Talk:Dead Space (comics)

Untitled

NATALIA OR NATASHA? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chueyjoo (talk • contribs) 19:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Should the patient Harris be mentioned?

Remember that psycho patient that almost killed Dr. Sciarello in Issue 1? Well, according to the print version of Issue 3, that guy's name was Harris, and he plays a very large role in the actual game. He's mentioned in several logs throughout Dead Space, although the best example has to be the following log from Chapter 2 [1].

Interesting Results

MEDICAL LOG

DR. WARWICK, B. (CHIEF PSYCH OFFICER)

REPORT OF PSYCHIATRIC OBSERVATION

PATIENT: HARRIS, B. (Employee #PM-19026-EH)

Harris is asleep, after another strong sedative. He seems literally unable to sleep without chemical aid. Most people succumb to exhaustion after 50+ hours of waking, regardless of any desire to stay awake. Not Harris. His explanation of events on the colony is also odd, and points to the same paranoia we've seen elsewhere planetside. His guilt is not in doubt--two planetside security officers were present when he took Dr. Sciarello hostage and murdered Nurse Evans--and he doesn't deny his actions. But he insists there was no crime, nor does he feel guilt.

This is classic sociopathic behavior, but Harris exhibits no other symptoms. He is affable and friendly, able to empathize and offer original opinions. When questioned about the murder, however, he becomes withdrawn and intransigent, displaying schizophrenic behavior. He also undergoes intermittent hallucinatory periods, again similar to those experienced by other colonists.

Harris claims he threatened the Doctor because he "had to stop the dreams and the faces," and that he'll kill again to "Make it whole again". What that means, I haven't determined yet. A most intriguing case.

I probably went overboard with this explanation. I just thought it was cool how this tidbit proves the relevance and importance of the Dead Space comics.

--71.65.232.6 (talk) 01:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dead Space (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/20080510230609/http://www.wizarduniverse.com/030508deadspacejohnston.html to http://www.wizarduniverse.com/030508deadspacejohnston.html

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: 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) 03:19, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dead Space (comics)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ZooBlazer (talk · contribs) 07:16, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I'd be happy to take this review. I've already gone through it some, so I should have more to say pretty quickly.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Review

Overall, this article looks to be in pretty good shape. Just a few things need to be addressed. Some of it's probably nitpicky.

• Not absolutely required, but it wouldn't hurt to remove all of the extra non used parameters in the infobox

• the game's development team acted as overall controller → maybe add "the" before overall.

• A graphic novel compilation of all six issues ... The graphic novel included exclusive art by Templesmith ... The graphic novel version was re-released → Some slight rewording is needed to avoid repetition. There are three straight sentences starting almost the same way.

• safeguard the Marker until their ship the Ishimura arrives. → Add a comma after ship

• Between its discovery and the Ishimura{{'}}s → and the Ishimura{{'s}}

• after the Marker video leak → is it supposed to be leaks? Just ignore if it's already correct

• Marker into the colony preparatory to sending both it and → remove "to" and replace it with a comma after preparatory

• The Ishimura captain Benjamin Mathius refuses → The Ishimura's captain, Benjamin Mathius refuses

• The Necromorphs attack the colony, killing many including Carthusia and Sciarello and converting the suicides. → Need an extra comma or two

• In the reception section, convert all {{'}}s to {{'s}}

• Italicize Wired in the reception section

• For ref #21, capitalize the author's first name. ben → Ben

Spot checks

• #5 - CBR - Talks about Johnston joint the project and Templesmith's previous work Y
• #7 - Wizard - Talks about the storyline and keeping continuity across multiple projects Y
• #19 - 1UP - Talks about the motion comic being unlockable in Dead Space: Extraction Y
• #24-29 - ICv2 - All show the sales numbers for their respective issues Y

Comments

Good job overall on this. I think once you address the minor issues above, then the article should be good to go. -- Zoo (talk) 07:39, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@ZooBlazer: I've taken care of everything above. I just trimmed the second video leak bit since it's not essential to communicating the character's breakdown. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:05, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake It's looking good. I came across some minor things when looking over the edits. In the multiple images template you should probably either add the alt text or remove the parameters.

Also space out the references. I see the intention is to have them organized, but you can instead use hidden notes to title the groups, or just space them out without titles so you don't have walls of text that make it harder to find specific refs.

Like I said above, it's mostly nitpicky stuff since the article is in pretty good shape. -- Zoo (talk) 14:18, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@ZooBlazer: All done. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake With that it looks good to me, so passing. Congrats! -- Zoo (talk) 14:27, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.