Talk:Love Is...

New Zealand Mid‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comics: Strips 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 Comic strips work group.

reword[edit]

however, no anatomical features are included

Arms, legs and noses are anatomical features! Can we find a better wording? The Wednesday Island 02:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are "anatomically incorrect"? --22:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

"No secondary sexual characteristics are shown?" - I know, I know...kind of silly to be throwing this in 5 years after the last edit, but I just found the page. GodaiNoBaka (talk) 22:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Child Pornography[edit]

How can people let it go on? Two naked eight year olds? Is this any better than Hentai?

-G

Yeah, I think the article definitely needs to mention that the characters look like toddlers. I added a few lines about it. I wonder if there should be a "Controversy" section. Lcduke 00:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "eight-year-olds" thing is a joke from The Simpsons. They are not eight Baller McGee (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CHILD PORN, HRADLY!!![edit]

You people have nothing better to do, you take something so innocent and pure and change into child porn! that's preposterous, get a life!

Innocent and pure, eh? Hradly. Have you noticed that the artist's brothers are the designers of first-person shooter computer games? Have a look at the family pictures. There's no way that smirking Gen-X geek doesn't know the connotations of his work. Lcduke 19:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erm.. I think their mom started making these as love notes in like 1960... I HIGHLY doubt that she meant for it to be pornography. --BiT 22:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth the "Love is..." characters are no more immune to misappropriation for "adult" purposes than any other cartoon character. As far back as the 1970s, I can recall hand-drawn and crudely mimeographed copies of definitely NSFW "Love Is..." comics being distributed. It's probably inevitable - look at the popularity of the various "rule 34" sites. But if we're talking about the official, artist-drawn strips, you would have to have an extremely low threshold for "pornography" to find these strips offensive. GodaiNoBaka (talk) 22:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Love is...[edit]

I don't understand why it's "is" is capitalized? Look at the picture, it sais Love is... not Love Is... Dose anyone mind if I move it? --Steinninn ^talk 17:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the page Death Note has both words capitalized. I think the rule is that in headers you capitalize every word that isn't an adposition? --BiT 22:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No sorry, every word that isn't conjunction.. Don't quote me on that one though. --BiT 22:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what conjunction is, but isn't is conjunction? --Steinninn ^talk 22:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. "is" is a verb. conjunctions have a page describing them in detail; read it. --Rpresser 20:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Straight Outta Lynwood was decided by original capitalization. 128.146.46.2 (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not for Wiktionary[edit]

Thanks, but titles of comic strips don't meet wikt:WT:CFI. The translations we have at e.g. wikt:I love you#Translations, cover this anyhow. --Connel MacKenzie - wikt 09:57, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is Stefano still working on this?[edit]

The GoComics page now says "by Kim Casali, conceived by and drawn by Bill Asprey". Did Bill take over writing at some point recently or do they just not credit Stefano for the same reason it's still signed "Kim"? Octan (talk) 06:17, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Asprey has been writing and drawing the cartoons since 1975. Jennifer Government 00:23, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kim "Grove"[edit]

Did she use the name Kim Grove? She was born "Marilyn Judith Grove" but styled herself "Kim" Casali. Jennifer Government 19:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, she called herself Kim Grove, and published many books of her cartoons under that name.

Seems we can't link to amazon.com which is a pity because if we could you would see dozens of Love Is..... books with Kim Grove's name as author on the covers. Am restoring her name to the article. Moriori (talk) 23:41, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And yet the reference you appended to para 1 states: "... Kim Casali continued to create her "Love is..." cartoons, which were printed here at the paper, syndicated nationally and appeared in more than 60 countries... A few, however, stood up for Casali, writing... Kim Casali died in 1997." And is illustrated with a cartoon by... Kim Casali. Discuss. Jennifer Government 23:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you deliberately being obtuse? The first sentence of the reference says "....Kim Grove, a New Zealand-born waitress....". It is used to verify the name in the first sentence of our article which says "....created by New Zealand artist Kim Grove....". That is accurate regardless that her later married name became Casali, and especially as she published numerous books as Kim Grove after she was married. Moriori (talk) 00:09, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obtuse? Far from it, in fact I rather suspect you are. She is far more notable as "Casali" than "Grove." It was her legal name, it was the name she used for virtually all of her work. Even Bill Asprey on his website uses "Casali." Jennifer Government 00:17, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rude? How ironic coming from someone who ended a post above with a schoolmarmish "discuss". I have adequately explained that the reference verifies the name in the first sentence of the intro. Subsequent marriage cannot change that fact, and I say again, even after her marriage she published books with her name as author, Kim Grove. Moriori (talk) 01:06, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The statement that the comic Love Is... is a example of Child pornography is true.[edit]

The statement of that the comic Love Is... is a example of Child pornography is true. - 186.220.137.52 (talk) 13:47, 2 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]

You left something out. Reliable references. Moriori (talk) 20:00, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another ghost[edit]

When I interviewed cartoonist Dale Hale for Hogan's Alley Magazine a few years back, he indicated that he had ghosted the strip for a year while Casali's husband was ill. --Nat Gertler (talk) 01:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is it still going?[edit]

Has the strip been discontinued? It seems to have disappeared from Comics Kingdom, and I don't see a trace of it. 65.78.20.206 (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]