Talk:Belgian comics

Do we need a separated article for Belgian comics?

This page is a fresh duplicate of theFranco-Belgian comicsandList of comic creators.It's in contradiction with the principles behind the combinated Franco-Belgian comics pages. This article should be merged to theFranco-Belgian comicsarticle.Lvr14:03, 25 October 2005 (UTC)Lvr12:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Lvr,

What I suggest is to delete all Franco-Belgian comic artists from the page and give a link to the main article:Franco-Belgian comics.However, not all Belgian comic artists have connections with France, especially Flemish comic artists. Therefore there is a need for this page, though it's still very underdeveloped. Perhaps we could make here a short introductory page about Belgian comics, referring to the differences between Belgian comics (Flemish comics, Walloon/Brussels' comics, Franco-Belgian comics, other cooperation), each different type linked to the main page.Mjolnir1984.18:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I moved this discussion from the afd page and requested for a merge.

I have no doubt that you plan to add valuable info. However I really think that France and Belgium have a really tight comics history, even for Flemish authors.

• Morris (comics):born inKortrijkhas work mainly in French,Willy Vandersteenhas worked for a little while forHergé.
• Nowadays, if you look at "contemporary" productions, there are not real frontier between Flemish authors, French speaking Belgian authors and French authors (like withFréon (Publisher)),
• Regarding comics publishing houses, most belgian comics (Flemish and French speaking) are published by common publishing houses that are either French or Belgian (Dupuis,Dargaud)
• ...

I don't deny (and it should be stupid to) that they are differences between these 4 regions, but I think that the common part is bigger that theses differences. Hence I suggest you to contribute to theFranco-Belgian comicspage with your material, so we could hope to have the "perfect" aericle.

Lvr12:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree and I disagree. There are quite some differences between the regions. The fact that there was cooperation between some Flemish authors and French comics is imo not enough to speak only aboutFranco-Belgian comics. This gives not only the impression that all comics are in the French language (1), but thatallthese comics are linked to France (2). A good example is Jef Nys who made the second most popular comic in Flanders (1st is Suske en Wiske). Another good example is Merho with Kiekeboe, another popular Flemish comic. (There are a lot more examples). These authors have no connection to France (or Wallonia). Furthermore Vandersteen main work was in Flemish (Dutch) for Flanders. I still think the best thing is to make a main page "Belgian comics" that shortly introduces the reader with 1. Flemish comics, 2. Franco-Belgian comics, 3.Other and then links the reader to the main articles.

Mjolnir198419:35, 26 October 2005

The way I see it is that the history and nature of French and Belgian comics are intertwined to the point of singularity. The title "Franco-Belgian" is I'd say the standard way of naming such things, as inGreco-Roman wrestling,Sino-Japanese war,etc. I'm sure there are plenty of comics on either side that aren't exposed on the other. Perhaps a section on Flemish comics could be introduced.Mikkel05:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

As proposed byMikkel,I think you should clarify theFranco-Belgian comicspage and clearly state you viewpoint. If you think that Flemish comics have a real singularity against the rest of Belgium, you may consider to create a specificFlemish comicspage. Again, I think that the best is a single page.

Now you do as you want, since Wikipedia is a free place. Beaware that duplication of information has often lead to conflicts and to disinformation like with the pagesComicsvsComic books,for which theWP:CMChad to struggle a lot (and still have) to keep a consistent and coherent content.Lvr11:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

I utterly agree withLvrandMikkel.This page should be merged withFranco-Belgian comics.Perhaps one reason more, the Franco-Belgian comics is an artistic movement which is defined more by a particular style (opposed to the American style) than by any precise greographical reference. This is the reason why some Swiss or Italians are often categorized as Franco-Belgians. I have begun the merging process and added most of the data from this page into theFranco-Belgian comicsarticle and related lists. Another remark: It seems many Flemings are intending to create an independent Flemish culture: a Flemish history, a Flemish painting, a Flemish music, etc... Those things exist but usually do not correspond to Flanders as it is defined now (fromDe PannetoMaasmechelen) but as it used to be (fromLilletoUtrechtand fromNamurtoCalais,i.e. the historicalLow Countriesbefore the independence of theUnited Provincesand theSouthern Netherlandsafterwards). And this historical region is not defined by the language as it is now but by a common economy, culture and political system of free cities and provinces. It seems to me trying to coin a name like Flermish comics pertains to the same kind of attitude.Vb14:53, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't oppose a merging, but I disagree with your remark. My intention was not to create an independent culture. I agree that "Franco-Belgian" refers to a style. My intention however was to create a page about "Belgian comics" so that people could easely find Belgian authors and their comics on Wikipedia and so that people could find when these authors/comics started, where they started, what is typical about it (e.g. it uses the Franco-Belgian style), etc. Something which the merge will not provide imo.

The fact that it was divided by region was in such case nothing more than logical (and not ideological).Mjolnir1984,12:33, 29 oktober 2005 (UTC)

I got myself informed by some communication science literature of my university. Flemish comics are considered as part of a wider European (+/- Franco-belgian) style, but are dealt with seperately because they developed their own characteristics, had their own evolution, etc.Mjolnir1984,20:28, 29 oktober 2005 (UTC)

I was not meaning this personally. I simply observe a common trend in Flanders and that this trend is being mirrored on WP. You are right about regional characteristics of comics but I think (as pointed out above) that one could mention those characteristics on the page Franco-Belgian comics. This would be much more fruitful.Vb09:44, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Merge withFranco-Belgian comics

The are various discussions about whether Belgian should have a separated page for comics. Most opinions convert to saying that it doesn't, but that the Flemish part of Belgium should deserve more attention. Therefore i'm trying to retrieve usefull information to develop such a section the FBC article. Any help is appreciated. Feel free to contributehere.I have already added the text from this page.Lvr09:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

"non-PC" =?

I don't understand this abbreviation. Can someone explain it, or "un-abbreviate" it?Lvr09:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that's supposed to mean non-Politically Correct.Mikkel14:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Completely new version of article

Since the merge discussion has been stale for about a year, and as I felt that Belgian comics as a separate issue do merit an article (since they have been treated separately by books, musea,... as well, though of course they have often been treated together with the French comics also), and because the current article was not to my taste and unsourced anyway, I have created a completely new article from scratch to replace the current one and end the merge discussion. Before I am overly bold though, I would like some feedbavck, thoughts, support or opposition (here) about it. The article can be found here:User talk:Fram/Sandbox.Of course it needs a lot of work still (even though it is sourced, it will no doubt be biased to my point of view), more sources, fact checking, expansion (and trimming of existing sections to avoid it becoming too long),... but that is normal of course. I have dropped much of the info of the current article, if there are aspects you feel should be included, please do so (but if possible sourced!), either in my sandbox or after the page is moved here (assuming most people won't object). Without objections, I'll move it here in a few weeks.Fram15:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Flanders/Brussels/Wallonia

"In 1980 there were about 300 Belgians listed as comic producers. The majority of them were living in Brussels and Wallonia, with just 50 of them living in Flanders"

Why are Brussels and Wallonia lumped together in this tally? Brussels is bilingual (and, for that matter, is geographically located in Flanders). They are in fact three separate entities and should be treated as such.Krikke15:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, because most Brussels' (Brusselois?) authors worked in French for the Walloon magazines or newspapers. Anyway, in my new version of the article (see section above), which will replace the original one very shortly, this is changed to a quote of 700 creators in Belgium, without regional division.Fram19:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Fram:Bruxellois;-)Lvr09:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

New version

As announced above, I'll replace the current page with the one from my sandbox now. Feel free to edit of course, and please reintroduce anything from the old page you feel is necessary (if possible, sourced please!).Fram18:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Still asking for a merge withFranco-Belgian comics

Thank you very much toFramfor this wonderful article. I read it with real pleasure. However I don't understand why call it Belgian comics. As the main author of this article you have the right to do so. However when I compare withFranco-Belgian comicsI wonder what is in the Franco-Belgian comics article to be said what is not already included in this article. Shouldn't we merge both articles. The name may be the one you prefer and why not Belgian comics but I think we should have one and only article for the topic! Whatever the name.Vb09:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one to claim that!Lvr09:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I've replied atTalk:Franco-Belgian comics.Fram09:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given atWikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria.For further details please contactthe Comics WikiProject.Comics-awb(talk)15:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Done - it needs a few images to illustrate the points. (Emperor(talk)19:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC))

OK that is looking better so it is an easy B and should be straightforward to push on towards GA> (Emperor(talk)01:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC))

GA Review

This review istranscludedfromTalk:Belgian comics/GA1.The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Will start reviewing shortly. Cheers,Ricardiana(talk)22:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Criterion 1: well-written

Unfortunately, I see many problems here. All sections have many problematic sentences. The lead, to take just one section, is filled with errors:

• "Belgian comics are a distinct subgroup in the comics history, and played a major role in the development of European comics,[1] alongside with France with who they share a large common history." --Should be "with whom", but in any case this sentence is clogged with clauses. Also, you seem to be hedging here: are the comics part of the larger Franco-Belgian tradition, or not? If there is controversy regarding this pointin your source material,then it should be included in the article and mentioned briefly in the lead.
• "While the comics in the two major language groups and regions of Belgium (Flanders with the Dutch language and Wallonia with French) have each clearly distinct characteristics, they are constantly influencing one another, and meeting each other in Brussels and in the bilingual publication tradition the major editors have" -- another overly-long sentence. "Have each clearly distinct" should be "each have." Also, I'm not clear on what "meeting each other in Brussels" means.

There are a number of other problem sentences throughout the article; for example: "Meanwhile, many artists who would later become famous debuted on a small scale in the Walloon newspapers: Peyo, Greg, Albert Uderzo, René Goscinny,..." which does not even finish but just breaks off.

I suggest asking for a peer review or for someone to copy-edit the article before nominating it again.

Criterion 2: factually accurate and verifiable

Big problem here: You haven't included full bibliographic information for your sources. I can see that you cite, for example, "De Laet, Zevende Kunst Voorbij, p. 14" in note 7, but when was Zevende Kunst Voorbij written, and what is the full name of the author, and the name of the publisher, and ISBN or OCLC number? You should start a "Bibliography" or "References" section and include this info. SeeEmily Dickinsonfor an example of what this would look like.

Criterion 3: broad in its coverage, and Criterion 4: neutral

The article really side-steps a major issue that's been debated on the talk page, which is: why are Belgian comics being treated separately when most scholarship treats them as part of the Franco-Belgian tradition? I understand that there may indeed be cogent reasons why the Belgian tradition is different,butthose reasons are irrelevantunlessthey arein your source materials.Otherwise you are doing original research, which is not allowed. The one source you have that seems to argue this is a link that no longer works. Even if, however, you add sources that agree that Belgian comics are their own distinct tradition, you still need to mention and take into account the many sources that say the opposite. On that note, I really commend the article's use of sources in languages other than English. However, there are some good sources in English that you do not use. I turned up quite a few by typing "Belgian comics" into Google Books. Many of them are quite recent, too - one is from just last year. --I'm not saying that you have to use every source under the sun, but the article's heavy reliance on a few sources whose information is not fully given and the non-addressal of a controversial point on which you differ from most current scholarship are all big problems.

Criterion 5: stable

OK here.

Criterion 6: illustrated, if possible, by images

OK here.

Verdict

I think that the article is a fail at this point, but I am going to put it on hold for a week to give you a chance to address these concerns, especially since you've had to wait so long for a review.Ricardiana(talk)23:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's been a week, and the only change that's been made is that the references have been given in full. All changes to the writing were done by me, and I didn't even begin to cover what needs to be done. The larger issues were untouched. The article fails, I'm afraid.Ricardiana(talk)23:58, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link onBelgian comics.Please take a moment to reviewmy edit.If necessary, add{{cbignore}}after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add{{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/20081012221136/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21444265-7583,00.htmltohttp://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21444265-7583,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set thecheckedparameter below totrueto let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018,"External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot.No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verificationusing the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permissionto delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfCbefore doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online}08:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)