Talk:American Splendor

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cleveland This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Cleveland, the scope of which includes Cleveland and the Greater Cleveland Area. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.ClevelandWikipedia:WikiProject ClevelandTemplate:WikiProject ClevelandCleveland articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter. Comics: DC Comics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by DC Comics work group. United States: Ohio Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Low-importance).

Ok I've finished the table showing the list of all AS issues. This table is important because it shows the continuity of AS despite the gaps between issues and the different publishers. I've made up some numbers for the unnumbered Dark Horse issues, and then continued the numbering to include the recent DC comics issues. So the Sep 2008 issue is actually the 39th issue of AS. There are a number of gaps in the table because i'm missing some issues. Please fill in if you know the answers! Simon Clarke (talk) 05:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made some major revisions to this article. First, I divided it into further sections - Origins, Themes, Artists, Publication History etc. In the previous version of the article all these were mixed in together in one section called Overview, and I think it's clearer my way. I've also written a bit more in each of these sections and put references in, especially on the Origins of AS. In fact, I've cleared up a lot of the lack of references. Enough to remove the box at the top saying there's not enough refs? Basically, all the info, other than the refs i've given, are from issues of the comic itself. Enough to keep this article in B-Class i hope. The other thing i'm going to do is complete the table of issues I've started. Simon Simon Clarke (talk) 04:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this should be merged w/ Harvey Pekar and redirected there. Brodo 05:39, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I was thinking the opposite -- putting the movie and the comic on the same page isn't fair, as the movie contains adaptation of multiple works of Pekar, including Our Cancer Year. --Jacqui M Schedler 02:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, splitting the film from the comic makes sense as they are definitely distinct entities.

Dancarney 10:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Article created, just copied all the text into a new article, but I'll wikify it. Not sure what to do with the text that remains on this page yet. --duncan 18:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pegship added a tag to the stage section, suggesting that we discuss splitting it off into another article. I'd say no - just because there's a pretty small amount of information available on those three productions, and there's unlikely to ever be any more information other than a few reviews in old newspapers. And it might be a little misleading to have an article called "American Splendor (play)" that really describes three different independently written adaptations.

Also, there was an error - the actual first production was left out. I've added it. [whoops, looks like I made an anonymous edit by mistake, but that was me] ←Hob 02:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense to keep all topics on American Splendor together. In reality it is easier to find under one article and there is really not that much information to go through.

This article was plainly inaccurate in some places and I changed that--Pekar was doing bio as well as autobio very early on so it's not fair to say this was outside his previous scope. I removed the parentheses around the non-Crumb artists because their contributions *WERE* important, not merely parenthical. Pekar appeared on Letterman SEVERAL times after the initial fight, so I've revised that. I've also corrected the bit that suggests he was self-published up until the last issue of the regular series (incorrect) and appended a bit about him losing thousands on his work to a sentence that suggests he was actually making some kind of calculated business move and not just losing his shirt to put out a comic. Thoughts?