itself, to 
realize similar plots, similar powers, similar names and similar 
uniforms.  How does one quote similar imagery?  It's just needed common 
sense.  Why shouldn't a link to an image of Fantastic Four hosted at 
wikipedia itself suffice as a "citation" in order to show the similarity 
between uniforms and super-powers?

>  From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
> "Editors should not make the mistake of thinking that if A is published 
> by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A 
> and B can be joined together in an article to reach conclusion C."
 >
>> Would the above newsgroups post serve as reference?  A blog entry?
> 
> They would be considered to be sources of poor credibility at best, and 
> even that is under the assumption that you start with a phrase like 
> "Some people have noted similarities...".

Exactly.  I don't think linking to blog posts by fans who know both 
works would gain much relevance.  They only allow it from the mouths of 
the creator or from cinema critics who don't know much about comics. 
Despite any evidence or even images.

>  From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
> "self-published media, whether books, newsletters, personal websites, 
> open wikis, blogs, Internet forum postings, tweets etc., are largely not 
> acceptable"

Indeed.

Post a reply to this message