Talk:Punisher/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Merger

Note: Some of the material in this article has been copied from The Punisher. See the edit history of that article for attributions. —Paul A 01:53, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Oppose merger. I'd also suggest severaly cutting down Punisher: MAX, which is so minutely detailed I doubt it's of encyclopedic use — it's too overwhelmingly obsessive to help a person not versed in the Punisher, and reads not like an encyclopedia article but a fan site. The level of detail may also violate Marvel copyright, in the manner of several quashed books and websites about TV shows and movies. -- Tenebrae 21:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Changing my vote to Merge, since most other comics-character articles include alternate versions such as Marvel's "Ultimate" universe. (Note that while some MAX comics are in mainstream continuity, others, such as the Nick Fury miniseries, reportedly aren't. Don't know where Punisher MAX falls.) This would also address the lengthiness and over-detail here, by condensing the material to fit within a section. -- Tenebrae 18:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge - Cut Punisger: MAX down and merge it. Someone more familiar with the subject may want to do this, but I will do so if need be. --Chris Griswold 00:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Merge -I have to agree merge it, makes more sense to me to have everything all together Danrduggan 15:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Oppose but edit Punisher Max. There is lots of precedent for the multiple titles of characters having separate entries, and given that Punisher Max is such a departure from other depictions it has a pretty strong claim. Obviously there will be crossover in some of the material in both articles but that too is standard elsewhere. However the Max article is full of unimportant detail and plot information and all that stuff needs to be severely edited out while more real world details, such as a timelines of publication, could be added. Hueysheridan 17:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Oppose merger. If we merge Punisher MAX into Punisher we should merge here also all articles listing issues with division to series and descriptions what would probably create wikipedias biggest article as there are about 20 articles like that. Some of them done pretty well like The Punisher Kills the Marvel Universe. I don't get why to merge those articles together, one is about whole punisher character/phenomen and other one is about specific series of issues. (thanks for notice Hueysheridan) Jakilcz 22:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge - This isn't alternate continuity, is it? If so, I would say go ahead and keep it, but trim it. If this is main continuity there's no reason to keep it, just continue the same Punisher article, noting the changes in the character due to the MAX imprint. --Newt ΨΦ 22:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge and severely pare down. Wikiproject Comics' worst impulse is for enthusiastic plot breakdowns to the point of minutia. I have no problem with plot synopses at all (I've discovered several wonderful comics titles based on them) but no more than a few sentences are needed, and certainly not an issue-by-issue recap. This isn't ComicBooksWithoutPity.com <g>. -Markeer 13:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Oppose there should be enough room for both

Merge and trim. We don't need blow-by-blows here. And if there are sub articles, we can make an infobox: Punisher Storylines and go from there. -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 16:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

With the total votes on the page at 7-2 in favor, I'm gonna call this one a CONSENSUS TO MERGE. CovenantD 16:08, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose I don't think it would add any value to the site by merging the two articles. The history article, as mentioned above, is entirely too mired in minutia, and the plot selection is very arbitrary. It isn't really a history of the character at all, but rather a detailed recap of several story arcs.

RPG stats

I removed the following from the article because I really 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 08:00, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC) Also, copying such detailed RPG stats would be a copyright infringement. Wryspy 06:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Vital Statistics

  • Name: Frank Castle
  • Occupation: Vigilante
  • Hieght: 6'1
  • Wieght: 200 lbs.
  • Eyes: Blue
  • Hair: Black
    • Intelligence Level: Above Normal
    • Strength Level: Peak Human
    • Endurance Level: Peak Human
      • (sometimes enhanced by body armor)
    • Stamina Level: Peak Human
    • Speed Level: Athlete or Greater
    • Agility Level: Athlete or Greater
    • Reflexes: Peak Human
  • Special Skills, Abilities, Paraphenelia: The Punisher has at his disposal all manner of conventional and state of the art weaponry. Frank Castle is a master of many forms of unarmed combat, armed combat, and is a phenomenal marksman. The Punisher's arsenal and resourcefulness have made him infamous to organized crime.

Supervillain?

"The Punisher was a novel character in mainstream superhero comics when he debuted in 1974 in that he was willing to use lethal force to accomplish his aims, without actually being a supervillain." Wasn't he per se a "supervillain", since he was an antagonist to Spider-Man?

Not all superhero antagonists are necessarily villains - there is, for instance, a long and noble tradition of two superheroes meeting for the first time and spending most of the issue beating each other up before realising/deciding that they're actually on the same side. The Punisher's first appearance belongs to this tradition: he goes after Spider-Man because he's been tricked by the issue's real villain into thinking that Spidey is one of the bad guys. --Paul A 06:51, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)


Other notable appearances?

Should the bibliography mention stuff like his appearances in Damage Control, Captain Marvel, or the Earth X sequels? DS 12:36, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Revenge / Punishment

"he not only takes his vengence on the criminals who slew his family and those who ordered the hit but all criminals full stop."

I'm not sure about this. Castle repeatedly states that he's not doing this for revenge, that it's for punishment.

I think this paragraph should be amended stating that while the basic theme/premise behind the Punisher is one of vengeance, the Punisher himself does not feel that his actions are out of vengeance, but out of a desire to punish those criminals who might otherwise get away with their crimes. Something like:

"The Punisher can be seen as the revenge genre taken to an extreme as he not only takes his vengeance on the criminals who killed his family but all criminals full stop. There is no final villain as is the case with many revenge sagas, the Punisher's war with crime continues without end. The Punisher himself does not acknowledge that he engages in his war against the criminal underworld as vengeance for his deceased family. Instead, the Punisher decrees to himself that he chooses to continue the War in an effort to punish the criminal elements that might otherwise never be brought to justice." --Thenedain 05:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Opinion and the same links

Why does Punisher War Zone.com have two links? When one link takes you too both the site and the forums? And why does The Punisher War Zone say it's the number 1 site??? That's opinion, not fact. And why is a fan site listed on top?


English, people

Some of the spelling and grammar in this article has been atrocious. I've done what I can to clean things up, but I'm sure it'll resurface in time. - AWF

I've edited the first two sections, but the rest is a mess. And that took an hour. Eesh. -PD

Added a cleanup template. Halfway into the "Character history" section, the spelling, grammar, and prose deteriorates noticeably. If I have time, I might try my hand at helping clean it up, but there's a lot of work that needs to be done on this article.
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 12:12, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Did a ton of work on the "Character history" section, but I'm still not happy with some of its organization. I'll probably come back later to work on it a bit more.
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 05:37, 24 December 2005 (UTC)


It appears that someone is systematically undoing the edits that are being made. Your thoughts? -PD

I haven't noticed this happening and I have this page on my watchlist. What edits are you talking about specifically? Cheers.
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 06:17, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Removed possibly non-notable information from Ultimate Marvel version section

He is later seen trying to kill a bank robber, but is stopped by Spider-Man, who also catches the criminal.
That story (Ultimate Spider-Man #61) didn't sit well with Punisher fans. The Punisher is seen screaming his head off and shooting his guns and almost killing others like some maniac. Many fans complained that the Punisher was purposely written out of character, simply because the writer didn't have a liking for the character.

I removed this from the "Ultimate Marvel version" section because it didn't seem very notable. We can't include every comic that fans didn't like. Unless there was a real uproar over this, or this was indicative of a greater trend, I don't think it should be included. If someone can come up with that information and add it to what was there, then, by all means go for it. But until then, I think I'm going to keep it quarantined here on the talk page. Cheers.

-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 06:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, it was me eho added the info about his later appearance in Ultimate Spider-Man, where he fought a bank robber equipped with some kind of flying suit and was stopped by Spidey. Someone else written the part about fans not liking the story. I think the piece about the action should be left. It is, as far as I know, the only Ultimate Punisher appearance since he was imprisoned. So I think one line is not too much for this, as it is important to note, that he managed to escape from the prison. If he will continue to apperar of course this one little fact will be not significiant, but so far it is the only thing we have exept the Ultimate Marvel Team Up story. Cheers

Oh, one more thing. I think it should be noted, that Punisher doesn;t have his own Ultimate Punisher comic book, and that he only appeared as o guest in Ultimate Marvel Team-Up next to Spider-Man (who can be called the host of this serries) and Daredevil. I would be good to mention also that Frank and Jillette weren't just "caught by the police" as it is written now, but, that Castle fought Daredevil and was knocked out by interferring Spider-Man and that delivered by him to a police station. I could do it myself but I'm afraid that my English can be not good enough to play with bigger parts of text.

Ahh ok. That's a LOT more information than what was there originally. I'd consider that notable in its entirety, but it needs to be added in coherently. I'll try to go ahead and do so when I have a few moments free. Just to clarify, youre saying that Frank and Jillete weren't actually caught by the police but were brought to the police station by Spiderman who had knocked them both out, right?
Thanks a lot for clarifying. :)
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 02:36, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, I think It's story from Ultimate Marvel Team-Up 6,7 and 8. There was typical Daredevil vs. Punisher fight. None of them wanted to kill another but Daredevil wanted to persuade Frank not to kill criminals and Frank wanted Matt to leave him alone ;-) They met one time and then another. Daredevil started talking to Punisher that, what he does is not good (as in normal Marvel) when Frank was pointing his gun at Jillette. Suddenly out of nowhere Spider-Man swung in and knocked out Punisher with o kick. Daredevil told him to take Frank to the police and pursued Jillette who had started to flee. So it was probably Daredevil who brought Jillette to justice. I know that rewriting the whole story makes no sense. But! There are several important things:

- Daredevil and Punisher are fighting - as in mainstream Marvel. The roof scene even resembles a scene from Welcome Back Fran miniserries (I think it was issue #3) but here it is Punisher who loses the fight.

- wrting that Punisher was just caught by normal police is a bit dishonouring for him ;-) It would seem that he is not too good really. Beeing stopped by two super-powered heroes is another thing (even if they hate each other and one behaves like an idiot)

- when he next apears in Ultimate Spider-Man, it was issue 50-sometning I think (the first story about Carnage) it is clarified that also Spider-Man does not agree with his methods. So, despite that in Ultimate world Daredevil and Spidey are not friends, both of them will probably try to stop Frank when he escapes from prison next time. I'm not sure if you are able to get these UMTU issues (great artwork BTW).

This thing about liking or not liking the scence from USM when Frank is fighting the bank robber... I think that it's normal that Punisher's fans didn't like it :-P He appeared on one page, on 3 or 4 pctures maybe and was rather easily stopped by Spidey. It's strange that he was shooting carelessly all the time, but I think that we can not base any characteristic profile on this scene. Remember that in past he was also often shown as an idiot who shoots even peaople crossing the street in wrong place. I just think, that as it was the onyl subsequent appearance of the cahracter it should be noted.

Whew. Ok, I added much of that information back in. Tell me what you think. :) Two more things you could perhaps help clarify (since you seem to know a lot about the series :D).
1) What happened between when he's "laying on the ground bleeding," and when he kills the two crooked cops (David and unnamed dude)? Does he kill them immediately, while wounded? Or does he recover first and then goes after them?
2) Secondly how did he get out of prison (escaped? parole?) and how did he kill the other two cops (Nick and Bruce)? How long did it take for him to find Artie?
Thanks for your help so far!
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 18:17, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Great job you've done changing my mumbling into some readable language.

And now the answers:

1) To tell the truth, I don't know. I've never read the first issue of that story. I only read in the Net that he attacked inamtes during a meal when they were talking about Spider-Man or Daredvil. I'm not sure if he killed any of them, but probably he did (he's The Punisher anyway ;-) ).

2) He was talking with his lawyer who left some stuff on the table. I think it was paper clip and plastic cup or somethning like that ;-). I don't know if his escape is seen but we can suspect that he used this stuff to free himself. As I said I did'n read the first story but I'm not sure if there is any info about how he killed the first guys and was arrested. The whole story is told by his ex-partner to Matt Murdock in a retrospection. Just after telling the story he is killed by the Punisher who shoots through the window. I'm not sure about the order of the events, but I think that then he's got a talk with Daredevil on o roof. Finally he shoots in the direction of Daredevil, but it is explained by Murdock that he must have wanted to miss, as Daredevil's powers don't allow him to dodge bullets. Another guy is shot with a shotgun on a parking in front of a pub, just after the gou attacked someone for saying a good thing about Punisher. I thnk, that Frank dragged the guy out. Then he told something and shot him. Then there was the final scene with Daredevil and Spider-Man. Spider-Man attacked Puniher because he was aiming at Jillete's head.

Ah! Punisher made a cameo together with many other heroes in the Ultimate Marvel Team-Up Super-Special. When Peter Parker gives says his homework in front of the class there are depictions of the heroes he had met before that illustrate the current part of the lecture. There are daredevil and Punisher holding a shotgun depicted on one of the pictures. In the same issue we can also see Kong - Peter's classmate, who is not apparently the brightest guy in Ultimate Marvel universe, disguised as the Punisher when giving his speech (the homework's topic was about Super-Heroes). It seems that the Punisher became some kind of a celebrity in this Universe, as in one the Ultimate X-men there is a teenager who has a t-shirt with Punisher's skull on it. The guy also had posters of Spider-man and X-men in his room so it can be just an in-joke. On the other hand this issue is quite serious. So it seems, that you can buy Punisher T-shirts in Ultimate Marvel Universe ;-)

One More thing. Punisher also appeared in X-Men the animated serries.. but only had a cameo, and it was a hologram or something in some kind of fighting simulation. He was depicted as in Spider-Man cartoon - he had a... a piece of material you wear around your head to look like Rambo (sorry, don't know the word...) and some kind of futuristic big gun.

I'm not sure if an info about forecoming Punisher cartoon can be reliable. Look at the page about Spider-Man the animated serries for the censorship and limitations creators of serries had to cope with. They couldn't even use real guns! Policemen were armed with some kind of laser weapons! The same was with X-men. I think that if this policy didn't change Punisher cartoon would be rather impossible. OK, cheers, I hope that it will be helpful.

Sorry for any lacking "e"s or any other letters, my keybord isn't working as it should do... Good Luck.

One more thing. The criminal who bribed the cops was the Owl, who is a Darevil enemy in normal Marvel Universe. He is descriped by Frank's ex-partner as "a kingpin wannabe".


And one more thing about cartoons: "Kraven was a hunter in Spider-Man: The Animated Series. (...) In Duel of the Hunters, he was called by Crawford to cure Spider-Man from his disease, until his hunt was intterupted by Punisher, who wanted to kill Spider-Man. In the end, they work together to cure Spider-Man" this part is copied from Kraven's wikipdia page. It was, a far as I know, the first appearance of Punisher in the serries.

Re: My revert

72.245.34.187, this is the second or third time you've undone many of my changes. If you have a problem with them, discuss them here before undoing them again. Let me explain why I reverted them back.

1) No offense, but your english and prose leave a little to be desired. I made many changes to improve the readability and flow of the article. Pasting your text back in right afterwards without editting them in smoothly makes the overall article disorganized and occasionally repetitive.

2) Much of the content is unchanged. I don't know if you even read my changes, but if you had, you would notice that much of the information you provided is still intact. Thus, when you put back your text, the same information is often presented twice (e.g. his not-quite relationship with the assassin).

3) Some of your text reflects a somewhat biased perspective. Remember, this is an encyclopedia. While a lot of your comments are interesting (your comparisons to the Fantastic Four and Flash in particular), they're often provided in a sensationalistic, if not pro-Punisher way. While such writing may be at home in a marketing campaign, I don't think the prose fits well with the format of an encyclopedia. Regarding those examples in particular, I don't even know if that's entirely true. Yes, the Punisher is an anti-hero who is different from many altruistic superheroes, but the concept of anti-heroes is not a new one (hence why there's a name for it). So saying that he's entirely unique is a bit of a stretch.

Another section that's particularly biased is that on the Vietnam War. Saying that a generation was "lied" to is a POV. We have to preserve NPOV.

4) You removed the template regarding the merge. As far as I know, that issue hasn't even been addressed here yet. I think the suggestion is worthy of being discussed first, before removing the template entirely.

Again, please discuss the changes here before putting them back.

-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 14:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

That's starting to sound like fucking ass bullshit. So nobody at all can add anything else anymore??????? Your right and everybody else is wrong???? Is that how it is now?????

Hi. Thanks for the friendly introduction. Did you even read my comments above? One of the major issues is that the information is already IN there. If you have a problem with something in particular, talk about it instead of wildly making accusations. For the record, MORE THAN ONE PERSON has reverted your changes. In other words, most of the people here, as far as I know, appear to prefer the version I've editted. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm saying you should provide a defense for your changes before literally undoing the work I did. I kept your information and streamlined the article to the best of my ability; it has nothing to do with "me vs you."
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 15:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Help Wikipedia by expanding it.

That's starting to sound like fucking ass bullshit. So nobody at all can add anything else anymore??????? Your right and everybody else is wrong???? Is that how it is now?????

I'm with him or her on this. That's what it seems around here. Nobody esle is getting to a change to put in anything else. It's just all you. It is a you vs me. Or "us" vs you. Anything anyone else has to say or put in is taken out just like just becuase you don't like it. It looks like someone is palying favorites.

Indeed

That's starting to sound like fucking ass bullshit. So nobody at all can add anything else anymore??????? Your right and everybody else is wrong???? Is that how it is now?????

Indeed. That is fucking bullshit.

I hope you're aware that your ip and time of post is logged each time, so everyone knows that you and only you made all of the last 4 edits on this talk page. Unless of course, you're talking to the voices in your own head, in which case I suggest registering an account for each of them. Cheers.
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 17:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Warning!!! Warning!!! Warning!!!

You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. This false information. Anything that you would to put or say in will be taken out due to the fact that people hear will not agree with you.

So I can go to any article I want and insert giant ascii penises if I feel like it because I'm "expanding" the article? No. Anyone is allowed to make edits to Wikipedia but for the good of the encyclopedia as a whole, not to further a personal agenda. That means that you have to discuss disagreements with other people, not ramrod your changes in because you think your edits are better than anyone else's. Consensus is a goal here at Wikipedia (the link is to guideline; please read it). On a sidenote, so is civility (this is a policy), something which your rants here clearly lack. Please READ the guidelines and understand them before making ridiculous claims like the above. -- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 15:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice to know

Warning!!! Warning!!! Warning!!! You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. This false information. Anything that you would to put or say in will be taken out due to the fact that people hear will not agree with you.

Thanks. I won't come back here again.

Mergers

OK, WHY do we possibly need Brown Shoes insane creation, The Punisher v7? There is no need for this (poorly named) page to be separate from Punisher. None. And the whole History of the Punisher isn't needed separate either. Dyslexic agnostic 07:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC) Dyslexic agnostic 07:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

The whole history page is as follows... "Then on Monday Frank Castle went for a walk in the park with his dog. Then on Tuesday he shaved. Then he took a...". Please. Superman and Batman have nowhere near this level of detail, and those are far more significant characters than this one.
I definitely agree regarding The Punisher v7. I'm a little more hesitant about History of the Punisher, but, for the most part, I agree on that count as well. It might be possible to pare it down a bit, without making it a skeleton carbon copy of what's included here, but then again, I don't think a lot of the detail is necessary. I don't think we need much more discussion for the first. I'll try doing the honors if I have time and no one objects shortly. By the way, regardless of the irrationality of a user's submissions, please remember to be civil. Cheers.
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 10:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge the former, but leave the latter (the history) alone. Its large enough to warrent its own article and merging it back into the main Punish article would only serve to make it bloated.--KrossTalk 04:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with this approach - there are an awful lot of Punisher entries some unnecessary and some replicating data in other entries. As a side note there is also some other discussion on sorting out other Punisher entries over on the list of The Punisher comics talk page which could also do with input (Emperor 15:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC))

I agree with this. In a number of other articles relating to comics, the other storylines/one shots dealing with the character are mentioned in the main title, whereas larger histories are placed elsewhere. --Thenedain 05:36, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

More than one person here

You think he and she is the only one who uses the compueter here. We may use the same computere but that doesn't mean it's the same person.

Hahahah!

They think it's the same person...hehehe!

Frankly, I couldn't care less if it's the same person or not. It's pretty amusing that you first said, "I agree with him or her," and now it's "We" and "he and she." What happened? Did you suddenly remember what gender you were? Let's cut the crap and get to the real issue ok? If you (or your imaginary friends) disagree with something in the article, you can refer to the topic above and discuss them like an adult. Or you can continue to play charades like a child and probably get blocked from editting Wikipedia ever again. Your call. -- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 17:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

The Angelic Punisher

Well, here's an odd question, and I'm sure I'll get flamed for it - has anyone thought of adding the weird storyline where Frank Castle kills himself and is turned into an agent of God to the Wikipedia entry? He gets imbued with mystical powers and his origin is tied to that of a demon, or somesuch. It's definitely not a very good story... and obviously not canon, but was likely planned as a revamp of the character (which was pretty much unacceptable). If not, I can dig up some of the issues I got which mention that, and add an entry. Kitsune Sniper / David Silva 06:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I think there might be room for that, as I actually came to the Punisher entry looking for a bit of info about that series. I'd definitely like to see at least some kind of mention of it. --Thenedain 05:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Not canon? I remember angel-powered punisher fighting alongside Wolverine in a crossover.

I came here looking for information on the Angelic Agent, not Punisher, actually. I knew very little information about the character (Angelic Agent) except that he is a verion of the Punisher and that he can create or summon any weapon. -- Trakx 21:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The Wolverine/Angel Punisher crossover was called "Revelations". It had pretty neat manga-style art. I believe the entire Angelic Punisher stuff is now non-canon. It was briefly mentioned in the article. Brunbb 20:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of whether it's canon, it is part of the character's history and should be detailed, partially since it is so absurd. --Chris Griswold 00:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

It's canon - it's referenced in the first Ennis series --Charlesknight 22:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

The Russian's image upload

sup people, i just created a character profile for the russian but im having trouble in regards to uploading his image i have a punisher comic book and i scanned the image of the russian but i dont know whats the error of my upload

i hope someone can correct this licensure thingy, thanks

Rewrite?

Does anyone else think this article could use a re-write? It doesn't mention much before Ennis took over. It doesn't even mention Microchip or any big Punisher stories (Suicide Run, The Final Days, etc.). It seems as if someone just read the Marvel Knights/MAX and decided to write it. It needs to be more in-depth. Brunbb 20:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Much of it does need rewriting to bring up to encyclopedic standards. I've made a pass at it, but it still needs work to excise POV speculations and conclusions, redundancy, and level of minutiae. -- Tenebrae 21:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

couldnt you make it any simple?

i started the "definition of justice" section but people keep on detailing the already simple definition of justice with too much explanations

i mean, whether in cartoons or films, the punisher's brand of justice is quite simple...an eye for an eye! just like that

now stop making things more complicated!

Please sign your posts. Also, note that your opinions are opinions, which you're entitled to, but not fact. -- Tenebrae 21:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
i know an opinion is a personal belief, but what i stated as the punisher definition of brand of justice as "eye for an eye" IS A FACT. I have a comic book of punisher wherein a fan wrote a letter to the then writer, chuck dixon asking what's castle's definition of justice and its clearly stated, "an eye for an eye", if you want i can scan that issue, btw, are you the one who deleted that section in the article? frbarba
That's good, but do you have anything in which it is stated in an actual story that defines the Punisher's belief? A thought balloon or caption box, etc. That would make it perfect. --Chris Griswold 00:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
you mean a comic book panel wherein the punisher himself stating his own brand of justice? nope, none im aware of but its the punisher staff in 1990s who clearly stated it, and i dont find a necessity for it frbarba 07:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Nothing recent? Garth Ennis' Punisher casts some doubt on eye-for-an-eye. --Chris Griswold 12:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

While reading over this article, this section caught my attention: [The way writers have approached the Punisher's response to the criminal justice system has changed many times over the years, as the audience of the character has adapted and matured. When originally conceived, his approach was hard-edged, and frowned upon by more heroic characters, such as Spider-Man. In the 1980's, particularly in response to the Death Wish and Rambo films and to America's reemerging sense of its role as a world power in the years after losing the Vietnam War, the Punisher came to represent a particularly American "might is right" viewpoint, and his actions were presented as significantly more heroic, depite the fact he was still committing sometimes quite appalling acts of murder, sometimes on an almost genocidal scale.]I noticed some word choices (bolded) might not be up to the non-POV standards, and possible author interpretations and ideas seeping into the work. Agreed that the Punisher is himself an anti-hero engaging in callous acts, but in my years reading the comic books I do not recall him ever committing genocide. Also, in reference the "might makes right" comment, to base the mentality of the American populace on the actions of a character in a comic book seems out of place for an encyclopedia grade article. Also, this author seems to overlook thet many other superheroes such as Batman, Superman, Spiderman and DareDevil (the latter two titles from the same company as Punisher, Marvel) abhor killing and do their best to try and avoid it. Also, in response to Frank Castle's brand of justice, The Punisher is an exploration of man's darker side, into the depths of the human soul. It is the investigation of what could make a man, who was once a law abiding citizen, in some story arcs an actual member of law enforcement, and turn him to a life of crime with little or no faith in the American Justice department and addresses the very real concerns and feelings of the public about corruption, crime, justice, disenfranchisement and insignificance. This comic, over time, has become a much more realistic depiction of real life, where the good guys aren't always "good" and the bad guys aren't always black-as-night evil, rather much life the world it is trying to depict, things are rarely ever cut and dried or black and white. - Evan

Unless cited, that's POV and original research.--Chris Griswold 00:16, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Secret Defenders

Please don't remove this from SHB. Not sure why someone did. --Chris Griswold 09:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


Hand to hand combat methods?

"Frank is well-versed in the arts of warfare and hand-to-hand combat, his styles of choice being MCMAP (Marine Corps Martial Arts Program) or the Marine Corps LINE combat system as well as unarmed combat training received in the military."

Where does this come from? Frank would have not learnt either MCMAP or LINE as the first was not introduced until 1980 and the second around 2001!

Do we have a source?

--Charlesknight 13:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


Merging punisher with punisher Max makes no sens

Punisher is an article about character and Punisher: MAX is just a description of one of series. Why does anyone want to merge this specific series into this article? Makes no sense for me, on wiki all series have their own articles and it makes sense. Why do You want to remove this one and leave the others?

I think You should remove this whole merging concept

Jakilcz 20:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Are there any major differences between the MAX version and the regular version? If not, then MAX Punisher is just another of a dozen comics that has featured the character and shouldn't have an article of its own.- Wilfredo Martinez 16:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

there is a difference, the MAX in the bibliography article basically lists all the issue titles (for encylopedic reference) while the punisher article is the complete description of the character †Bloodpack† argh! 16:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I think merging isn't a bad idea, but you'd have to note the differences between the two comics. Listing the chip etc. You could easily add this information into The Punisher without ruining any of the ongoing points by just having it catergorized correctly. It does seem like an intelligent idea.

moving the regular series, one-shots, limited series to the bibliography

i think there's no reason to place them here since we already got the whole list under the bibliography article, what do you guys think? Bloodpack argh! 12:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

the punisher archive

its starting to get annoying, off and on i see the punisher archive site added and yet deleted in the references, why is it always being removed? and who keeping it added? *sigh* †Bloodpack† argh! 15:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added it a couple of times, and I have no idea why its been deleted.

Psychopath

Whoa... I seen other comic book psychopaths, but strange, the article didnt mention he is a psychopath. Triple-Quadruple 03:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

no, he isnt a pychopath, there's more to his personality than being crazy, everything is detailed in his bio †Bloodpack† argh! 04:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I think you could find a good few reputable sources that call him a psychopath. He's more a sociopath than a psychopath. Yes, that's a POV. Anyway, my understanding is, nothing can be added to this article that does not come from a primary or secondary source. --Newt ΨΦ 04:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Then let's remove the category, "Fictional psychopaths."Triple-Quadruple 03:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

If anything Ennis' run on the Punisher seems to imply that Frank is a sociopath to say the least. I found it fascinating that in the final issue of Born many people assumed that the person Frank made the deal with at the end was the Devil or Death. The simplest answer would be he had caveated to himself; the conversation merely a byproduct of his condition. Alsosprachmiyamoto 04:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

battle van section?

should that also be in his weapons/armory? like a merge? †Bloodpack† argh! 22:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Character History Rewrite?

It seems to me that this section could use a considerable rewrite. It's not that the information isn't pertinant; it's just that it reads more like a "character traits" section than a true summary of the Punishers history. There is no mention of the Tyger one shot, no mention of his Nam' activities. These are all formative experiences for the character and it seems curious that they would be ommitted in a character history section. Is anyone else in agreement on this? Alsosprachmiyamoto 03:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Expand?

Why not expand the article and actually provide that "minute detail?" What would really be so wrong with it? I, and thus it's likely that many others, like such details in something. This isn't an encyclopedia; it's a web-site. A web-site with encyclopedia-like content and aspirations which are notable and even, perhaps, commendable, to be sure, but still. Plus, there's the ability to write "simple" versions, so--why not make a "simple" version of this (and, for the record, other) pages, alongside a detailed version? The first example that springs to mind is the simplified CIA page. It's short, to the point, and allows for a more detailed version.

I say this not to be a schmuck or anything, honestly, but since there's the ability to have a "simplified" version of a page, why not, then, let the "main" page be detailed to all and sundry? Maybe even provide a link at the top, "For the simplified version, see here" or something. Often I'll be curious about something, only to find its article be "trimmed." I already know the basics about some things, but want to know those minute details (and I certainly can't do it; if I knew the minute details of, say, the Punisher, I wouldn't be looking them up).

Mainly curious, yet hopeful.

-- Last Thylacine 08:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I hate to be a wet blanket, but actually, no: This is an encyclopedia. That's the founders stated intent, and Wikipedia is designed for a general audience. Fannish details are best found on a fan site, and Wikipedia really isn't designed to be a free server space for that. There's more info about all this at WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Hope this helps clarify. Happy Wiki-ing, -- Tenebrae 02:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
It's not about being a fan-site, per se. It's about actually having the detailed information that a web-site with encyclopedic aspirations should have. Without it, minimalistic entries are no better than catalogues, indexes for this or that subject. Since there is the ability to make a "simplified" version of a page, why not do that, and have the detailed entires for people really curious about a subject? Also, there's nothing in that second link, at all, that says there can't be a detailed entry alongside a simplified entry. As for the first link, it really doesn't change anything to have the ability to truly look for what one wants to look for. That would be of use to the most people, so that's about as general of an audience as it gets.
-- Last Thylacine 21:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
There's nothing at WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information that says there can't be dual entries for the same article? There's also nothing that says there can't be a picture of an elephant on every article. I'm simply trying to point out that Wikipedia has overall parameters. If you want to make a major change that involves Wikipedia offering dual versions of an article, that's cool, but you'll need to take it up through the procedure that's been honed through the years and build a consensus. Start at WP:RULES, and work with an Admin to do it up right. (BTW, pls look at the [CIA article] again. First, it reads like it was written by a grade-school kid, but that's beside the point: It's from an entirely different Wiki encyclopedia. the "Simple English Wikipedia". Apples and oranges. Anyone else interested in this debate, please take a look at it and the only mainstream-Wiki Central Intelligence Agency article.)--Tenebrae 02:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
It's still from Wikipedia.org, so it's not from a completely different Wiki. It's the same one, just a simplified version. So, it's not apples and oranges, but more like different types of apples. ;) That aside, it's not about changing major rules--it's about offering information. There seems to be some arbitrary decision-making, from normal, average-Joe users like myself, about what "should" and "shouldn't" be included. If all that's going to be offered is bare-bones information that anyone can dreg up with two minutes of using a search engine, then Wikipedia really can't call itself an encyclopedia. Really, if all that's going to be offered is the "basics," then that's fine--but it doesn't make for an encyclopedia.
-- Last Thylacine 04:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I guess it's relative; I wouldn't call the Punisher article currently here "bare bones", and I wouldn't say "the basics" are a bad thing — it's certainly appropriate for a general audience. In any case, I'm being serious: Having two versions of articles is a major policy change, and if you genuinely, in your gut, feel that this is an important change for Wikipedia, there's no reason not to follow your instincts. As for "should" and "shouldn't", dude, every organization in the world has got rules!
Finally, trust me: Having written a ton of articles, there's not a single one that's taken "two minutes" (and I know that's hyperbole) of using a search engine. Unless one believes everything one reads, facts have to be cross-checked and confirmed, then organized, and text written in a non-POV, wikistyled way, and much more. There's not one full-length comics-creator bio that took less than two hours. And if you think Mystic (comics) or even Millie the Model took just a few minutes, hell, check the history time-stamps! :-) But passion's good. Don't lose that. Channel it. --Tenebrae 04:44, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, every place has rules--but are those rules dictated, created, by "average" people? That's my point. It seems like everyday, average-Joe users--not the head-people at Wikipedia--are saying what "should" and "shouldn't" be allowed into an article. That's what I don't understand. I don't feel that it's an "important change," I feel it's a logical progression. If this web-site is going to proclaim it has encyclopedic content, then it should have encyclopedic content. If they are going to profess to be for the general user, then I believe they should be for the general user. Making things as complex or as simplistic as could be wanted is about as general as it gets.
And yes, you're right, that other comment was hyperbole. :)
Thing is, there really is little I can do, because I'm not going to troll the 'net for days looking up information for a Wikipedia article. Mainly because I just don't have that sort of attention span. :) As such, while I do appreciate the work put into an article, if it's no more than what can be found with just a bit of surfing--I.E., lacking those minute details--then I really can't appreciate the article itself. It isn't easy to create a lengthy page of information, whether or not for a Wiki. Anyone who creates and maintains articles has my respect (and sympathy, heh)--but if all that's in an article is what is in most web-pages around--it really seems like a waste of time.
Also, no, this isn't passion. I could only categorize it as "mild concern." I just believe that if something is going to be claimed, then that claim should be lived up to. If not, well--it happens. All this is to me is a bunch of glowing words on a screen. :)
-- Last Thylacine 07:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


Edits to the trivia section

Ok Fellas - what seems to be the problem? And how can we move forward?

--Charlesknight 21:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

thanks =] actually, its about the trivia section of the article. I have a copy of the Punisher 1987 series #98. At the back of the issue is the fanmail section wherein a fan can write to the editor/writer about the book. A fan asked Don Daley 3 questions: 1) Who created the punisher. 2) About his costume. 3) Whats the punisher definition of justice. Since questions 1 & 2 are well known to every punisher fan, i added Don's answer to question #3. I added it in the trivia section and wrote it as exactly as whats printed in the comicbook and that is The Punisher's version of justice is clasically based as an eye for an eye. Now what tenebrae did is he added additional infos which are not written or found in the source (The Punisher #98) like the code of hamurrabi, etc. etc. So my question is, is it right to add ideas to original statements? †Bloodpack† argh! 21:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok as a first remark - I have that issue in a longbox and should be able to dig it out tomorrow to confirm what you are saying (please don't take that to mean that I think you are making it up, it's just that two editors who have read the same thing make a better case for inclusion!)

Tenebrae - could I ask you just to explain why you think that the code of Hamurrabi should be included and if there are any sources that mention this code in regards to the punisher?

--Charlesknight 22:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

If Don Daley had said, "The Punisher's take on things is the classically based 'a rose by any other name would smell as sweet'," wouldn't you agree that "classically based" sounds ignorant? It's Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, and to not state it sounds like a negligent omission. I was perefectly happy to compromise and use both "classically based" and the actual source of "an eye for an eye," but if compromise isn't acceptable to another party, I can't force it. I can only mount a case that this isn't trivia in the first place, but something that belongs in another section, "Views on the criminal justice system". --Tenebrae 01:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
wow, its not for us to determine whats going on inside the mind of don when he answered that letter. Its like saying, we have to know why david mustaine said his music has been commercialized Point is, we have a source of an item here, we add it exactly and precisely, no more no less. Putting that hamurabi thing is your own opinion. You believe don made a stupid reply to that fan thats why you beautified his sentence and decorated it with other infos such as hamurabi. My concern is the readers. Have you considered that there are people who use wikipedia as their source of reference? the next time a punisher fan read that portion, hell believe don was referring to hamurabi when he made that reply when in fact were not even sure if he (Don) even knows the code of hamurabi. this most probably would lead the readers astray. Regardless if don made a stupid comment, its up to the readers to judge that, not us. we only lay down the facts. you dont quote a person and then add wordings of your own. its dangerous. THIS ISNT ABOUT COMPROMISING, YOU SABOTAGED A TRIVIA SECTION, YET YOU WANT ME TO ACCEPT IT AS A COMPROMISE? YOU CANT AND SO YOU DELETED IT. I TRIED TO BE REASONABLE AND POLITE BUT IF DELETION IS YOUR SOLUTION THEN SO BE IT †Bloodpack† argh! 12:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

(the last is to what happen in the last issue of the Marvel Knights Punisher story "Army Of One"). is found under Character History. What is this supposed to mean? I don't even know what to edit it into. I trust one of you all knows what should go there.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.83.123.247 (talk • contribs) .

video game section

since we already have a seperate article for the Punisher (game), do you think we need to trim this section a little bit (seems too broad to me especially with the character list appearing in playstation/xbox). if not, should we merge the punisher video game to this article? Bloodpack 03:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Source of DVD sales

I've a ref for the DVD sales, but is a brazilian website. The content is in portuguese, obviously, but confirms that it sold about 2 million copies soon after it was released.

In the lusophon wikipedia, we can use references in other languages, since most times they are in english, but i'm not so sure if this is possible here, since i've already seen non-english websites be removed from articles.

Any comments about if I should add it or not?

FlavioTerceiro 03:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal - History of the Punisher

Proposed merge - History of the Punisher into Punisher. I know this has been briefly mentioned before, when discussing other merges, butWikiProject Comics editorial guidelines state that plot summaries "should not become so enlarged as to become separate articles" (as per WP:NOT) & "articles focused on describing storylines should be avoided unless significance is established through real world sources". I'm not convinced that this qualifies. --Mrph 00:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Survey

  • Merge and trim --Mrph 00:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and trim. I thought this had already been done. Doczilla 00:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and WAY trim -- The info in History of the Punisher seems more properly placed under "Fictional character biography", per WikiComics exemplar. Also per Project guidelines, its blow-by-blow plot synopses need to be WAYYYYY shorter. See Daredevil (Marvel Comics) for a good example. --Tenebrae 01:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and trim per Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/editorial guidelines#Brief summary --NewtΨΦ 12:41, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and trim. Redundancy is for mobsters. And Frank Castle Punishes mobsters. He just wouldn't approve. -- Nick Begovich 20:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and trimPhoenix741 18:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and trim FixerMX 20:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Most of the History article concentrates on Vietnam, and it's in more detail that the Wikipedia guidelines would suggest. Better to edit it down and add it here? --Mrph 00:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Reason for "does not drink" etc. deletion

This sentence:

In his current incarnation, he does not drink or consume any type of drugs, but he has been portrayed drinking in comics past ("Holiday Special #1", etc.).

could be said of virtually every single heroic character in the Marvel universe, few of whom outside Tony Stark and Wolverine have ever been seen with so much as a beer. Unless we're going to include this line in virtually every single character bio, it doesn't seem to make sense to include it here. -- Tenebrae 00:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Aside from that it breaks the perpetual present of fictional characters, and mistakes the Punisher for a real person with a continuous history. --PsyphicsΨΦ 17:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

In issue 11 he refuses a drink. I think he does it again in the next issue too. I know that CCA-era heroes don't really ever drink, but Punisher might be one of the few who actively refuses it.Freezing the mainstream

Cite a reference for me

could someone cite the quote in the trivia section from mustaine, i've already got the website http://megadeth.rockmetal.art.pl/interviews_guitarschool1993.html thanks, i just dont know how to do it properly

no prob buddy, btw, pls sign your post with 4 tildes †Bloodpack† 21:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Other version section

im just wondering with regard to the Ultimate Punisher under the "Other version" section of this article. Do we really need to place it here? i mean, its not only the "ultimate" version of the punisher we have, he also had other versions under his bibliography. Can we just redirect the section? or if not, can we also create a separate article for other punisher versions then place it here? (i.e A Man named Frank where the era is set in a western world), or should we also need to include the 2099 version of frank in this article? †Bloodpack† 03:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

History Or Something

Wow. I have no idea where to ask this, so I thought I 'd bring it to the bottom. Easy to find and all that. First: MAX is separate from 616. Has that been properly addressed within the article? Second: Where has Frank been in the 616 up until the time he shows up in Civil War #5? I came to this article hoping to get caught up, but -- and pardon my French -- but what the fuck? -- Nick Begovich 20:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I understand your concern, but I believe you misunderstand the purpose of this article. The article is supposed to treat the character as a phenomenon, not as a real person, and thus the most current stories may not be included as they may not be notable to the character as a whole. If they were, I do not believe they would nor should be in-depth enough summaries to catch you up on the whereabouts of the character in contemporary 616 books, but rather would discuss changes to the character made by contemporary writers, retcons, etc. To answer your first question, I do believe that the article treats the Marvel: MAX version as separate, though it's not entirely straightforward, and could use some cleanup. I don't know the answer to your second question and it may not have been revealed as of yet in the comic books. --PsyphicsΨΦ 20:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess the point I was trying to make is that I came here looking for information, and instead found confusion. I proceeded to come to the message board only to find... arguing. It's frustrating, you know? -- Nick Begovich 21:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Understood. Sorry I couldn't help more. I don't know much about the character, but I'll admit there is definitely some work needed on the article. --PsyphicsΨΦ 21:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
yes, no, maybe - MAX is generally seperate but the way (from the interviews they have given) they are treating the punisher is that those are his adventures when he's not hanging around the mainstream marvel universe (in the same way that Alias is "in" but we are not going to have a flashback in new avengers to Cage handing out some backdoor action). This also gets a wink in War Journal one where he gets his classic outfit on after encountering some badguys. In some respects it's not really worth thinking about too much because the marvel position on his MAX adventures changes from week to week, depending on who's speaking and who's giving the interview. It gets confusing because the MAX imprints take on what is in or out varies from title to title --Charlesknight 22:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Okay. I haven't read War Journal (is it out?), but that makes more sense. Quick comment: for some reason the old outfit sucks less in Civil War #5. Punisher's so cool. I don't know how long it's been since he showed his face anywhere else, though. When did Bullseye Vs. Punisher take place? -- Nick Begovich 22:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

---12/3/06--- I edited out the section where it said that the Punisher has tried to kill Spiderman, Wolverine, Hulk, and Daredevil to just say battled. In Punisher 64(I believe that's the number) he states that he wouldn't kill any of them, that they are fighting a good fight, just not making any real difference.

Punisher civil war inclusion

should we include in this article the Punisher's participation in the civil war? †Bloodpack† 06:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely, let us include Frank Castle's actions in the Civil,War, including his rescue of Spider-Man and his killing of Jester and Jack O'Lantern. Somebody has been deleting any references to the Civil War in this article and in History of the Punisher. Let us beseech this person to cease and desist, or at least explain his or her strange POV that Frank did not enter the Civil War. See Civil War #5, Autumn 2006. Erudil 16:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

i object, civil war events/synopsis, including all those who are involved (even the Punisher) should go directly to the main civil article. We are not gonna put every step-by-step, event-by-event of the civil war here. This article is mainly about the Punisher character as a whole. This article is supposed to treat the character as a phenomenon, not as a real person, and thus the most current stories may not be included as they may not be notable to the character as a whole) †Bloodpack† 17:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I think it should be included, even if it's just a sentence or two about his appearance. It's a legimate appearance and is relevant to the character. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.28.71.162 (talk • contribs).

The more important point-- the one that needs to be included-- is that the Punisher has reentered the mainstream Marvel Universe, and now targets super-villains, as well as "regular" criminals. -- Nick Begovich 00:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Punisher's Civil war participation: Lets vote

Let us reach a consensus if were gonna narrate every detail of the Punisher's participation in the Civil War (comics) event.

  • Exclude- i vote to exclude the Punisher's detailed participation in the Civil War (comics) event. A slight background about his civil war participation found in the Revival section of the article is good enough. The rest, i feel, must go to the main civil war article †Bloodpack† 17:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Include a summary - once the dust settles, anyway. It may be too soon to comment until it's all over. Civil War is notable (in Punisher terms) for at least one thing... it's reintroduced him to the Marvel Universe in the War Journal title. Although he's guest-starred in other books (such as Daredevil), for a while his only title has been the MAX one, minus the guys in spandex... --Mrph 19:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The Punisher in the Civil War

So far, Frank Castle has:

  • Saved the life and freedom of Spider-Man.
  • Killed the Jester.
  • Killed Jack O'Lantern
  • Created quite a stir among the anti-registration rebel heroes over whether he should be admitted to their ranks or not.

All four of these are major events in the life of Mr. Castle, and major events in the history of the Civil War. It would be absurd to l;eave them out. Erudil 17:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

not "major" events. until we see the end of the civil war, we cannot conclude that these are the "major" events because theres more to happen †Bloodpack† 17:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Concur with Bloodpack here and with him and Mrph in section above --Tenebrae 02:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it's particularly important as a Punisher "life event," but it is worth mentioning.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.28.71.162 (talk • contribs).

It seems to me that refusing to include Civil War events because bigger things might happen in the future is a bit like excluding any mention of the events of September 11, 2001, because something bigger might happen in the future, such as the nuclear destruction of a major city. Well, "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball," as they say, so we should not wait for these future events, but just write down what has happened so far. If anything is eclipsed in the future, then in the future delete what has been shown not to be so major after all. Meanwhile, Frank Castle joining the anti-Registration Rebellion, killing super-criminals and saving Spider-Man are very much major events if we do not do any crystal-ball gazing. Erudil 16:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

well, like most everyone said, a basic touch on whats the punisher's stand on the civil war is enough. we dont need to give every single chain of event of the punisher's role on CW or what hes "currently" been doing in civil war. this article is about the character as a whole and NOT an ongoing "comicbook" that we have to update every minute (synopsis) per the CW events †Bloodpack† 17:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but his saving Peter Parker and killing Jester and Jack O'Lantern need to be mentioned. Erudil 16:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

"Oh, awesome. Action is my reward, too." The biggest thing here-- aside from rescuing Spidey, which is noteworthy-- is that the Punisher is taking it to super-villainy. That should go somewhere. -- Nick Begovich 08:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

External Links

Why do the links have to keep getting cleared out? There are several Punisher sites that are relevant to encyclopedia readers —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.28.71.162 (talk • contribs).

true, but as per WP:EL and WP:NOT, wikipedia is not a repository or directory of links, as far as im concern, marvel site is the only official link for the punisher, the rest are just commercial fansites †Bloodpack† 18:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Agree generally. That said, some fansites can be cited as refs, particularly if they have interviews or well-sourced background information.
Also, what's listed as "External links" here should be "References" and what's listed as "References" should be "Footnotes," per WP:CITE. (External links for "for further reading"-type links.) No biggie; I'll fix. --Tenebrae 17:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

talk page reminder

well, the year is about to close and i feel we should archive the talk page, a fresh start for the new year, i think lets end this year before we start another talkpage, just a thought †Bloodpack† 19:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

God. Have you guys seen this page? I second all that. -- Nick Begovich 08:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

publication history revisions

I changed a couple of things, but the most notable changes are these: first, a reference to a supernatural change in Castle in "Born" to become the Punisher. I see this more as a potential supernatural event, since the voice which would indicate supernatural phenomena is also widely interpreted as an internal event within Castle and not a third party. Secondly, the article stated that Castle often fights enemies of conflicts he has battled in the past, but this is not really evidenced in the MAX unlimited series, with his tours of duty being related only to the Vietnam War (and a complete lack of Vietnam conflict related adversaries.) If this is not accurate, please don't hesitate to educate me. --neo_aa 11:26, 28 December 2006

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/u/n/Talk%7EPunisher_Archive_1_41b6.html"