Talk:Power Girl

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Popular Culture[edit]

I tried adding the following image and text. I really don't feel like edit warring about this.

Power Girl at the 2011 San Diego Comic-Con

References

  1. ^ "Power Girl".
  2. ^ Cosplay Diaries: Cara Nicole (AZ Power Girl) at Smallville Comic-Con
  3. ^ az power girl
  4. ^ Top Cosplay Girls To Follow On Twitter
  5. ^ Top 10 Characters Cosplay Girls Love to be!
  6. ^ 25 Hottest Cosplay Girls At Comic Con 2013

What do you think? --evrik (talk) 02:36, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources either aren't considered reliable by Wikipedia standards or don't say anything like what you're citing them for. See WP:IRS, particularly WP:UGC, and see WP:VERIFY. If you can cite a reliable source that says the above, then there's no problem (WP:CHALLENGE). DonQuixote (talk) 03:33, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Even if verified the blanket statement still reeks of WP:INDISCRIMINATE, merely being popular isn't enough. There are lots of popular cosplay characters.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 03:45, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not so, it speaks to the popularity of the character. --evrik (talk) 21:16, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It would if sources reflected this, but the sources you gave don't really show that. - Aoidh (talk) 00:52, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. The sources could at most be used to reference something like "Like many well-known superheroines, Power Girl is a popular cosplay character", which really just devolves "Many superheroines are popular cosplay characters" which isn't really useful info for this article. If you had a character of whom you could say "Despite her relative obscurity otherwise, so-and-so is a popular cosplay character" that might be worthwhile information. Herostratus (talk) 13:50, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Despite her relative obscurity otherwise, so-and-so is a popular cosplay character" I like it, but then someone will claim she's not obscure. In any case, I think the relationship to cosplay does deserve some mention. --evrik (talk) 19:00, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you can cite a reliable source that says that, then go right ahead. DonQuixote (talk) 19:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How about, "The design of the character's costume has made her a favorite in cosplay?" [1] --evrik (talk) 15:58, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm hearing no objection to the text above. --evrik (talk) 22:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Er...you should read the responses. You would need to cite a reliable source, to begin with. Two others have said it's not notable for inclusion. DonQuixote (talk) 22:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No one objected to the text from 12-27-2014. --evrik (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You would still need to cite a reliable source. That requirement doesn't change. DonQuixote (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Text aside. There is no reason the image can't be placed on the article. --evrik (talk) 20:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Images carry a lot of WP:WEIGHT, and with out the text there is no reason to give it any.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is pretty clear that the character is used in cosplay, and I would say makes her more popular than the comic book ever was. The images is relevant under popular culture. --evrik (talk) 21:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you need reliable sources to back up those assertions, otherwise its WP:OR.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Any of those could be a reliable source for the one sentence. --evrik (talk) 18:49, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As DonQuixote pointed out two years ago, either they are unreliable or do not verify the information that you are claiming. This discussion should have been closed long ago.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:57, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just coming back to this. I think we should take this to a neutral third party. --evrik (talk) 17:00, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Third and fourth parties have already weighed in. Concensus is against you, get over it.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:05, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can try, but I have to tell you that the name of the game is Citing Reliable Sources. If you can't start with a direct quote then you're not citing properly. If you're not citing properly then no one's going to support you. DonQuixote (talk) 17:58, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The few people who look at this page may be biased. Let's pick another forum. --evrik (talk) 18:23, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DROPTHESTICK.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and added it back in with eight references. Trim them if you like, but one or some of them should be enough to make the one sentence stick. --evrik (talk) 19:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Throwing things against the wall and seeing which one sticks isn't the proper way of doing this. As mentioned above, if you can't start with a direct quote, then it's not suitable for an encyclopaedia article. DonQuixote (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are eight references. Pick one. Otherwise stop being difficult. There is more than enough to document one line of text and a photo. --evrik (talk) 01:57, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you won't cite reliable sources properly (see WP:VERIFY), then you're the one being difficult. And whatever happened to getting a third opinion that you mentioned? If you continue to ignore policy, then you're just being a nuisance and you should drop the stick. DonQuixote (talk) 02:29, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Brian Childs (2011-05-11). "The Best of Power Girl Cosplay". uproxx. Retrieved 2016-05-28. The Power Girl costume is perhaps the most popular cosplay costume of super hero comic books. By that I don't mean that it is the most frequently worn costume. It is the most popular comic book costume for people to re-post, share and click on for reasons that remain a mystery to no one. --evrik (talk) 01:53, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Entry revision to include new black teenage Power Girl?[edit]

Last August, DC Comics announced that following the return of the original Power Girl, Kara Zor-L, to her own origin universe, she would bequeath the title to a new character, a former intern at her software company named Tanya Spears, who is African American and much younger. (See http://www.newsarama.com/21935-dc-comics-has-specific-plans-for-new-power-girl.html) This character has appeared since February of 2015 in DC's Teen Titans comic book. Can someone do the revision of the Power Girl page to reflect this? I would, but it will take more time than I have. Thanks! Matt G. Leger 00:32, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

  • I think this version of Power Girl should have her own page, considering the decades long history of the real Power Girl has already resulted in a vary long article and since the original Power Girl has already returned to being the "regular" Power Girl. 173.209.109.40 (talk) 18:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No creator info in Lead or Publication history sections: Who did what?[edit]

The Infobox lists four different creators for Power Girl, but neither the Lead section nor the Publication history section make any mention of them. This is wrong. Can we can a mention of them in both, and not just a mere mention, but a description in the PH section on which creator contributed which aspect to the character? Can anyone research info on how the character was created and (no pun intended) developed? Nightscream (talk) 21:57, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Power Girl. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apperance section[edit]

I feel like 5-6 paragraphs about her bust is excessive and a few times borderline redundant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.151.125 (talk) 04:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Power_Girl&oldid=1208311912"