Talk:Cruisin Central

From ZineWiki
Revision as of 20:40, 29 September 2006 by LitLives (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

I don't think ZineWiki is a place for reviews. At least, if we're going to do reviews, they shouldn't be mixed in with the regular articles, they shoul dbe offset like the Punk Planet articles are so that everyone knows they are seperate. Alan Fall of Autumn 04:06, 26 September 2006 (EDT)

I agree, this is a book review, it makes no sense to have it on a Wiki, much less a Wiki devoted to zines. It should probably just be deleted. dan10things 11:49, 26 September 2006 (EDT)

Review vs entry

I meant it to be just info on the book - and the book is surely just as indie as Game Quest for ex. Perhaps I can rewrite it. PS Dan is against anything I do so I take everything he says as just the general no to all. Musea 13:51, 27 September 2006 (EDT)

I'll add this - this novel fits every definition to make it eligible on zinewiki. This is a single person published book - and a great one. And the author is as indie as you can get. Musea 14:17, 27 September 2006 (EDT)

Tom, you are paranoid, I honestly didn't know you had written it. Alan commented first, I saw his comment in the "recent changes" page, read it, and agreed. I thought it was someone confused as to what ZineWiki was about and reviewing a book here, I figured any existing editor would know better.

While I totally support indie projects, not all of them fall within the scope of the ZineWiki. Similarly I don't think bands should be plugging their indie CDs here. Stuff like indie books, indie bands and their releases, indie crafts, indie art projects, etc. have nothing to do with zines. It seems to me the only books that we should be including are books about zines like the F5 Reader, The Book of Zines, etc. But that's just this one person's opinion, if you believe otherwise, by all means make the case for it. There are tons of "single person published books," should we open the door the thousands that are out there, I fear the focus of the ZineWiki on zines would get dilluted, if not lost. dan10things 14:30, 27 September 2006 (EDT)

We have about four or five 'books' that I'm aware of on the site, however, all of those books tie back to zines, either the content of the book is about zines (Stolen Sharpie Revolution), or the author was once a zinester, or the author has made some other incredible contribution to zines. For instance, the Jeremy Robert Johnson page may look like it has little to do with zines, but he has written time and time again for Verbicide and did a reading for the Zinester Podcasts and tables at the Portland Zine Symposium every year... so, he, and his self-published books count, in my opinion. If the author of the book you've reviewed here has made comparable contributions to the zine world, by all means it stays (as an entry, not a review). But those are just my thoughts on it, and I removed the relevency tag when we started ZineWiki for a reason. Alan Fall of Autumn 19:13, 27 September 2006 (EDT)
It seems like this one should be deleted then, I think the same is true with the Game Quest listing Tom mentioned, I just read it. There is a big potential for abuse here with book publishers and authors essentially trying to get free ads here for their books--books that have nothing to do with zines. I'd delete both, but I could not see a function to do so. I also think the authors should be notified first. dan10things 20:55, 28 September 2006 (EDT)

I really hope zinewiki doesn't start keeping out work by indie artists on technicalities. Is this the time to start restricting contributions, contributors, and entries? Let's look at the def of the site ZineWiki is an open-source encyclopedia devoted to zines and independent media. It covers the history, production, distribution and culture of the small press. Feel free to add your project, contribute additional information to already existing pages, or to edit what’s already published. Subjects should be explained in terms of their relevance to zines and independent media.

I think you would have to be a lawyer looking for loopholes to rule out some indie novels but not others. This is small press for sure . Numerous chapbooks authors may or may not have written zines. Do we start ruling some but not other chapbooks? Webb HAS contributed to Musea. And so has Leopold (Game Quest) come to think of it.. Musea 22:21, 28 September 2006 (EDT)

I think what Dan is afraid of is every person who self-publishes a vanity book and sells them on their site via PayPal will barge in and clutter our encyclopedia up with entries that are basically a commercial for their product. Because books are different than zines, in price and scope and production. Yes the definition that Emerson and I wrote says "small press," this was done to include self-published pamphlettes, journals, quarterlies, newspapers - things that weren't called zines, but that were made in the same spirit. If both authors have contributed to your zine, awesome, then they are welcome here. But their entries might be edited to contain factual and relevent info only, and to not sound like a sales pitch.
Also, Dan, I'm upping your account here, so you should have revert and delete privledges now, I hadn't before because we had just met and I wanted to make sure you were going to be sticking with this. So that brings the admins list to myself, Kate, you and Emerson. Alan Fall of Autumn 23:19, 28 September 2006 (EDT)

Dan has an extreme, long standing prejudice against the Underground LIterary Alliance, and every one and everything connected to it. Can you, Dan be fair at zinewiki, when you've had such a consistent anti-ULA stand for so many years? Musea 13:12, 29 September 2006 (EDT)

Tom, try to get out of paranoid-mode for a minute and see that Alan was the first person to question why this was included on the ZineWiki. It's not a technicality to limit the scope of ZineWiki to zines and zine-related projects, it's sticking with the mission and vision of this wonderful resource. Keep your eyes on the prize: zines. If you are adding something that isn't a zine, isn't about zines, or isn't obviously related to the zine community, it's not appropriate for the ZineWiki. No lawyers are needed, it's really a no-brainer, the books that are included should be about zines. dan10things 13:17, 29 September 2006 (EDT)

Ok, Alan said to come here and talk to make my points.

I just noticed the entry for my novel, Game Quest, has been deleted. I tried to write as fair an account of the book as possible. If people felt it was too one-sided, then they are free to edit it. I thought that was the point of wiki? I think it's unfair to disclude indie books merely because they are longer and usually singular in nature. It doesn't change the amount of work that went into them, the spirit behind them (essentially the same as printing a zine!) Book entries look like reviews because there is only one book. If someone put up a zine entry for zine that had only one issue, it would essentially be a review for that zine as well. I run the ezine Red Fez Publications, and have printed several small poetry zines and a zine novella The Red Fez. But my format is novels. I'm part of the ULA which also is a big advocate for zeening and independent art. Are we going to start dividing our forces, our common endeavours and hopes for a ground-up culture into 'real arists' and 'poseurs'? There's this new link with Punk Planet. Punk Planet is not a zine, it's mass manufactured. Does it belong here any more than an indie artist? Punk Planet also reviews indie books. My book is, essentially, about a company that pioneers a new art form out of their garage - indie games, essentially - and is taken over by the heartless money-making machine of the mainstream market. I fail to see how that does not relate to the zine movement!

Zines are (were, at least) about breaking boundaries. Why are we suddenly throwing up walls?

I think we're splitting hairs when we say 'because this has too many pages, it's not a zine.' I think the worry that independent authors are going to start coming out of the woodwork to put 'ads' on here is a little far-fetched. First off, the only indie authors who are even going to know about zinewiki are those already involved in the scene on some level. Secondly, people don't just come to zinewiki and SLAM! get hit with advertisements. You only find entries by looking for them. People will only find book entries if they've already searched the author or found some other reasonable link to it, from a zine entry perhaps. I'd be very surprised (though happy!) if the entry for Game Quest here sold one book! The point, for me, is to have a record of it. Why aren't we worried that every half-assed teenaged zinester who put out a comic they drew while picking their nose in history class is going to contribute here? It's about as reasonable.

It seems counter-productive to me to disclude books. Sure, make another category. Make some terms for what counts and what doesn't, but ignoring art that doesn't fall into the rigid traditional category of zine seem harmful. In any case, I think SOME effort should be made to contact the author! People like myself add entries to zinewiki not because we're looking for free advertising, but because we want to be part (and feel we ARE part) of this movement. Remember, zinewiki relies on people wanting to contribute and join and be a part of it as much as zinesters rely on zinewiki to document it.

Those are my thoughts.