Talk:Goats (webcomic)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2007) |
There is a lot to be expanded on in this article- from character bios, to information about locations, to storyline details.
Contents |
[edit] Structure
Is everyone happy with the rough structure that I've plotted out here? Please suggest any changes that you think are more effective, I am aware that the current structure is comprehensive but possibly unwieldy. Snipergirl 15:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- It's fine. This is naturally difficult to organize, what with the changes in the comic's format, etc. Your solution to the problem seems best. --Michael Kinyon 16:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fleen section
If the planned Fleen section is going to be brief, it might make more sense to put it over in Jonathan Rosenberg. If it is going to be comparable in length to Websnark, then it probably deserves its own article. I'd do either of these myself, but I'm not sure what's planned for the section. --Michael Kinyon 19:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm. Yeah, good point. I'll move it over to Jonathan Rosenberg, and start a new page on it as well. The "fleen" section would just be in regards to Jon starting it up, etc. The "fleen" page I guess would be more like "websnark". Snipergirl 03:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Micropayments
Under the business model heading there is this line "As a "pioneer" of sorts in the web-comics industry, Rosenberg once experimented with micropayments, and produced strong evidence that no business model involving them as a primary source of income could be feasible." Which seems to state the situation a little strongly. Rosenberg did one thing to experiment with micropayments and it didn't work. That hardly qualifies as "strong evidence that no business model" with micropayments could work. If anything it was "strong evidence" that micropayments aren't going to work for Goats. It doesn't really prove anything else. As such, I think I'm going to go ahead and edit that bit.71.217.233.41 (talk) 01:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Tone
I don't want to be the guy that says humor isn't allowed (I don't see why it shouldn't be), but in some cases it gets a little bit much, and truly keeps the article from being encyclopedic.
For example:
- "Staropramen: Arch-nemesis of the International League of Pedants. Poops a lot. Super-villain. "
I don't want the humor to leave the article, but can we at least have grammatically correct sentences?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 06:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

