Talk:The Invisibles

Clean-up

Although this article is accurate and informative, it could use some quality clean-up:

The article is too long, focusing as it does on a detailed plot synopsis of each trade paperback in the series. The plot summaries can be substantially condensed, leaving more room for, e.g., brief analysis and cultural or literary influences, in addition to populating the "External Links" section which is now blank.
The style should conform more closely to encyclopedic standards. Although grammatically and syntactically correct, certain paragraphs contain pop-journalistic or advertising-copy affectations ("Pause. Play"; use of long ellipses). Otherwise, a good effort. -- Michael Sidlofsky 15:27, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Started work on the page, tidied up parts as well as expanding it.The plot summarries do need some extensive cleaning up. It would be good if we could list the artists who worked on each volume as well. I intend to return to carry on work on it.Logan1138 16:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

~I was the one who extended the Invisibles entry a while back. I understand what you two are saying about the length of the summaries, but like the person below me, I really do believe they shed light on the plot of the series like no other source on the web. If things are changed, I hope that at least the parts concerning the Hand of Glory and Jack Frost's destiny are left in since they are two of the most confusing elements in the story and not even "The Bomb" fansite has been able to thouroughly explain them. Thanks for all your feedback.

I had a good read through my issues and yes, i changed my mind and i agree, the summaries are very good and needed. I only tweaked a few things, added some Wki links and added images to break up the text and illustate the summaries. I really don't see much, if any further work being done on it. However i still intend to come back and credit the artists who worked on the series. Logan1138 21:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I read the whole thing. I agree it's pretty good, although there is a fair share of awkward sentences and some confusing punctuation. But I really think source references are missing for several of the explanations. The plot summaries contain a lot of interpretation/analysis, and most of it might be correct, but if it isn't explicitly (or fairly explicitly) stated in the comic itself, it should be sourced. And I think there are quite a few of those statements in the text.

I've read a lot of Invisibles discussion and analysis, and I got the feeling when reading this that some of it is the author's interpretation more than "fact." 193.91.181.142 00:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC) (Nick)[reply]

Thoughts on the cleanup

Actually, I think the detailed summaries help in the understanding of the series. I've looked around the internet and have yet to see such a large and detailed summary of the invisibles, that sort of "explains all" and I think the summaries deserve to be there to help people understand what exactly happened in the series. Even the website the bomb does not provide such a detailed play by play of what went on in the comic book.

spoooooillleerrrrsss....

whatever

Missing data

Which year was it published!?

An excellent article - much appreciated

As it stands (02 December 2005) I think it is an excellent summary of the series -- lucid and informative. I've spent the last week re-reading The Invisibles from start to finish, and it STILL took this article to help me decipher the last twelve issues. I'm not sure where the idea that John = Quimper comes from, but that's part of the fun, isn't it? Good work all, and thanks!

Thanks.I think i speak for everyone who has worked on this and say it's good to see it's so appreciated.Logan1138 12:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Biggest Spoiler?

video game... inhaled as a gas... intentionally not included?

~It was just a metaphor for how the Invisibles were playing a game. The whole series wasn't actually a videogame.

Characters

The section is a nice idea but it might be a better idea to create a seperate page for them to be listed as such. It doesn't seem neccessary to list every character in such a way. Plus a seperate page could be better spoiler protected. Thoughts?Logan1138 15:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

~Makes sense.

Ok then, i'll move the characters section to a seperate page and slap spoiler tags,etc on it. Plus it'll help keep the size of the main article down as it's getting a bit big now.Logan1138 11:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Invisiblism

It would be nice to have some analysis on the philosophies presented in the series, the illusion of human struggle and the subjectiveness of reality and the inevitability of the future and the search for freedoms and all that. I'd do it but I'd immediatley fall into endless run-on sentences with pop journalism sentiments and heavy bias. :)

I'd do it, too, but I have no idea how to word any of it. ;)

If it us added, then I suggest it is included in an "anlysis" section after the plot summaries. Solofire6 18:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try! Tell me what you think. :) Solofire6 18:53, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Invisible Kingdom

I added in some ideas I learned from a friend of mine who's like an Invisibles guru. Solofire6 22:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Culture Reference

There are a lot of references to popular culture and conspiracy theories in particular. Should a page be made for such things - especially those that aren't the center of the plot ? Like the inclusion of Rennes-le-Chatteau. Or real life people who appear or are mentioned, such as the scene with John Lennon and Stuart Sutcliffe and how Princess Di refused to give birth to the Outer Church's new king thing. Thoughts? Atropos 04:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Active status?

I'd argue the phrasing of what members of the team are active at the end of the series, since at that point the entire reality collapses in the supercontext. 6_9 Invisible Queen 12:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Listing the members is unnecessary. There is a page for that and this a page about the series, not the actual organization. Solofire6 01:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review, Good Article, Featured Article?

I was wondering if anyone wanted to get this a peer review and eventually up to GA or even FA status? I think the series definitely deserves it and the article is already pretty good. Atropos 04:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchists

i am removing List of Invisibles Characters from the Category:Fictional anarchists because the article should be included there, not the list of caracteres. If you consider that they are not anarchists, please remove it, i don't know anything about this comic. I'm also leving a not in Talk:List of Invisibles Characters, thanks --Cacuija (my talk) 02:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gnostisism

How can there be an article of such length about The Invisibles with no mention of Gnostic ideas? 193.91.181.142 23:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC) (Nick)[reply]

Unverified Analysis

Most of the analysis is verified by the series itself.

Exactly. For example, I'm sure Helga's translation of the 64-letter alphabet is seen as unverified. It's not stated that by learning the 64-letter alphabet she becomes enlightened, but it is stated earlier on in the series. Both Sir Miles and Cell 23 say that the 23-letter alphabet limits human ability to express abstract thought since they cannot properly name/describe the reality of the world they inhabit. The Invisibles see reality for what it is briefly when Cell 23 exposes them to words derived from the 64-letter alpabet in Counting to None. Plus, the Grant Morrison interview in Anarchy For the Masses: The Disinformation Guide to the Invisibles confirms a lot of what is said in this article. Solofire6 07:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]