Talk:The Transformers: Last Stand of the Wreckers

Deprod

I actually considered PRODing this as well (Special:Diff/939215651), but in my WP:BEFORE, I found good sources and decided against it. It can stand on its own, but there's WP:NORUSH to get there. WP:NBOOK is the relevant guideline, and criteria 1 is satisfied. Highlighted by publisher IDW as one of the premier stories they published (out of over 40). That one doesn't count towards GNG, but it illustrates the rationale. Independent sources: 5 critic reviews at Comic Book Roundup & IGN also highlighting this as the best Transformers story. -2pou (talk) 21:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

@2pou: Hmmm, the IGN entry is not bad and IGN is reliable, good find. 5 critic reviews sounds good though I'll note those are revies per issue, with 1st issue getting 2 reviews, issues 2-4 one each, and issue 5, none. Let's see what we end up with: all 5 reviews are to a site called "Comic Book Revolution", now offline. Here's a sample review of theirs. They are anonymous by 'William' or 'minimus-minor', except one review by 'Chad Nevett'. I am seriously not convinced they are better than 'user reviews', except they are published on a blog instead of in a comment field. Here's the one non-anonymous review by Chad Nevett: [1]. I guess this really boils down to whether we can consider the "Comic Book Revolution" website reliable. Here's their about us page: [2]. It started at least in 1998 ([3]), and I think disappeared around 2016, through it might have not been updated for a while. It seems to have been run by one person at first, then by a small group, but does it make it better than a web-fanzine? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:44, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@Piotrus: It looks like you are mixing up a couple things there between Comic Book Resources (now CBR) and Comic Book Revolution. The Chad Nevett review is actually from Comic Book Resources, so that is an additional independent source if you lump all Revolution reviews to a single independent source (and regardless of whether Revolution is reliable or not). Note that this review is from before what some consider a 2016 downward spiral, from the time they were winning several awards for coverage. Two is enough for me, but there is also ComicsAlliance coverage here (another award-winning comics journalism winner--and in that time frame), among others. (I sometimes find Wikipedia article titles also adversely affect the BEFORE process.) -2pou (talk) 19:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

@2pou: Ah, good catch. Well, given the reviews, I think we managed to prove the notability of this. Thanks for rescuing this one! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

 -2pou (talk) 06:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)