Talk:Daredevil (Marvel Comics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Archives
[edit] Powers
Doesn't anyone do research? DD doesn't have super agility or strength. Here's proof.
http://www.manwithoutfear.com/ddORIGIN.shtml http://www.marvel.com/comics/Daredevil http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/d/daredevil.htm
[edit] Plot summaries
Before this gets any farther out of hand, please, as regular editors, read the WP:COMIC consensus on plot summary, Wikipedia policy on plot summary (#7), and Wikipedia's styleguide to fictional articles. Summaries should be kept to a minimum, per Wikipedia policy, and only used to help readers understand the real-world aspects of the character or work. Primary sources (like the comics) should be used sparingly. This article has possibilities, as much of the article is kept to out-of-universe discussions of the character (at least relative to articles like Magneto (comics) or Wolverine (comics)), and I'd like to see this article someday become featured, but if we start summarizing arc by arc, it's not going to happen. I know this may come off as possessive or pretentious, but plot summaries with no secondary analysis are against Wikipedia policy. This is why I'm posting here before trying to make any drastic edits or cut out anything that may just get reverted.
If you want to write about Daredevil as if he is a real person, this is not the place to do it. It infringes on copyright and gives no basis for understanding the character to an uninformed reader. --Newt ΨΦ 15:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Boy, this article has too much detail. For example, a story like Daredevil: The Man Without Fear which has its own Wikipedia entry should have little or no detail here. Doczilla 16:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- Agree with Doczilla. The Bendis/Maleev portion is way out of hand. It needs to be a much shorter, summary-style section suitable for lay people seeking information about the character in an encyclopedia. Fannish-level detail is inappropriate, and best suited to the many terrific fan sites out there. I can cite the same chapter and verse on the Comics Project examplar page, etc., as Newt ΨΦ does above, or can we save the time and reinsert an older, more streamlined version of this section.
- We've all had this debate before, and the consensus of both the editors and Wiki mediators is to use the shorter version. -- Tenebrae 04:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Why hasn't anyone taken up my pleas for help by removing all the character bio stuff from Pub History into Fictional Biography? Plot descriptions have no place in Publication History! It should only be information salient to the book as a real world object - creators, publishing timeline, etc. GodzillaWax 09:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I agree with GodzillaWax. The pub-hist section should focus on the creative teams, give map directions to the numbering scheme, awards, etc., and only noting plot events that, for instance, temporarily change the cover-title. The tricky part, then, is to take the other information currently there and integrate it with char-bio without including too much unwieldly detail and minutiae. -- Tenebrae 17:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Marvel Ultimate Alliance
Daredevil is a playable character in Marvel Ultimate Alliance. He is pictured in the Team Builder[1] section of the Marvel Ultimate Alliance website[2]. It is rumored that he must be unlocked before he is playable according to Marvel Ultimate Alliance. Bondswalterppk 23:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fictional
I notice the title of a sub-section has been changed to "Fictional character biography" from "character biography" - why? surely people understand what the word "character" means? --Charlesknight 21:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars, which is a one-stop must-see for all of his WikiProject Comics folk! --Tenebrae 00:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Overhaul
This page has been stagnant for a long time, even though as far back as 6 months ago big changes were agreed upon. So I've started the butchering to get everything together. Changes:
- Fixed some tense issues in Origin, and rewrote some things ( I first wrote that stuff probably 8 months ago and it needed to be tweaked ).
- The creator list was big and strangely incomplete -- e.g. listing 'no regular writer, 1985-1986', that kind of thing -- so I've condensed it down to just links to categories. There's no need to be redundant with creator listings ( especially an incomplete one ) when a category takes care of it for you.
- Moving character history stuff out of publication history and into the fiction biography. This is definitely NOT COMPLETE. A LOT of work has to be done here. Publication history should only be notable developments with regards to creative teams, the status of the book ( cancelled? renumbered? ), and issues of that nature. Character biography should be the closest thing to plot summaries this page has.
I'd appreciate any help in getting this all under control. Like I said, I've started the moving around process, but now things need to be fleshed out. Cheers GodzillaWax 20:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- I removed a lot of the excess headers. Many of the sections were only one paragraph long, and it cluttered up the TOC. CovenantD 20:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Past Tense / Reverts
Wiki-newbie, please do not just blindly revert the origin section anymore. You may have been trying to change the tense of what I wrote, but you also wiped out a lot of sentence changes and updating.
Additionally, your assertion that there is no past tense in fiction is flawed. Suggestions high school English teachers give for making creative writing essays more readable does not translate into how one should recount the details of a fictional characters life. The section heading is 'fictional character biography'. What biography have you ever read that was written in the present tense? The whole point is that what is being retold happened once already. GodzillaWax 22:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sexual Frustration
It is a valid theory that Daredevil is sexually frustrated and cannot win the affections of the Punisher. The theory has been brought to light many times; can't it be included in the article? What style is appropriate for such an insertion? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.28.71.162 (talk • contribs).
- Your comments would be taken more authoritatively if you would follow the rules of Wikipedia. This includes, at the most basic, reading directions on the edit page that explain how to sign your posts.
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. If you were discussing string theory, for example, you would have to cite an authoritative source that references an authoritative theorist, such as (hypothetically), "Dr. John Smith of Harvard published a theory in 1995 that posited a multi-dimensional universal principle called 'string theory' that scientists Dr. Jane Doe and John Roe further postulated in 1998 explained the existence of 'dark matter'...", with proper footnotes. If it's your own, theory, however, that's disallowed under the guideline "No Original Research". --Tenebrae 16:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
It is not my own theory. It was suggested by a comic book enthusiast with a master's degree in psychology. Procedure means nothing to me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.28.71.162 (talk • contribs).
- Obviously. Why don't you go vandalize a phone book or something? CovenantD 20:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- the simple answer is no we are not adding that - until or unless it appears in a marvel comic book or similar source. "some bloke said" is not a source. --Charlesknight 16:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, it would preferably appear in a reliable secondary source, comic articles rely too much on primary sources as it is. --PsyphicsΨΦ 20:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- the simple answer is no we are not adding that - until or unless it appears in a marvel comic book or similar source. "some bloke said" is not a source. --Charlesknight 16:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- true true but I suspect if Daredevil 99 had the line "oh Frank, how I long for your big hard cock" that such a discussion would be moot. --Charlesknight 21:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Genius
Has anyone every got any conversation out of the 172.XXX editor who keeps trying to add in that Daredevil is a genius? --Charlesknight 10:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- None here. The guy's an obsessive and clearly doesn't play well with others.--Tenebrae 15:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Link to "Unproduced Screenplay"
I'm deleting the link to an unproduced spec script - there are surely lots of these out there, and more notable. Why include this one and no others? --Chancemichaels 16:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Chancemichaels
[edit] "Good people come in all colors shapes and sizes"
I just wondering. I'm Roman Catholic. I was talking with so ppl who think Daredevil is a bad character because his name had the word "devil" in it, but other say that it don't matter because he's a hero who fights for what's right. I think it doesn't matter what your name is or how you dress, it matter what you fight for and weather you're a good person or not. What do you guys think?
[edit] Infobox text.
The caption for the infobox picture reads: Totally gay promotional art by Alex Maleev for cover of Daredevil vol. 2, #41 (March 2003) Am I correct in assuming that the phrase 'totally gay' doesn't belong? I'm taking it out. Valencerian 19:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Early life.
The graphic novel Yellow by Jeph Loeb would seem to be in stark contrast to the origin presented in The Man Without Fear by Frank Miller. Yellow presents his classic Silver Age origin, while The Man Without Fear brings it into the 80s. Which one is the proper version? I know Marvel doesn't use multiple origins and versions like DC, so one must be wrong. Feb 07 MH
- Neither is wrong, largely due to the fact that these are fictional stories. They're all right. There are lots of small variations in the retellings of the origins, and Marvel has even put out its Mythos line of books, which combine comic book and movie origin details and add more. It will only matter the next time it's written about in the comics. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 09:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Worth nominating for GA status?
...This article's now been graded as "A", so is considered one of the best articles within WP:CMC - which means that it probably has a decent shot at getting Good article status, if a couple of things (such as the citation requests on the fictional biographyand a redlink or two) can be resolved first. Even if it doesn't make GA status, there should be some useful feedback. Opinions? --Mrph 18:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Right then. Nobody's screamed stop, and although the article's not perfect it's looking pretty good. Let's see what we get back... --Mrph 21:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Quickfail
I see five categories at the bottom just screaming at me:
- Articles lacking sources from February 2007
- All articles lacking sources
- Comics articles needing issue citations
- Articles with unsourced statements since February 2007
- All articles with unsourced statements
Check these sort of things before nominating guys.--SeizureDog 21:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Needs Cleanup
Most of publication history and fictional character biography still need work. I harp about this every few months without actually contributing much, so apologies, but it still needs work before it should be considered a model of anything. GodzillaWax 16:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Recurring characters
I'm confused as to why someone feels that citations are needed for Gladiator and Jessica Jones, but not for any of the other characters in the list - especially the latter, as her line is much the same as Luke Cage's ('was a bodyguard for him') but his line hasn't been deemed in need of a citation.
My gut feeling is that all of the characters should have a citation, or none of them should. Otherwise how does one quantify which ones to cite and which not to?
[edit] Sources For Biography?
How can anyone put a "needs to cite its references" on the fictional character biography? That's fairly asinine. There's 40 years worth of comics that are being summarized in a few paragraphs - theres no way individual issue citations could or should be added. GodzillaWax 16:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)