Talk: Candidates for Deletion

Pop culture appearances

I DISSAGREE

This Page is important because it details Garfield's pop culture appearances.

IAmaBoomer (talk) 21:22, May 7, 2020 (UTC)

No, it only details one pop culture appearance. We have not decided how to handle that overall.

Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 22:55, May 7, 2020 (UTC)

Topics

I believe it is important to cover these topics, as we do at Gnorm Gnat, and keeping these seperate as different creations and books is important for documentation. The other page, Jim Davis' Other Work, 1962-1974, is confusing, muddled, and does not explain what is showing well enough. OS25🤙☎️ 16:23, July 27, 2020 (UTC)

Are you asking what the purpose of the latter page is for, exactly?

Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 16:41, July 27, 2020 (UTC)

German Garfield comic

Why is it important to disallow people to get an idea of what the German Garfield comics look like?

Why are you misinterpreting my concern? I said it "may or may not need its own page". If not, then it can be part of a page/section covering international matters. It should be noted that we have yet to tackle/figure out international stuff.

Also, don't remove the delete template on your own.

Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Are you running out of room? Are you only allowed a certain number of pages on this Wiki? Maybe wait 5 years and then if you still think this page is unnecessary, delete it then. It took you no time at all to decide that people shouldn't know what the German Garfield comics are like. You swooped in super quick with your CENSOR banner. RogerBlake (talk) 04:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Still misinterpreting? Maybe you should sleep on it for a while.

Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 20:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Try here: https://garfield.fandom.com/wiki/Garfield_Comics

Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 20:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

People are going to find some random photos in the basic Comics Gallery, w/o context, and suddenly have a better understanding of what German Garfield comics are like? Seriously?

I'm sure you will find this shocking, but other wikis have tons of comics, each issue with it's own page. It's standard operating procedure pretty much everywhere. Other Wikis, GCD, Comic Vine and everywhere. The idea is that every comic book, every book, every record, every puzzle should have it's own page. Otherwise, what's the point of the wiki if you can contain all of the information in a single Tweet? "Jim Davis created Garfield and made some stuff w/ his face on it." Add 4 pics and the the Garfield Wiki. RogerBlake (talk) 07:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey Roger, calm down with your usual crap when you can't get your way. This would have been avoided if you just looked here: Garfield Books/Others. So much for censorship, lol.

Yeah Joe, I'm so rude. Lowspark offers to destroy and censor all of my work, and I can't find it in myself to thank him for that. RogerBlake (talk) 06:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

"Censor". Tell me, why oh why, this is censorship? Or is this your personal "buzz word"? You just can't admit that you have an aversion to rules and what you say is gospel. This has happened twice now. Most comics shouldn't have their own pages because most don't contain important-enough information to warrant thousands of pages. Garfield's Judgement Day warrants a page because it actually has a story (A) and (B), it's important out of its paper form. If you really care about archiving these things, scan them and upload them to the Internet Archive. If you did that, I think it'd be far more appreciated.
By the way, you never told me what I've added that is wrong on this wiki, given that I'm a South African with a mushy brain toward American media.

Cooljoe01 (Talk Page) 07:35, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to share useful and accurate information and Lowspark is trying to delete it. That's very specifically the definition of censorship. This isn't DeSantis vs Rebecca Jones because no one's life is on the line w/ Garfield comics.

Each Issue of All Comics on every site on the internet have their own pages. It's how it is done. I'm sure this sounds crazy to you, but people actually buy comics. Like every day. And most auctions on eBay just show the front cover. So this page could help someone w/ their decision. Or lots of someones.

More information is good. Hiding information is bad. RogerBlake (talk) 07:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Blake, that's not censorship. If it was, your page and all images would have been outright deleted, not to mention a blocking if you "talked back". Low Spark (not "Lowspark") added the template with a noticeable section that leads here. The fact that you're here talking against the decision to add is proof IT'S NOT CENSORSHIP. Obviously your "five decades of American English experience" didn't help you in seeing "May or may not need its own page.". But here, you're bringing out some court case because you can't actually argue intelligently.

A wiki is not to buy comic books, neither is it to display most of the comic book. If you feel so strongly about helping people with their purchases, create a website for that purpose, because I wouldn't search the damn wiki for it first. If I'm gonna research information about an album I want to purchase, I'll do it via Discogs, not some random music wiki. And don't bring up that "music isn't the same" because you think the same for jigsaw puzzles. You told me you have to experience a jigsaw puzzle to "understand" it, so what good is it being on the wiki? What "preview" am I getting of actually building the set?

And now, you purposefully haven't responded to the "South African" because you obviously know how stupid your argument was in the first place. Neither have you responded to the "Internet Archive" comment because again, it doesn't go for your argument here. Cooljoe01 (Talk Page) 19:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Dude. This is a Garfield wiki. Information about Garfield belongs here. Seriously. Why is this such a hard concept to understand? If you don't have the ability to understand this concept, that's on you. RogerBlake (talk) 20:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

So, now you've dropped the censorship argument and you're now ignoring all other points. Obviously those are a little too difficult to comprehend. Cooljoe01 (Talk Page) 21:20, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm not dropping any argument. This is a GARFIELD wiki. This is where information about Garfield comics should be. I don't understand why you are all setting your hair on fire over this. You are waging a personal vendetta against me. How does these comic pages surviving mean the end of the world? RogerBlake (talk) 01:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

You came in claiming that "THIS IS CENSORSHIP! LOW SPARK THINKS GERMAN COMICS SHOULDN'T BE SEEN!". Given how you kicked off the argument, it's obviously you who has the vendetta.

But again, you refuse to take note of my other points because it doesn't go for your narrative, and for that reason, it's time to hide in the corner and complain about how mean everyone else is being. You've done it once before, and now again. Cooljoe01 (Talk Page) 20:22, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Please stop! Is time to move to Comic wiki! DJ1999 (talk) 10:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

That's just stupid. People have to go to a non-Garfield wiki to see Garfield comics? What is wrong with you people? 23:37, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey @DJ1999 if there's a BETTER Garfield wiki the comics probably belong there, but if this is the Garfield Wiki, then Garfield comics belong here. People aren't going to be looking for Garfield comics on the Harvey or Terrytoons wikis. Why are Garfield comics causing such a PANIC? RogerBlake (talk) 11:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

It has been over a year since the articles were made, and as the creator thereof had no argument for keeping them beyond "Censorship!", I have deleted both of them (not to mention a few others).

Remember, just because you can create an article on here (or anywhere) doesn't mean you should.

Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 01:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Garfield: Bound for Home

The sources for the article can be found in this Quinton Reviews video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSZu6qnEdHY as well as the video he links in the description: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk3Oqi0Mwco. I didn't add them as references because I don't know how, but I wanted to make an article so that others would know to do so.

I'm not so sure about those as reliable sources, exactly...however, it seems there are better sources about this game contained here: https://www.reddit.com/r/lostmedia/comments/101ch13/fully_lost_lost_build_of_unreleased_garfield/

Also, be sure to sign your posts here. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 04:29, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Just to give an update: I am convinced that this is a real game, with more recent information about it shedding light on the matter.

I have also deleted the part about the developer not being known because there is evidence of a particular developer being involved. However, since said evidence is insufficient for adding it to the wiki, I am withholding that part for the time being. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 22:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with the gallery for Monday being on the block

I mean, the page for Monday itself is not on the block and there is a small gallery on that page. Why should the gallery featuring Monday-themed comics be deleted? To me, it seems like a double-standard. This unsigned comment was added by BigPerritoFan.

Did you see the reason I gave?

"Questionable usefulness, due to Monday being an abstraction."

If you want me to put it another way, Monday is an abstract concept in the Garfield franchise. It isn't actually depicted in anything (barring a few exceptions); it is simply something that is acknowledged as something Garfield fears (sometimes on other days, even).

Therefore, there isn't much point in making a gallery for it, at least not as a separate page. The page for Monday itself is useful since it describes the impact of that day of the week for Garfield (as a franchise and in-universe).

Also, be sure to sign your posts here. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 22:11, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Cheerios

I disagree since there's a Cheerios ad with Garfield from 1993.

It's real: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_dL7AS9pLM This unsigned comment was added by 143015 Mark.

The question isn't if it has a real connection to Garfield. The question is if it needs an article of its own. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 20:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, be sure to sign your posts here. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

I'd be in favour of a page that catalogues Garfield's appearances in non-Garfield media, but the main issue with those sorts of pages is that they can be hard to find if you're just looking for a specific instance. Murnjendoof (talk) 07:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I should probably say: there is a wiki on Garfield commercials that I made a few years ago. I'm actually planning on transferring/merging the contents of that wiki to this one, hopefully sometime this year. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 22:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Garfield (2024 Movie Varient)

I added Garfield (2024 Movie Varient) for a reason so I could tell the difference between Garfield in the comics & in the 2024 film This unsigned comment was added by SonicFanBois.

It is not clear if such a page is actually needed, though. And remember to sign your posts here. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

My vote is to delete. That information can simply remain on Garfield's general character page. There really isn't enough of a difference between each iteration of Garfield to warrant needing separate links. GarHalloweenField (talk) 05:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Baby Garfield Page

Do we really need a "baby garfield" page.. seriously? This unsigned comment was added by Spasticomentale.

I've deleted both that and Talking Garfield. And remember to sign your posts here. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 03:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Jon Arbuckle (The Garfield Show) and Jon Arbuckle from the live action films

We don't need those pages at all. Why? Because we don't make separate pages for different versions of characters. So, we don't need a page for the garfield show and the live action version of the character. I think those pages are pointless. Spasticomentale (talk) 17:10, June 5, 2024 (UTC)

Similar logic to the point GarHalloweenField made about 2024 movie Garfield. Low Spark of Lyman (talk) 22:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Lasagna.cz

So apparently this site can't get it's own page because it is not an official Garfield site. That may be true, but it is definately Garfield-related, and I believe there's a lot of people on this wiki that will find this transcriptions database very useful when trying to find a specific comic. Vallalkozo (talk) 03:42, 23 July 2025 (UTC)