Talk:Kevin and Kell/Archive 1

This page may be..

This page may be justly considered "way too long". - Fennec 19:25, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

This article is very impressive. An excellent summary of Kevin and Kell. - TGIF

Great summary of Kevin and Kell. - AbsalomDaak

Essentially an advertisement. Wetman 18:27, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

No more so than any of the other articles on webcomics or other, more commercial works (books, films, etc). nifboy 1:10 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Shouldn't come as a surprise as articles like this one are usually written by fans. detrius77 8:56 01 Jun 2007 (UTC)

The paragraph before Rabbit's Revenge should be after that section, otherwise George marries Danielle before ever meeting her. - Nat.

I was surprised to see the link http://herdthinners.pvxhost.com/ was deleted as spam. Kevin and Kell's main website is down at the moment and that is the only mirror working. For details, checks Lidesfarne's blog: http://harelink.biz/serendipity/index.php?/archives/54-TECHNICAL-DIFFICULTIES.html

I'm sorry I jumped into that conclusion. It was an anonymous edit that changed a major link in the article. Please consider making an account and logging in. :) --- Ekevu (talk) 15:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I've noticed that the debate over this article's length has come up again. I set aside the characters section to reduce the article's length, but I'd like to address claims made about the length, given that the article has been tagged for being allegedly "overly long, confusing, or ambiguous".

• Firstly, the series has been going on for over ten years. Additionally, at least once a month on average, there is a series that is worth some note, whether having an impact on the plot, or revealing something significant about the characters. Additionally, many series build on each other and are interdependent; in the Jerry Springer Spaniel series, Jerry attempts to convince Kell to eat Kevin by mentioning his prior online relationship with Deathpaw, and results in Kevin losing his insurance (leading to another story in which Rudy exposes his own domestication, part of another plotline).

• Secondly, the plot summary is not especially long on its own. For example, Sluggy Freelance (which has not been tagged) has a comparably long plot summary.

• Lastly, it is not entirely accurate to refer to it as based only on "direct observation of the comic". The article incorporates work such as the Unofficial FAQ and Lindesfarne's blog. Furthermore, parts such as the character, trivia and error sections require- and feature- not only relating what happens, but how it is important. For example, Pastor Worcestershire's seemingly casual "How is the uh, marriage going" actually says a considerable amount about what he thinks about interspecies relationships (he disapproves of them, but less vocally than some do).

I thus conclude that the current length of the article is justifiable with the characters section split into its own page. Ralkarna 02:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

R.L. not a wolf

R.L.'s predecessor was a wolf, but R.L. is not. I forget what he is, so I don't want to change it without being sure. I think he may be a wolverine. --Coyoty 16:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

(From the Unofficial K&K FAQ) here: http://kevinandkell.com/about/faq.html

2.10 ) Who is R.L.?

R.L. was Kell's boss at HerdThinners, Inc. He may be a wolf; he's only seen as fangs and hands. He :is 'fifty-ish'. While he is an adept manager and savage predator, he is not particularly :computer-literate. He is another secret sufferer from Domestication, a malady and secret that he :shares with Kell and Rudy. His predecessor at HerdThinners was named 'L.D.'. R.L. is married to :Angelique, Kevin's ex.

The strip seems to imply that he is some sort of canine (Angelique has him on a leash in one strip, and threatens to punish him with a rolled-up newspaper), but his species has never explicitly been revealed. Ralkarna 02:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Paring down article size

I think we should spinoff the Kevin and Kell timeline onto its own article, and condense the timeline in this article itself. --Kitch 15:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. • Ekevu • ♥ • ★ 20:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

It wouldn't hurt to break a "kevin and kell minor characters" article off of this one. Kail Ceannai 22:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Corrie Dewclaw

She sometimes uses Ralph's wolfskin to disguise as a wolf, which resulted in her being registered as a wolf-cub, and people thinking that she was Ralph's daughter, although they did not know that. I'm not quite sure what this means. Could it be corrected?

That has been clarified. What was meant was that she went to meet "Redfang" (Rudy) disguised as a wolf cub, and was registered as one when Fiona noticed that she wasn't on the species registry. They then think that she is Ralph's daughter because she smells like him. Ralkarna 02:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Not the longest running webcomic

Sorry, but Kevin and Kell is not the longest running webcomic. There is another, Argon Zark!, which has been going since June 1995, compared to Kevin and Kell, which started in September 1995. ISD 18:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The writeup currently says K&K is ONE of the oldest webcomics....but perhaps that change was made after your post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.118.253.107 (talk) 07:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Reviews and reception needed

Can anyone find some reliable sources which contain reviews of Kevin and Kell please. ISD 11:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of December 2, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Article is written in clear understandable language, and does not seem too "in-universe".

2. Factually accurate?: Good use of sourcing. Could use more citations in the About section, even though they are already at the end of the paragraph - so we know which sentence is backed up to which source.

3. Broad in coverage?: I would like to see a little more information in the Reception section. Also, the reviews should each be attributed to who said what, as opposed to "some reviwers said this", while "others said that", etc. The large blockquote doesn't look that great, I'd suggest changing it to a smaller quote placed within the rest of the paragraph format. Also, if possible it'd be great if you could find another source to add to the Reception section, but this is not a dealbreaker.

4. Neutral point of view?: Information appears to be presented in a neutral manner.

5. Article stability? Article history appears to be stable going back at least two months.

6. Images?: The one picture satisfies image requirements.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.— Cirt 03:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

• Overall, a good article, message my talk page when these above minor issues have been addressed and it should be able to pass. Great work. Cirt 03:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC).

GA Pass

Thanks for addressing my above points. Article meets the criteria. Good job. Cirt 15:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC).

Thoughts on further development

I've made a few edits after the request for copyediting at WP:FURRY. However, I don't believe that's the only thing this article needs to fully meet A-class or to attempt FA-class. In general, I feel it fails to hit the "comprehensive" standard of coverage in some areas. In particular:

• The "About" section seems confused - is it about the comic's success, or about the storyline? "About" is a silly name, anyway - the entire article is "about" the comic. I think this section should be split into two sections: "History" and "Storyline and themes". The latter could actually be two sections - "Themes and structure" and "Plot" - but from what I can see the overarching plot appears to be fairly weak as compared to (say) Megatokyo.
• Looking at the history, the article used to have a very long (and totally unreferenced) storyline section which was split off into Storyline of Kevin and Kell, and recently deleted per WP:PLOT. While there appears to be some attempt at summarizing this already, it may be appropriate to scavenge some small parts of this back into the main article (and perhaps all of it could go onto WikiFur - we have no problem with original research of this fashion).
• There is no "See also" section. Such a section is not strictly necessary, of course, and many obvious choices are covered in the body. Still, I suspect there are some related topics which have not yet been mentioned. If nothing else, consideration of this area may lead to additional body text.
• The article has one image. Does this really constitute "well illustrated"? Fair use has its limits, but I don't think we've hit them yet. In particular, a cover of one of the printed works would be nice.

Examination of other featured articles about comics may prove useful. GreenReaper (talk) 09:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I have carried out some of these measures. I've added another image, and seperated the history and plot. The plot section into two parts, the main plot and the characters, and has also since been expanded. I don't believe a "See also" section is needed. ISD (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I have created a WikiFur article containing the storyline section that was deleted from Wikipedia. ISD (talk) 09:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

History?

When and where was Kevin and Kell first syndicated? Where exactly did it first appear? I have a vague memory of reading the first strips in black and white on a Compuserve forum and not on the web in 1995. By the way the herdthinner external link for the first strip is dead and also not found on archive.org. -Wikianon (talk) 17:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC) I just fixed the link. -Wikianon (talk) 17:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The very first citation answers my query: "It began September 3, 1995, as a downloadable feature of CompuServe's Funnies Forum". I now remember that compuserve members could download GIF images from certain forums. Google "Kevin and Kell Compueserve" and find old talk of the comic starting on Compuserve. Now, it seems this information should be included in the History section. -Wikianon (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)