Talk:Electro (comics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I removed the following from the article because I don't think RPG stats belong in Wikipedia. Since large numbers of these "vital stats" sections have been added to various articles, I'm using Talk:Strength level (comics) to discuss this issue in general. Bryan 08:15, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Vital statistics
- Name: Maxwell Dillon
- Height: 5'11
- Weight: 165 lbs.
- Eyes: Blue
- Hair: Red
- Intelligence: Normal
- Strength: (unenhanced) Normal, (charged) Superhuman Class 10
- Speed: (unenhanced) Normal, (charged) Metahuman
- Stamina: (unenhanced) Normal, (charged) Metahuman
- Durability: (unenhanced) Normal, (charged) Metahuman
- Agility: (unenhanced) Normal, (charged) Metahuman
- Reflexes: (unenhanced) Normal, (charged) Superhuman
- Origin of Superhuman Powers: Freak lightning accident at an electrical facility which resulted in a body-wide mutagenic change in his nervous system. This change transformed him into a living, electrical capacitator. Essentially, he can shoot electricity at people and kill them. When his body is charged with immense levels of electricity he becomes superhumanly strong as well.
Contents |
[edit] Vandalism
The IP User:199.79.168.160, who removed the section on previous Electros, has been repeatedly cited for vandalism, and is apparently currently blocked. I've restored the section. — Tenebrae 21:36, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Magnetic Powers
Technically, Electro's magnetic powers should be just as good as his eletrical powers, since current flow and charge are related to magnetic force (through movement). Jackpot Den 00:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- True, but for Dillon to realize that, he'd have to be cleverer than he's often shown. Plus, Mangeto's already got the magnetism schtick. Dr Archeville 20:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Earlier Electros
In the interest of cooperation, I've refrained from bringing up that, in existing print-encyclopedia format, the chronologically first Electros would be up top, the first section after the introduction. Chronological outline is one of the basic tenets of encyclopedic writing, which is different from popular-press magazine writing. I've avoided reversions/mediation on this issue, so I ask that if we're going to do this as a popularity contest rather than an encyclopedia, let's at least retain the link I've returned to the lead. A bit of give and take here, please. - Tenebrae 10:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reason for deleting wikidate overlinkage
It's per Wikipedia style guidelines. This from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29#Avoid_overlinking_dates
- Avoid overlinking dates
- If the date does not contain a day and a month, date preferences will not work, and square brackets will not respond to your readers' auto-formatting preferences. So unless there is a special relevance of the date link, there is no need to link it. This is an important point: simple months, years, decades and centuries should only be linked if there is a strong reason for doing so. Make only links relevant to the context for the reasons that it's usually undesirable to insert low-value chronological links.
- Usage of links for date preferences
-
- year only. So 1974 → 1974. Generally, do not link unless they will clearly help the reader to understand the topic.
- month only. So April → April. Generally, do not link
- century. So 20th century → 20th century. Generally, do not link
- decade. So 1970s → 1970s. Generally, do not link (including an apostrophe (1970's) is incorrect
- year and month. So April 1974 → April 1974 Generally, do not link
- new year and month. So April 2000 → April 2000 Generally, do not link unless they will clearly help the reader to understand the topic. Presently, articles only exist for combinations from the year 2000 to current
- day of the week (with or without other date elements). So Tuesday → Tuesday. Generally, do not link.
- year only. So 1974 → 1974. Generally, do not link unless they will clearly help the reader to understand the topic.
--Tenebrae 03:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More vandalism
The Marvel Electro images -- though not the Atlas Electro image -- was removed by the vandal User:4.244.48.62 on 15 March 2006 at 22:39 & 22:40. Since it's been indicated in the comics that the Marvel Electro is bisexual, this appears to be homophobic vandalism. -- Tenebrae 01:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gecko?
According to the page History User talk:Rtkat3 on 13:51, 11 April 2006 changed "A Counter-Earth version of Electro appeared in the Spider-Man Unlimited animated series" to "A gecko who is Counter-Earth's version of Electro appeared in the Spider-Man Unlimited animated series."
I'm afraid I haven't seen that animated series, and since anything's possible, is this vandalism as I suspect, or did the screenwriters get wiggy and have a gecko character? -- Tenebrae 15:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hyper-Electro deletion?
Can we merge this into the Electro file (under video games) or delete it outright? There is no reason that a character that appears only once in a video game needs its own entry.
[edit] Bisexuality
It was just removed from the article that an arc suggested he is bisexual. He's listed in the LGBT comic book characters category. Anyone want to comment on this so if it is either returned or removed after being returned, this discussion can be referred to to prevent revert wars? Sorry if this reads poorly, not in a coherent mood right now. --Newt ΨΦ 02:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
He's not lsited by Marvel as being Bisexual, or even gay. Your guess is as good as mine on who keeps putting it up. IronCrow 05:43, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's in Marvel Knights Spider-Man #2. There's your source. Thanos6 19:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)