Talk:Action (comics)

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Comics: British Mid‑importance

	Comics portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by British comics work group.

Renaming

It was requested that this article be renamed but the procedure outlined at WP:RM#How to request a page move did not appear to be followed, and consensus could not be determined. Please request a move again with proper procedure if there is still a desire for the page to be moved. Thank you for your time! -- tariqabjotu 22:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

With references this could be a b-class article. I've rated it as mid because of its role in British culture. Questions were raised in the House of Commons regarding the subject nature of the comic, which led to a revising of the tone. Hiding Talk 22:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious as to how Action was launched as a competitor to Warlord when:

a) Battle was already in circulation
b) Action was not a WW2 comic, unlike Battle.

Fair use rationale for Image:Action1.jpg

Image:Action1.jpg 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) 06:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Hookjaw3.jpg

Image:Hookjaw3.jpg 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 ensure 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) 22:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental

Did "Hook Jaw" really have an "environmental" edge? Such things, I would guess, were not really on the radar in the mid-1970s, this interpretation only really being possible via late 2000s 20/20 hindsight. 217.155.20.163 (talk) 01:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental issues where indeed on the radar in the mid 70's. Some say it was a leftover topic from the flower power mother earth thing from the 60's, others would argue ancient religions who worshiped the earth where the first true environmentalists. I have read the strip in question and would indeed say there are environmental issues contained within. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.14.186 (talk) 03:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Global warming wasn't "on the radar" but concerns over dumping chemicals / radioactive waste in the sea etc were. 131.111.53.213 (talk) 13:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cf. Doomwatch. Nick Cooper (talk) 10:33, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Action (comics). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051202091411/http://www.comicsuk.co.uk:80/ComicInformationPages/ActionPages/ActionCharactersAndStories.asp to http://www.comicsuk.co.uk/ComicInformationPages/ActionPages/ActionCharactersAndStories.asp

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:31, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]