Talk:Religious Studies 101: A Handful of Thorns

From GargWiki
Revision as of 07:11, 27 April 2016 by Greg Bishansky (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Should we give the Longinus Spear and the Crown of Thorns CiT entries? --GregX 22:52, 25 August 2009 (CDT)

Was the canonicity of this story discussed at all at the Gathering? I'm just wondering if making articles based on it would be like making articles for Thomeheb and Brigadoon. -- Demonskrye 07:39, 31 August 2009 (CDT)
The canonicity of the Radio Play was discussed and Greg said it was not canon at all. He did say he MIGHT use the Spear and Crown down the road, but frankly, he has also said he would get to everything eventually. So without an Ask Greg reference, I'm not sure what the point of making these pages would be. What would they say? They couldn't refer to a non-canon radio play for information afterall. I guess they just barely qualify as CIT in my mind. I dunno. -- Matt 09:24, 31 August 2009 (CDT)
I think that Matt's right - though I'd have enjoyed writing a "Real-world Background" article for the Spear of Longinus. --merlyn
Well, that's the funny thing; if we did make an article for the spear or crown all we could put in the article would be a section of Real World Background and I guess a reference to the non-canon radio play. And that doesn't really merit a page in my book. -- Matt 21:18, 31 August 2009 (CDT)
Just to play devil's advocate for a moment, we do have categories for Little Anton and LaVonne and E--- P-- and "The Flashback of Notre Dame" and The Spectacular Spider-Man, so where exactly is the dividing line between what is appropriate non-canon or out of universe material to cover and what is not? So far we have articles on some apocryphal characters from some apocryphal stories. Being written by Greg, I don't think this particular radio play script is any more apocryphal than a Disney Adventures comic or a Marvel Gargoyles comic or an episode of TGC. I'm not entirely convinced that these artifacts should have their own articles, but I think we should use this as an opportunity to think about our policies for what should and should not be in the wiki so that everyone is clear on them. -- Demonskrye 08:08, 1 September 2009 (CDT)
I have a compromise for this. We can have sections in THIS entry for the Spear of Destiny and the Crown of Thorns. Just make them subsections of the Religious Studies 101: A Handful of Thorns entry. --GregX 10:26, 1 September 2009 (CDT)

Script Posting

Can we put the script for this episode onto the site, like those for the Radio Play versions of "Hunter's Moon Part Three" and "The Reckoning"? I'd like to read it (especially with a cast this wide). -- merlyn

I'll start posting the play at ASK GREG later this week.--Gweisman 02:28, 31 August 2009 (CDT)
Thanks, Greg! I'm looking forward to it. (Still figuring out how to enter these "talk" posts.) -- merlyn

Picture

Would anyone mind if I posted this http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v661/gregx/SpearofDestiny.jpg on the page? I know we normally don't use fanart. But, it's a pretty accurate depiction of the scene (and what Demona said she was going to do to Elisa), and it was drawn by Karine, who is officially connected to the property via her comic book work? -- GregX 21:01, 19 October 2011 (PDT)

It is a cool picture. I don't have a problem with it being posted as long as it is made very clear in the caption that it is fan art and not canon. Frankly, I don't much have a problem with any fan art as long as it is identified as such and generally found on non-canon pages. -- Matt 06:19, 20 October 2011 (PDT)
Just for the sake of comparison, I can only think of the sketch of Demona that Vashkoda colored in that's currently included on the page for The Last. Like Matt was suggesting, the sketch is in a non-canon article (really its CIT, but still not actual Canon) and it has a rather descriptive caption saying that its not official. So with with a similar train of thought, I'm ok with Karine's pic as well :) --Pheon 08:19, 20 October 2011 (PDT)

Character Entries

So, since characters from apocrypha have character entries, would you object to giving the Spectacular Spider-Man cast their own character entries on GargWiki. Obviously we'd limit it to characters who appeared in the Radio Play. For example, Sandman and Rhino who don't appear and aren't even mentioned woudn't get them, and we'd keep the History on each page to the events and role they played in the Radio Play. The Transformers, for example, once had a non-canon crossover with the Avengers (non-canon for both universes), and the tfwiki still gave those characters wiki entries. For example: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Doctor_Doom so, thoughts? --GregX 07:59, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

I would strongly object to characters from another universe getting their own entries here. If you want to mention them specifically, do it on the Spectacular Spider-Man page and/or modify them on the Spec. Spider-Man wiki. Handful of Thorns is great and bears mentioning (and its own page) for various reasons (Gargoyles crossover written by Greg, presented at the Gathering and performed by numerous Gargoyles voice talent) but it obviously isn't canon and in that regard doesn't warrant what you are suggesting. If you want to mention, say, Demona's actions in the work in the Apocryphal part of her entry, I see no problem with that. And if, as I mentioned, you want to modify the Spec. Spider-Man page, that seems fine too. But giving non-canon, non-universe characters their own pages here just doesn't make any sense to me. --Matt 10:27, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
So, should we start deleting Gong Li, Dr. Nexus, etc? They're non-canon and non-universe. I know we're not the TFWiki, but I was looking at that as a model for this. The Marvel characters are clearly not canon in that universe either. Not trying to be snide at all, just wondering where the line is? What's the cut off? I mean, I strongly object to Dr. Nexus and Egon Pax being here on a personal level, but at the same time I understand why they're here and I would never advocate to have them removed. So, where should the line be? --GregX 10:45, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
I can see both ends of this argument, and both points are kinda valid. Perhaps this should be decided by a vote? Griffinwyrm7 10:53, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
I'm cool with that. Since the Radio Play exists, I think it's universe can count as Apocrypha now. And since I'd place Greg's Apocrypha higher than Disney's Apocrypha, I vote yea. --GregX 10:56, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

Gong Li, Dr. Nexus and Egon Pax are not canon, but they are directly connected to the Gargoyles Universe. They are not part of the canon universe, but they are published and released under the Gargoyles banner. Handful of Thorns, is not a published work. It is a fanfic crossover that happens to be written Greg. And while this makes it more worthwhile than the TGC or the Marvel comics, it doesn't make it canon, even Greg has said that. For me, this wiki is about canon and canon-in-training primarily. I would have no problem with Egon Pax's page being deleted, but I can also understand why some people feel like it should exist here. And I can see why it has more of a right to exist here than Vulture or Electro or whomever. It seems to me this is going back to the old GargWiki vs. GregWiki argument. And I'm not sure what relevance these character pages could have that couldn't be placed on the Handful of Thorns and Spec. Spider-Man pages. If you want a vote, that's fine. I think my vote is obvious. -- Matt 12:11, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

This idea isn't too disimiliar to your idea above about the Crown and Spear having their own pages except that, unlike the Crown and Spear, the Spider-Man characters have NO CHANCE of ever showing up in Gargoyles. But even with the Crown and Spear yoou decided to simply give them space on this page and that was, I think, the right way to go. I think if you want to do Spec. Spider-Man character bios, they should be here or on the Spec Spider-Man page. Besides, they already directly link to pages on other wikis that are far more informative than we could be here. If people are interested in those characters, they can follow the links there and the editors there can reference Handful of Thorns if they wish. -- Matt 12:37, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

Just a discussion, we'll see how this vote goes. And while I would agree that TFWiki is not the model we want to follow here (even though I think both wikis rock at what they set out to do), the idea intrigued me. And, like Chip, I see both sides and I definitely understand your point. Is there a Spec Spidey wikia? I know the wikipedia page we link to for these characters are very bare bones. Hmm. -GregX 13:38, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
The more I think about, the more I think that condensing all this apocryphal stuff to their "home pages" would be good. So Egon Pax wouldn't have his own article, but he'd have a section on the TGC page, the Medusa Device would not have its own page, but would have a section on the Marvel comics page and characters like Electro would not have their own page, but would have a section on the Spec. Spider-Man page. And I'd love to get rid of all the not-to-funny TGC "reviews". Just would be nice to streamline this site and focus on the canon. -- Matt 14:41, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
While my preference is for us to be as all-encompassing as possible, all my biases would love to toss out the TGC stuff, I do wonder if we should really go this route. This is me, for once, trying not to think of my own desires but what would objectively be best for the GargWiki as a whole. --GregX 14:50, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
Okay... so doing your best to set aside your personal desires and dislikes, how do you think giving Vulture or Electro a page on this site would make the GargWiki better? What could those pages add to the site that couldn't just be added to the existing pages? --Matt 14:58, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
I guess, for me, since it's part of Apocrypha introduced by Greg, and yes NOT canon, it would fall into the goal of being all encompassing. If it's very clearly labeled as apocrypha, I don't see the harm. Maybe there's always that outside chance of someone googling the Green Goblin and coming up on his entry and then checking out the rest of the site and becoming interested enough to buy a DVD. Unlikely, but there is always an outside chance. --GregX 15:03, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
And if we do this, I also wouldn't be opposed to giving Milo Thatch, Joshua Sweet, Mole, etc from Team Atlantis their own entries, as long as we mostly limit it to The Last. --GregX 15:08, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
Personally, I think Team Atlantis characters are a special case as Greg W. has specifically said that The Last is Canon in Training. On the other hand, he's repeatedly clarified that the radio play is in no way canon. So I think Milo has as much right to a character page as Nick Maza or Queen Mab. At the same time, I don't think Spidey or the Green Goblin should be treated any differently to Venus, Egon Pax or any other apocryphal character. Personally, I would not object to giving Doctor Octopus a page nor would I shed any tears over deleting Dr. Phobos' page. My main concern is that we apply whatever rules we decide on consistently.
Yeah, for me this comes down to one thing, do we want to be all-encompassing or not? Obviously there are also some disagreements over what all-encompassing is. But, while my bias would prefer to keep this to only things that have Greg Weisman's name on them, I think the GargWiki would be better served by being all-encompassing. --GregX 17:39, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

The problem with becoming all-encompassing is that we start to become less like GargWiki and more like Wikipedia. If Doc Ock gets a page, where do we draw the line? I think that in the interest of being focused and coherent and reasonable and consistent, we should only focus on Gargoyles material and stuff directly related or relevant to that material. We can have a page for Spectacular Spider-Man or Handful of Thorns because they are directly related in one way or another to our series. But putting up a page for Kraven or Milo Thatch just because they appear in works that are, at best, canon-in-training opens up a floodgate. Casablanca and Wizard of Oz and Bambi are all referenced in CANON. Should Sam and Toto and Thumper get their own pages? What about Karine's gargoyle character Kanthara. Karine has contributed canon work to the Gargoyles Universe, so shouldn't her non-canon character get a page? GregX has written a Gargoyles fanfic that is totally based on canon-in-training material, much of it is directly quoting Greg Weisman's Ask Greg responses, should his fanfic get a page? And certainly if Electro gets his own page then Egon Pax should too. I can't see how you can logically think that this site should be all encompassing and then turn around and say that Spider-Man characters are welcome, but TGC characters are not. Doing what you suggest is a Pandora's Box. And I feel strongly that it would upset the integrity of this site. It would make our GargWiki bizarre and unprofessional. We love Gargoyles. And this site is the fandom's expression of our love of the series. Can't we just stick to Gargoyles stuff? --Matt 17:52, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

I agree that we have to draw the line somewhere and that we should stick to Gargoyles stuff, be it canon, or CiT, or apocrypha. Otherwise, like you said, we'd end up with Bambi, Frankenstein, Star Wars, Star Trek, every Shakespearian character... and of course, Spectacular Spider-Man. DTaina 18:25, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
Seems to me that non-canon, non-universe, and all-encompassing are the key words here. TGC and the Marvel comics are non-canonical, but The Spectacular Spider-Man characters in "A Handful of Thorns" (and I would argue Team Atlantis characters beyond the realm of "The Last") are both non-canonical and not-universe. They would be unable to appear in any future Gargoyles story unless that story was *also* apocryphal (or fanfic). As for TGC, the Marvel Comics, and the remaining apocrypha, I figure that's where the all-encompassing aspect comes in -- Eg-n P-x and Little Anton (*shiver*) are most definitely non-canonical, but they do remain "Gargoyles" creations . . . which is where I would recommend drawing the line. But, in the efforts to be consistent throughout the GargWiki but remain all-encompassing of all-things-Gargoyles, if we end up cutting some of the TGC or Marvel Comics character pages (maybe moving whatever info and pics to the sparse-ish episode/issue pages), I'd be okay with that --Pheon 18:44, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

And including all things that have Greg Weisman's name on them is hardly better. You are basically talking about merging our wiki with the Young Justice wiki and expanding it to include everything else he has ever worked on. I love Greg and his work, but that is ludicrous. I mean, you seriously just want one big GREGWIKI, don't you? --Matt 17:57, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

Was the "GregWiki" comment necessary, Matt? DTaina 18:25, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
I get where you're coming from, but like I said earlier... the proposed line would be stuff that's mentioned inside the work. So as far as the Radio Play goes, Doc Ock would get a page but Sandman and Rhino would not. As far as The Last goes, Vinny gets a page but Audrey or that chick Claudia Christian played in the movie do not. At least that's my thinking. Karine's gargoyle character did not appear in any canon material, any CiT material, or any Apocrypha material that I know of. Ditto with the story I wrote. Anyway, that's my line of thinking. I think we have both made our points, for now I propose that we let the discussion sit here and see what others think. In any event, great discussion... one of the reasons why I love talking to you, Matt, is because you are just as passionate about this property as I am. Sometimes, and I mean this as a compliment, when you and I argue here, it's like when Greg Weisman and Frank Paur argued... with a mutual respect and knowledge that both want to make it better. For them, the show. For us, GargWiki. At least that's what I'd like to think, but when I submitted this very post, I got a notice saying that you edited it again, and that last sentence feels like you're making this debate much too personal for my liking. --GregX 18:03, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
Where did I say I wanted YOUNG JUSTICE characters or WITCH characters (aside from maybe Blunk since he was name-dropped in the Radio Play script). Point out where the comment is, point out where I mentioned anything from outside the Radio Play. Point it out or withdraw the comment. I eagerly await your response. --GregX 18:08, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

The tone I gave with the GregWiki comment was uncalled for and I apologize for that. But the fact remains that GregX said, "my bias would prefer to keep this to only things that have Greg Weisman's name on them". That to me implies that he does want a GregWiki. From giving Doc Ock a page it is a slippery slope for all the other Spec. Spider-Man characters and eventually YJ and WITCH and other characters and concepts as well. There is no line or limit. That is what irritates me. I don't want to see a site that we've all put a lot of work into become a total mess for no reason that anyone can spell out. Again, I'm sorry if what I'm saying sounds like personal attacks, but Greg, you are right that I am passionate about this and I know that you understand how hard it can be to remain objective in this circumstances. -- Matt 18:35, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

Apology accepted, Matt. Consider it forgiven and forgotten. What I meant was while my bias might want something, my goal is the same as yours, the best GargWiki we can get. I was simply raising the conversation so that we could all discuss what is and isn't appropriate and where the line is. I saw another wiki's standard and decided to see what everyone else thought. --GregX 18:49, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
Well, I imagine you have a pretty good idea about what I think, eh?  : ) To be honest, it is kinda fun to have some serious action on the "Recent Changes" page for the first time in a while (though I wonder if we should be concerned that it is all about Demona, Religious Studies and Satan!). -- Matt 18:56, 31 August 2012 (PDT)
No argument here. Nice to see some action. I still think we're far from complete, even as far as material released to us goes, not just whatever Greg might have planned. So still plenty of work to do. And as for your last point, LOL! Any points about Elisa or Angela we don't have? Someone not evil? In all seriousness, Todd's Satan entry is really cool. ;) --GregX 18:59, 31 August 2012 (PDT)

I feel that we should include all characters that have been featured in any officially published Gargoyles medium, even non-canon. We should include characters that Greg has indicated are canon-in-training to the Gargoyles universe (i.e. potential to be included in official canon stories). Spec Spidey characters are neither of these, because their official stories aren't Gargoyles and they can never appear in official Gargoyles stories. I honestly don't know about the Team Atlantis characters; didn't Greg say he would have to use some Captain Erzatz characters if he included the story in canon, or did I imagine that?

There's no Spec Spidey wiki that I know of, but the Marvel Animated Wiki has some good pages on it. -- Supermorff 03:01, 1 September 2012 (PDT)

Supermorff, JEB's 2007 Conjournal is the closest I can find about GregW potentially using Team Atlantis analogues during the SLG comic days --Pheon 12:03, 1 September 2012 (PDT)
That must have been what I was thinking of. So he'd still like to use the original characters if he can? I'm okay either way with including them or leaving them out. -- Supermorff 23:52, 3 September 2012 (PDT)