Talk:Big Dave (character)

Comics: British Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by British comics work group.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Fair use rationale for Image:Bigdave.jpg

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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've spotted a few of these notices and have been working to address them. I am unsure if this is one though. The image provided isn't great and really doesn't show much. I'd suggest letting it go and sorting out a better one. Possibly: [1]^{[dead link]} [2]^{[dead link]} with the first one being prefered. (Emperor 13:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

{{Dead link}} but it seems to be referring to Prog 869 which features Big Dave on the cover -- Horkana (talk) 21:11, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

There does not seem to be a lot of available sources for this. The letters pages of 2000 A.D. are probably the place to find fan reactions that could be referenced. Reviews and critical response would be a significant improvement to the article. -- Horkana (talk) 21:11, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In 2010 Total Film magazine included Big Dave on a list of 9 Mark Millar comics that should be made into films (at number 3 but the order doesn't seem to be important). It isn't an ideal source and I'm not sure how I'd fit it into the article but the text calls him a contraversial character, which goes some way to suppporting the claims of this article.
George Wales (September 9, 2010). "9 Mark Millar Comics That Should Be Movies. It's Millar time". Total Film.
In an interview with The AV Club Morrison says "The Big Dave strips I did with Mark Millar for 2000 AD are some of my favorites and would make a good, daft book."
Leonard Pierce (July 22, 2009). "Interview Grant Morrison". The AV Club. The Onion.
The BBC describe it as "One of 2000 AD's most controversial" (see sidebar "primer", bottom right) David Bishop (2004-01-30). "BBC - Cult Presents 2000AD and British comics". BBC.

If it was that controversial, I would have expected it to have got more comment in the press. -- Beardo (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]