Jump to content

Talk:Fangoria

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Fangoria (magazine))

Proposed move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was I propose that this article be moved from "Fangoria (magazine)" to simply "Fangoria", as the word was created for the magazine, and the only other listings on the disambiguation page are a band (named after the magazine) and a film company (owned by the magazine). "Fangoria" is simply "Fangoria", and its article should reflect this. An "other uses" link could be added to the top of the page, but I believe that when one types "Fangoria" into the wiki search bar, this is the page that should come up. LetsDoThisRight (talk) 13:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly This should be moved with a {{for}} link at the top of the page. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved Fangoria (magazine) → Fangoria and the previous Fangoria → Fangoria (disambiguation) as it was already a nice DAB page of the various meanings. Added hatnote to Fangoria (now one specific meaning) pointing to that DAB page. DMacks (talk) 18:46, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Editor

[edit]

For the first time in 25 years, a new editor is taking the reins of fangoria. DreadCentral.com and shocktillyoudrop.com both report that the new boss is Chris Alexander, a past contributor to Rue Morgue magazine. But nonr of this is actually sourced to Fangoria's publishers; both sites indicate that their news source is Alexander himself, and no one has yet quoted any known Fangoria principal or employee. see http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=14002 and http://www.dreadcentral.com/news/35756/chris-alexander-named-fangoria-magazines-new-editor Bustter (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

[edit]

I have deleted the unverified piece of information regarding the website Bloody Disgusting being banned from all Fangoria events. I have personally verified that this piece of information is untrue, and even if it were, it would be Creation (the company that puts on Fango's events), not Fangoria that would do the banning. Fangoria simply acts as a namesake to their Weekend of Horrors conventions. 207.45.43.68 (talk) 12:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This information is posted as Bloody Disgusting's website and claims that Fangoria editor Tony Timpone crossed BD editor Brad Miska's name off a guest list. This does not constitute a ban from Fangoria events, nor is it even remotely encyclopedic in nature. 74.201.138.98 (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fangoria Comics

[edit]

The last attempt at starting Fangoria Comics was speedily deleted despite looking fairly solid [1] and if we wan it back we need to prove notability. I'd suggest we gather together resources here then restart it. So examples include:

Given the output and the fact it ties in with various films (and other film involvement - seems Michael Madsen has created a title: Shifter in which he stars), I don't think we'll struggle to meet notability but I want to be sure. So if you spot anything from reliable sources then drop it in here. (Emperor 19:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Fangoria issue 07.png

[edit]

Image:Fangoria issue 07.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Fangoria issue 07.png

[edit]

Image:Fangoria issue 07.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Betacommand bot is again asking me for a fair use rationale for the use of this image in the Fangoria article, which has been there for several years.

I stare at the "fair use rationale" on the image page, and I don't see what's missing. Please advise on the Fangoria Talk page what I should do. Bustter (talk) 01:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

incorrect, uncertain

[edit]

"As they have been since their inception Fangoria is currently the most widely-read horror-themed publication in the world." Earlier in the article, Fangoria was losing $20,000 per issue, so it can't have been that widely-read at inception. Secondly, while figures may show Fangoria to be the largest-selling horror-themed publication in the world, there is doubt that many contemporary purchasers actually read it. Bustter (talk) 01:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No discussion = no consensus. However, I will be bold and remove the questionable statement if no one can argue that it has a factual basis. Bustter (talk) 19:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone removed my [citation needed] from this statement, without actually providing any citation. calling Fangoria "the most widely read horror publication" worldwide is questionable; to say it has been so since its inception is flat-out wrong. Its first issues sold terribly, as the article itself points out. Certainly Famous Monsters of Filmland, which was then still in its initial run, outsold Fangoria at the time. Bustter (talk) 02:08, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It just occurs to me....aren't Stephen King's books "horror publications?" Each one of his novels sell much greater numbers than an issue of Fangoria, each of which likely sells well under 100,000 copies. Bustter (talk) 02:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After months of waiting for a citation to support the claim, I've removed the "most widely read in the world" sentence. Gorezone magazine has similar unsupported claims in its Wiki article as well, which I am also contesting. Bustter (talk) 04:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Website?

[edit]

I have just tried to access the magazine's official site but I am not getting anywhere in doing so. Does anyone in here know what is going on with that? Are they making any changes to their site at the moment or did they shut it down? Does anyone in here have any answers? Thanks Frschoonover (talk) 23:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Your post was ages ago, but for the lst few months linkage to their site has been very unreliable. Now at the top level, a notice:

"Fangoria.com is currently being revamped. We appreciate your patience and continued loyalty as we work on bringing you a new and enhanced user experience from America's longest running horror magazine. In the meantime, please visit our temporary presence to see all the latest in horror news. See you soon." There is a link to an interim site: http://fangorianews.blogspot.com/. Bustter (talk) 13:06, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracy

[edit]

This article says that no "groundswell" of fantasy films occurred following the release of "Conan the Barbarian." That is demonstrably untrue, as the decade quickly saw such major fantasy films as "Ladyhawke," "Legend," "Willow" and "The Princess Bride." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.229.114 (talk) 19:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "Planning" section of this article was written mostly by me, and is sourced largely from an article titled "The Secret Origin of Fangoria" which appeared in Fangoria #100.

In a sense, however, this stuff is all "original research," in that I was there -- I edited Fangoria for its first five years, and I wrote the "Secret Origin" article years ago. You are correct, there were a great many fantasy films in those years, mostly in an effort to follow the trend indicated by the successes of Lucas and Spielberg in the realm of effects-driven films. Many of the projects you mention were greenlighted during the same period that "Fantastica" was being planned, long before the release of Conan. But the positive trend toward fantasy film was not sufficient to drive sales of a magazine about fairies, elves and gnomes, which was where the publishers' heads were at when "Fantastica" was planned.

I know this because I was there, but I didn't go into such detail in the "Secret Origin" article, so I could only provide that detail as original research, unless I were to write another, more detailed article published in another reliable source. Bustter (talk) 19:25, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a horse in this race

[edit]

I have some objection to this passage:

"In 2011, Alexander resurrected the original logo, presenting a classic Fangoria look, coupled with illustrated covers and a bottom page filmstrip that Alexander freely admitted to 'borrowing' from long defunct monster magazine Castle of Frankenstein."

As I mentioned above, I used to edit Fangoria, so I lack the objectivity required to just wade in and edit here, but the fango filmstrip motif was originated by me -- Robert "Bob" Martin -- in bald tribute to Castle of Frankenstein magazine, which was designed by Bhob Stewart. Chris dropped my film frames early on, and then brought them back. I don't hav any reference except the magazine itself -- you can see the film frames on the cover of issue #7 from three decades ago! Alexander didn't borrow it fropm CoF -- I SWIPED it decades ago! Bustter (talk) 00:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section

[edit]

There's been a few controversies over the past few years or at least the last year, so I thought it'd be good to have a section for them. I don't want to add anything without having enough RS to back them up, so I wanted to ask if anyone could help look for sourcing. The two main ones I can find surround Alexander writing his own review and not being open about it at the beginning, and Lianne Spiderbaby plagiarizing articles. I've found a Bloody Disgusting source about Alexander and a little about Spiderbaby, but not much so far. Because controversy sections can be well, controversial, I want to have some substantial coverage. Anyone up for helping? Here's what I found so far, but the issue is that not all of them mention Fangoria: ([2], [3], [4], [5]) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Fangoria. Please take a moment to review my 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to 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 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:42, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Fangoria. Please take a moment to review my 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:14, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fangoria Chainsaw Awards

[edit]

I was just wondering if the awards should be made into a separate article or an article for each year or category, I was just thinking that if one keeps adding the awards to the main page it could get quite lengthy. Kingstoken (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2017

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fangoria&oldid=1207178928"