Talk:PVT Murphy's Law

Creation of Article

I created this article originally because when I was serving in the military this was a very popular and widely read comic strip in the Army Times (a newspaper sold on US Army bases). I think this comic strip deserves a wiki entry as much as any popular newspaper comic strip does. I noticed that someone suggested this article for deletion. I can see that this entry is rather uniformative and short, but let me suggest as an alternative that the entry be merged into a sub-section of the entry for the Army Times.

Additionally, a concern has been raised about how the author of the comic himself has edited this entry. That may be the case, but the entry was not created by him and the bulk of the information for this entry was a product of my work. This entry is not an instance of mere self-aggrandizement by the author. The PVT Murphy's Law comic strip was a well-known and celebrated comic strip within the US Army during the time it ran and I created this wiki entry as a record of this cultural phenomenon within the US Army. Also, from looking at the edit history, it doesn't seem as if the author of the comic strip substantially added much to this entry. Atfyfe (talk) 06:26, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• @Atfyfe: For what it's worth, when I tagged this article with a WP:PROD tag, it was when the article had been gutted to an extreme from its previous version. After I realized this and restored the old version, I removed the tag since the more in-depth version looked considerably more notable (which, from what I can tell, was/is the version that you started when you created this article.) I mean, the creator of the subject of this article had obviously participated in some of the edits on this article, but at the present time, it's not a wholly blanking or removal of content, so I no longer see issues ... with the article's current state as of this date. Steel1943 (talk) 18:38, 3 January 2020 (UTC) Steel1943 (talk) 18:38, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Request Edit

Please remove: It was dropped from the paper after some controversy.[1] - reason - There was not controversy, I was a freelancer to the paper I stopped submitting the cartoons for several reasons the main one was because they wanted me to sign a "work for hire" contract which would have given the Army Time copyright to my cartoon. I wasn't willing to do that - the paper did not drop my cartoon.

Please remove: The reasons included references to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy of 2005–2006, mockery of Muslims and Arabs, bad language and mild sexual innuendo.[2] - This paints me in a bad light, it's unnecessary and is not entirely accurate. I didn't mock Muslims or Arabs, if "turd" is bad language OK. But is it really that bad? And there is no sexual innuendo. When vehicles are parked weapons are locked in the up position. The fact that the editor read something into that, as well as the skin color of the characters is more a statement about his character, not mine. I had no intent for that cartoon to be anything other that what it is. Soldiers bragging about their "toys" (weapons)

Please change content to:

Pvt Murphy’s Law (or just Pvt. Murphy) is a comic strip created in 1992 by Mark Baker that satirizes life and service in the US Army. According to Baker he created the “Comic strip about a Soldier, by a Soldier, for Soldiers” to poke lighthearted fun at life in the Army.

Comic Books

In 2019 Baker started illustrating Soldiers’ deployment stories on his webpage Charlie Mike Comix - charliemikecomix.com/ - after several stories were completed Baker self-published 4 comic books and is currently working on further editions.

Author

Mark Baker is a freelance artist and cartoonist. He retired from the Army after 20+ years of honorable service.

Baker is an Arizona native, Directly after graduating High School, instead of using an full Art Scholarship to ASU he enlisted in the US Army. After his first term he returned home to Mesa, AZ only to be recalled to active duty a few months later for Desert Storm. He was released again later that same year 1991 but decided to return to the Army after a 2 week break in service – this time he stayed until his retirement in 2007.

Baker started cartooning in 1992 while stationed at Fort Bragg, NC. What started as inside jokes about his unit later became “Pvt. Murphy’s Law” after team members convinced him to submit his cartoons to Fort Bragg’s newspaper, “The Paraglide.” The cartoon ran in several Army papers, the Army Times, and a couple of civilian newspapers.

That's all I'm asking. This wiki-page has cost me clients because what is written here. Please accept the changes I've requested.

Thank you. V/R Mark Baker — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvbaker1985 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi there @Mvbaker1985, I have to reject most of this edit request because it is unsourced. You need to provide reliable sources for what you want changing or removing from the article - we can't just take your word for it (see Wikipedia:No original research). If you want help finding reliable sources, you could try visiting the reference desk. Furthermore, your proposed additions to the article appear to be slightly promotional - content in Wikipedia articles can't be promotional, and must stick to the neutral point of view policy. However, I am going to remove the current second paragraph of the article because it is poorly sourced, appears to breach the no original research policy, and I can't find any other sources online to support it. If you want to re-submit the rest of this edit request, you should first find reliable sources for what you want changed. I'm going to leave a message on your talk page with more help you may find useful, and you may also find this page listing the help available to editors with COIs useful. If you need any more help, you can , or just leave a message on my talk page. Seagull123 Φ 20:57, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

"It was dropped from the paper after some controversy."

I am deleting this line.

I see that this line and topic has had a lot of discussion. The author of the strip (Mark Baker) has attempted to delete references to this controversy and folks have rightfully been on guard to someone editing their own entry.

But here's the problem: the controversy that is being mentioned here is based on someone's reading of Mark Baker's own personal website (not a news report). And Mark Baker has come her to say that calling it a controversy and our treatment of it is inaccurate. Normally that might be a conflict of interest, but the orginal post is itself some editor's interpretation of Mark Baker's own website!

I think the initial inclusion of the "controversy" due to someone's reading of Mark Baker's website was "orginal research" and that we have special reason to think that these edits are wrong because the very source being used to call it a "controversy" and to characterize it is Mark Baker's website which he is here claiming we are misinterpreting.

I am going to delete any reference to the controversy until someone can site a source outside Mark Baker's own website which he claims we are misrepresnting. This content probably shouldn't have been added in the first place because it's personal research using Mark Baker's website instead of citing a reporting source writing about the comic strip and Baker's website.

In general, I think this entry should probably be incorporated with a larger entry unless more content is added. But that is a seperate issue. Atfyfe (talk) 01:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)