Talk:Greg (cartoonist)

Requested move

In the hope that this move is uncontroversial, and there be consensus that this move makes the most sense, this is the proposal. As Michel Regnier is significantly more known by his pen name Greg than his given name, placing his article under the famous pseudonym and keeping his real name as a redirect feels like following established wikipedia suit. In preparation for this, the previous occupant of Greg (comics), a less known superhero, has since travelled to Greg (Marvel Comics), but the remnant redirect will, as I understand it, cause this move to be within the admin scope of actions. All for or against, please be heard.—MURGH ^disc. 22:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Relevant discussion at User talk:Fram#A suggested move and Talk:Greg (Marvel Comics) —MURGH ^disc. 15:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

As I have said on the previous discussion, Support. Fram 15:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

• Neutral I support the idea of moving to the well known pseudonym but I just don't like the title Greg (comics). Unless you are specifically aware of Greg, that title seems confusing as to what it is about. How about Greg (comics writer)? 205.157.110.11 22:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. Well, strictly speaking, he isn't just a comics writer.. Consider a user in direct search of Greg would initially arrive at the disambiguation page, to see Greg (comics) pseudonym of M.R. at any rate, but a somewhat experienced wikipedian might be used to this convention of a denominator for someone notable from the world/industry of comics (as with Morris (comics), Will (comics), Mike McMahon (comics), Bruce Jones (comics)..) There are quite a few articles where (cartoonist) has been applied, but in most cases incorrectly (at least I feel this should be limited to political satirists and others who work with the 1 panel medium). This is no doubt a bigger consensus dance for another day ;)
    There are the odd uses of (comic book creator) but at that point I think it abandons the simplicity of a unifying indicator, and would probably not be so precise in many cases. So unless everybody get their own private detailed custom tag and there never be style conformity, I really feel (comics) is the best route.
    —MURGH ^disc. 05:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Reply: the naming conventions guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics) says "the agreed general disambiguation phrase used for articles related to comic books, graphic novels, comic strips, and comics creators is "(comics)"." So this proposal is just following the guideline. Fram 06:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
    • • Comment Admittedly, I'm still not a fan of the (comics) disambiguation. I was never much of a comic book guy so it is probably par for the course that my first thought when I hear the phrase "comics" is to think of the plural of "comic" and to picture a room of Jerry Seinfield, Bill Cosby, George Carlin, and Whoopi Goldberg. 205.157.110.11 03:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
    • That's nice and firm. Is this to say I ought to have placed the RM in the Uncontroversial section, rather than the Other? :( MURGH ^disc. 23:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

PAGE MOVED, per above discussion. -GTBacchus^(talk) 05:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)