Thread:Undoniel/@comment-5270921-20190224042313/@comment-3406131-20190224105012

Hi! Indeed, that's been a while, glad you're back (and I hope you're gonna stick around)!

On this one, I have to agree with ADour and AnnabellRice, the designers are the ones who should be credited, no matter the order of the first appearance's writer and penciler.

That said, I think that in such cases (as this one seems to be discussed on the Internet and comic-book community), that argument should get its place in a "note" (or a "trivia"), where such issues can be explained in a better way to the whole community than an edit war. As for a few pages I've edited, a "Creators2 = (See notes)" field could do the trick (see Sareeta (Earth-616) for example).

Interestingly, that argument brought up a few points on which I often question myself:
 * Should the Marvel writer and Marvel penciler of an adapted material be credited? (see Category:Cthulhu Mythos and Category:Literary Characters for examples) I would say that yes, the adaptaters (?) of a concept should be credited (which can be tricky in my regards considering some topics can be adapted without any continuity between the adaptation, like Erich Zann (Earth-616) who was adapted twice in Earth-616] (so in those cases, it's "first-come first-served"). Given mythological and historical figures get credited, I tend to say yes, but maybe it's the other way? (but then we would be uncreditting authors for the such of modern age Thor and Hercules...)
 * Should the original creators of a character be credited on the alternate versions of this one? For now, the custom is to only put the writer and penciler of the issue in which they first appear.
 * And while I talking about Sareeta, Annabell, there is indeed a problem of the same kind on Sareeta (Earth-616): Roy Thomas and Barry Smith made plans for a comics on Kull's youth. The project was abandonned but Smith produced finished drawings (later published in (1974). The precise date of the drawings is unrevealed, only that it was "in the early days of the Conan comic-magazine" (1970-71?), "several years ago". Roy Thomas did create Sareeta in  (1971) but with a different penciler. There is no real difference in concept for her (she is a naked and bound girl with long hair), but Kull's concept is a lot different. It's basically the same as  or before that Starr (Earth-616). Without taking in account the fact I have no precise date, in the case the Smith concept was earlier, should he be credited? I'm unsure but I tend towards the choice of not creditting him on the basis the project was abandonned, yet given Roy Thomas was on both creative teams, he could have transposing earlier concept from Smith.