Talk:Marvel Comics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Marvel Comics article.
Article policies
To-do list for Marvel Comics: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
  • Other: Add in-line references


I am Eric Roy. Please stop writing "Fictional character biography" in each individual entry. It is already said in the 1st paragraph of each page that they each are fictional characters, so please don't put it in every other section. An important part of litterature, comics, role-playing games, and movies is actually the "make-believe". You remove the "magic" if you write "fictional" 12 times through the article. Thanks for your comprehensivess. I'll fight for this one. Eric Roy

Contents

[edit] "Marvel Comics" vs. "Marvel Comics universe"

One of the two terms above is used in most entries for Marvel Comics characters, which generally say either "so-and-so is a fictional Marvel Comics superhero" or "so-and-so is a fictional superhero in the Marvel Comics universe" (as it says, for instance, in entry for Ego, The Living Planet]

The two terms each link to separate Wikipedia entries. They mean different things -- one entry is about a comic-book company, the other about an internally consistent fictional setting, ala Tolkein's Middle-earth -- yet they are used interchangeably.

For consistency and clarity, it might be good to establish some sort of standard language for these Marvel Comics entries. -Tenebrae, Sept. 6, 2005, 8:32PM ET


Should there be a "Categories: Marvel Comics characters"? The numerous "Avengers members", "Defenders members", etc., etc. categories could then be properly-nested subcategories of it. -- Metahacker 23:07, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Why should an article on this company appear in an encyclopedia? This seems to be advertising disguised as education. Hmmm.

Probably because it is also a cultural icon. Would you rather have a gap in the encyclopedia? -- Metahacker 18:47, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

i agree with the afor proposal of making the character list easier to navigate. as to the comment of the entire article not beloning here: if it where an advertisement then why would DC be here as well? Marvel and DC where major players in american Culture duing the golden and silver ages of comics, there for they have a rightfull place in an online encyclopedia that for all intents and pourpouses....includes any thing and everthing that exists in the known universe ---Iorek Brynson 9:59 AM, May 17, 2005

In the many months since this discussion in May 2005, I've noticed, in articles other than mine (and a form I've been emulating), a semi-consistent convention in the lead sentencce of Marvel-character entries: "So-and-so is a fictional superhero (or Western hero, etc.) in the Marvel Comics universe". This seems to cover all the bases. Thoughts? — Tenebrae 00:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
That's the format I've been using. Dr Archeville 20:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question regarding EIC list

Credits in color titles published in 1975-76 list Marv Wolfman as EIC of the color line, and I'm pretty sure that Wein stepped down in 1975 and Wolfman took over, per an announcement in the Bulletins page in the comics. Why does the EIC list here show something else?

N. Caligon 01:46, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not sure on that one but here's another - just how long was Conway EiC for? I was always under the impression he held the job for less than two weeks in 1976 (it seems several were almost forced into the chair) but this list implies he was there for longer. Timrollpickering 8 July 2005 15:41 (UTC)
The Bullpen Bulleteins page in Peter Parker the Spectacular Spider-Man #1, cover dated December 1976 (so I'd guess on sale August) has a list of editorial staff with Archie Goodwin listed as "Editor" and Conway, along with Thomas, Wein and Wolfman listed as "Consultant Editors" or similar. Given this and the stories that Conway was in the job very briefly I'm going to change his date to 1976. Timrollpickering 13:30, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Atlas/Seaboard

RE: "Goodman created a new company called Atlas Comics, but the effort didn't last a year." This company, actually called Atlas/Seaboard, is completely unrelated to Marvel Comics; Goodman was no longer with Marvel, and was free to create any new company he wished. See Atlas/Seaboard Comics -- Tenebrae 11:43 AM, Aug. 10, 2005

I know. I wrote that line. Your point is...? --Pc13 16:29, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
The way it had been written made it seem as if this new Atlas was somehow part of Marvel. Just a language thing, not a fact thing. No biggie. --Tenebrae 3:52 PM, Aug. 30, 2005

[edit] "Notable" Timely heroes

The list of other "notable" Timely heroes ran the risk of becoming an ever-increasing list. I've removed The Fin, Black Marvel and Red Raven. According to Jess Nevins's Timely Heroes site, they were actually pretty minor. Red Raven appeared in one story during the Golden Age, The Fin in three and Black Marvel in six. --Pc13 16:01, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

--- --- --- I am Eric Roy. This is an encyclopedia. Stop removing info. Eric Roy remaining polite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.202.0.195 (talk) 20:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Felicia (pseudonym)

Hi, My having failed to persuade anyone that Felicia (pseudonym) isn't non-notable, it seems to me that 'she' therefore deserves at least a mention on this page. And potentially, to be merged to this page? Yes? No? Regards, Ben Aveling 01:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

With all due respect to the well-sourced amount of work and time you clearly put it, my opinion as one voice in the debate is that Felicia just seems like an anonymous press source, the kind reporters frquently (if not always responsibly) use. Just doesn't seem like "Deep Throat" significance, or that the source's actions had much, if any impact. -- Tenebrae 00:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't think it should be merged with the article, both due to the sizes of said articles, as well as the different purposes they serve. Sure, it can be mentioned in a section with a pointer back to the main article, but merging would be pointless.--Mitsukai 16:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
The question isn't the size of both articles, it's whether "Felicia" deserves an article at all. The so-called source wasn't even used for journalistic purposes. "Felicia" was an informant to Rich Johnston, a self-styled rumor monger who always avoided the journalist tag (both for ethical and professional reasons - it would force him to check his sources, instead of just blogging, and it would forbid him to work in advertising, his main source of income). I agree "Felicia"'s impact in the industry in Marvel business practices were minimal, and that it's importance is severely overrated. At best, this deserves a one-sentence mention in the 2000s section. At worst, this is fancruft. --Pc13 16:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with Tenebrae and Pc13. Anthopos 21:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I would oppose the mergist proposion on the same logic as Mitsukai. --LukeSurl 19:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. She deserves her own article. Nightscream 06:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, if we can't merge it here, I propose a second nomination for WP:AfD. Felicia is nothing more than a limited piece of trivia. --Pc13 08:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Agree with Pc13 -- Tenebrae 17:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Felicia doesn't even deserve a mention, much less a merge. CovenantD 23:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Leave as is per Mitsukai. Metamagician3000 09:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I proposed Felicia for WP:AFD. --Pc13 10:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Felicia should be left as is. Its an interesting and well-sourced article.
Please sign your comments. And even if one were to accept your anonymous points, they still don't make Felicia of encyclopedic weight or value. Is every industry's unnamed gossip now going to get an encyclopedia section?-- Tenebrae 19:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

With all due respect, in this case, it represents an unusual event in comics history. Namely that the reaction to such a leak went in such a bizzare direction; and that it was given so much attention at the time.-the man with no reason to sighn.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.23.59.119 (talk • contribs)

This discussion was over a long time ago, and Admins ruled against a Felicia entry. Please stop bringing it up. --Tenebrae 01:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Atlas

Someone very knowledgable has added a great deal of info on Marvel's 1950s iteration, Atlas (though the prose itself needed some cleanup). The level of detail is such that I wonder if it might not work better to synthesize the basics here, and blend the rest into Atlas Comics? Thoughts? -- Tenebrae

Agreed. Once its own article, it could do with another expansion, though. --Pc13 10:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
I just noticed I had a typo in my original query just above, which messed up the link to the existing Atlas Comics (1950s) site. That caused some confusion, for which I apologize. I've fixed it in my paragraph above. What I meant to suggest was blending the details of the Atlas portion of the Marvel article with the existing 1950s Atlas article. -- Tenebrae 03:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "The Swarm" Cybercomic

Recently, Marvel Comics and M&M'S Brand have teamed up to create a cybercomic featuring the M&M's Minis characters called "The Swarm". The story's about the Minis accidently creating a freak Spokescandy called "Master M", who traps them in his Twisted Tube and transports them into various environments to annihilate them as revenge for ruining his dreams. For example, the Blue Minis end up in an aquarium, while the Red Minis find themselves in a carnival. Should the article say something about this? - NES Boy 22:50, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Earth-616

Do we have a list, or is there a list elsewhere, of all the titles in the Earth-616 continuity? I'm interested in finding specifically a list of the X-men titles that fall under Earth-616 but thought that such a list may be good to have here on the Wikipedia. Maybe List of Earth-616 comic titles would be good? Dismas|(talk) 06:44, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Haven't we been through this before? Such a list would be practically identical to List of Marvel Comics publications, except for three or four exceptions. --Pc13 13:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry to have bothered you. I'll remember not to stain this talk page with my presence again. Dismas|(talk) 22:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bankruptcy

What type of bankruptcy did Marvel file for? Elijya 18:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Chapter 11. --Pc13 19:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seduction of the Innocent

some days ago i've added a note about infamous Seduction of the Innocent book and Comic Code (you know ...). Someone has removed since off-topic. IMHO it was topic, 'cause directly related to failure of comic book market in '50s. In fact this article still report "An attempted superhero revival from 1953 to 1954, with the Human Torch, the Sub-Mariner and Captain America, failed." --88.149.169.237 19:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Those comics' failures had absolutely nothing to do with the Comics Code. You can read more about it at Atlas Comics (1950s) and Silver Age of Comic Books, and in such magazines as Alter Ego and Comic Book Artist, not to mention several books on the subject of comics history. --Tenebrae 21:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
i not mean there is direct correlation between closing of Cap.America comicbook and Comic Code, but IMHO it have had (bad) influence in comicbook market in 50s.. in sales and to edulcorate contents.. but ok.. :)

[edit] Seduction II , Comic Code and Magazine Management Co.

this article says "In 1968, company founder Martin Goodman sold Marvel Comics and his other publishing businesses to the Perfect Film and Chemical Corporation. It grouped these businesses in a subsidiary called Magazine Management Co. Goodman remained as publisher." BUT i've reading a copy in internet of "Comic Books and Juvenile Deliquency: Interim Report of the Committee on the judiciary," (the infamous 1955 US Congress report related with Comic Code ) that already mention Magazine Management Co. like the owner of 31(!) publisher in the hands of Goodman.

If the internet copy [1] is unaltered , i must suppose that Magazine Management Co. ALREADY grouped Goodman's comics business in 1954-55. (of course he hasn't yet sold to Chemical/Cadence.. only grouped). Someone can confirm?

Another note: the doc mention as address '270 Park Avenue, N.Y'. Since all publisher and distributor are in this address, i can suppose it's only a "legal/commercial" address.. or what? I've noticed because it's not mentioned in bunch of addresses of this article.. Someone confirm/has more detail ? --88.149.169.237 18:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

These are all really good questions. I'm a bit tapped out on energy at the moment, but I will definitely follow-up tonight or tomorrow. Thanks for what sounds like a really interesting lead!-- Tenebrae 20:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marvel Comics slogan

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the company's name ever "Make Mine Marvel"? 69.230.215.101 03:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Founder

Do you mind that I put the name of Marvel's founder?Brian Boru is awesome 14:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CC of posting at Steel

User:24.60.85.190 again
Almost as soon as he returned from the block, User:24.60.85.190 is still adding linkspam, enough so that I've reported a 3RR vio here. I'm afraid I found the directions daunting, and I might have filled out the form incorrectly. Whatever the case, I wanted to let you and the other three editors working on this know about the 3RR request. As I said there, this anon-IP has become obstinate, seems dismissive of Wiki policies, isn't making worthwhile contributions, and only seems interested in advertising his blog. -- Tenebrae 13:58, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marvel Universe Infobox

Does anyone this a Marvel Universe Infobox would be appropriate? Kind of like the Star Wars one where it's put at the bottom of each article. It could list all the major super heroes and films and everything. Anybody? PrettyMuchBryce 16:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Canam Publishers Sales Corp."?

Early issues of the Fantastic Four (and I presume other titles published at the same time) listed "Canam Publishers Sales Corp." as the publisher and copyright holder in the indicia. Was "Marvel" merely the trade name, and "Canam" the actual incorporated entity? Also, "MC" was initially used on the cover, followed by "Marvel Comics Group" as of May, 1963 (while Canam continued to be listed). To what did the "group" refer? This article should explain this, if only in a footnote. Also, it looks like the printing was farmed out to "Eastern Color Printing Co." in Waterbury, Connecticut. Postdlf 22:48, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Canam was one of 59 shell corporations that publisher Martin Goodman used. See his article and more specifically see Atlas Comics (1950s)#After the Golden Age, paragraph 3, for details. Eastern Color Printing was one of the largest color printing presses in the U.S. at that time, dating to the 1930s. Virtually all East Coast newspaper comics and comic books were printed there for years. --Tenebrae 19:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I figured it was something like that. Is there a place for a complete list somewhere? It should also probably be mentioned in the different comic title articles what company names ostensibly held the copyrights. When I googled Canam, the only hits appeared to be library catalog entries for comic books; the catalogers just used the indicia information, so many resources will credit only those shell corporations instead of Marvel for its earliest titles. I don't have any info except for the FF as to what names were used in the indicia (I highly recommend the GIT Corp 44 Years of the Fantastic Four DVD, btw—full scans of every comic, cover to cover). Postdlf 20:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biasm

"DC was the equivalent of the big Hollywood studios: After the brilliance of DC's reinvention of the superhero ... in the late 1950s and early 1960s, it had run into a creative drought by the decade's end. There was a new audience for comics now, and it wasn't just the little kids that traditionally had read the books. The Marvel of the 1960s was in its own way the counterpart of the French New Wave.... Marvel was pioneering new methods of comics storytelling and characterization, addressing more serious themes, and in the process keeping and attracting readers in their teens and beyond. Moreover, among this new generation of readers were people who wanted to write or draw comics themselves, within the new style that Marvel had pioneered, and push the creative envelope still further."

uhhh, this qoute is a direct attack against a fellow company, much older than Marvel. Its also dumb to put that quote there because Marvel and DC contribute to their own ideas in different views. They have talented writers too. This quote is like Bill Gates quoting how Pcs develop faster than cars. Marvel is actually in my view a defilement of DC. Its like giving superman a Lazer gun and cool goggles, than making him commit genocide and than calling him a hero. Or like reinventing Bugs Bunny into some idiotic high-tech cartoon for kids with big d#$*%cks. Hey Minnie Mouse how about a bikini, a big ass and a figure? I mean I read that and in the following paragraph there is something about Jack Kirby, the king of comics, who contributed equally to DC as to Marvel in char creations? I vie for removal. --209.234.96.194 23:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I understand your POV, but Sanderson's comment is in no way, shape or form bias. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree, the quote is the published comment of a respected comics historian, and as valid an analysis as that of a film historian discussing Hollywood and the New Wave. This properly cited analysis is entirely valid under Wikipedia policy and guidelines; articles on the likes of Van Gogh or art movements, etc., include such analytical perspective by established critics and historians. -- Tenebrae 13:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Early 70's price controls and Marvel

I read somewhere that in the early 1970's when there was a freeze on price and wage increases, Marvel increased the price of their comics. In response to a complaint by the government regarding the price increase, they put extra pages in some of their titles during one month. My memory of this is incomplete; I can't remember exactly, but for example, the Fantastic Four issue had a mini poster on glossy paper. I thought this would be a good addition, or at least for trivia. I would appreciate help with the facts on this.(Tighelander 05:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] In-line references

It is nice that this article has lots of references, but to qualify for good article status or better, the references need to be 'in-line', that is, references have to support specific facts, not just the article overall. This is pretty much impossible unless you have these reference works to look at. (The lesson in this is to make in-line references from the beginning; going back later is a pain!) ike9898 20:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

You are right, I have no clue where a lot of this information came from, surely if I visited the local library I could back up about everything here up but I don't have the time. The random list at the bottom requires that we trust that previous editors relied on these works to support what they did. --Quirex 15:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Please see under "Article needs proper sourcing" below. Taking your point to its logical conclusion, no set of References can ever back up any article.--Tenebrae 22:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of animation, television series and films based on Marvel Comics

Is there any particular reason for there being 3 lists of media based on Marvel Comics? I don't see why animation should get its own article, why not just have one for films and one for movies? I also think TV movies should be listed under films, not television series. -Joltman 13:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Addition of one more link

Hello, I added one link to the external links page, that of the Unofficial Handbook of Marvel Comics. It is the only source that I've found that constantly updates and maintains a database of all the inkers, pencilers, cover artists, and writers on Marvel comics. I have read through the link policy on wikipedia and I believe that this is a relevant contributing source, much as a link to statistical databases are to sports entries. I have also removed one link to a site that has little content and has very few links that work.Folkform 08:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Folkform (talk • contribs) 08:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Editors in Chief

With Joe Q stepping down as EIC for a week in March, for Editor for Day, is it reasonable to break up his long running career as EIC? Although mostly sematics, he is technically unemployed for that week.

You sure he's giving up a week of salary, medical benefits, turning in his key card, etc.? Otherwise, I'm not sure he's really "unemployed" for that week. Sounds more like a week's vacation. --Tenebrae 01:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
What about co-editors?66.109.248.114
Not sure I understand the question. --Tenebrae 15:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Instead of stopping Joe's run as EIC, adding the Editors for a day, adding an asterix or something. 66.109.248.114
Isn't this just a marketing gimmick, like "Assistant Editor's Month"? -- Pc13 16:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article needs proper sourcing

Currently the article is drifting into Original Research and this should be avoided. The topic is quite notable and there are many books about the history of comics and Marvel comics. There is no reason this article should be so poorly sourced. --Quirex 15:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The article has 16 footnotes and at least that many reference sources, including several notable books on the subject. Unless anyone has a serious reply as to why this copious footnoting and bibliography, coupled with the specific cite-request tags currently here, is not enough to remove the top-of-article template, I believe the template has been there long enough. Comments, please. --Tenebrae 22:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
The discussion has been open for over a week with no comment, so given the aforementioned amount of citations, there appears to be no objection to removing the cite-req template. --Tenebrae 06:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marvel Graphic Novel

Marvel Graphic Novel was redirected here. Can someone please incorporate the following information (if it is reliable) on the article. Thanks! Real96 04:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

From 1982 to 1990, Marvel comics published a series of Graphic Novels known as the Marvel Graphic Novel line of trade paperbacks. The first such story, The Death of Captain Marvel by Jim Starlin, was logically referenced as Marvel Graphic Novel #1, with additional stories becoming Marvel Graphic Novel #2, etc. Marvel numbered stories through 1990 up to number 38, but released some 29 other stories in the same format that are considered unnumbered parts of the series according to the Official Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide.

[edit] Intro graf

I believe that saying Marvel can trace its origin not to Timely Comics' Marvel Comics #1 but to a 1936 story is an arguable assertion. The Ka-Zar character introduced in that story is not the same Ka-Zar (Kevin Plunder) in the Marvel universe, so saying Marvel's roots began with that earlier Ka-Zar is an opinion.

If one wants to stretch the definition of roots, one could go back to Martin Goodman's first getting into the publishing business. But that's of questionable usefulness.

The one indisputable fact, on which everyone can agree, is that Marvel Comics #1 was the first publication of Timely Comics which evolved, with the same publisher, to Marvel Comics. --Tenebrae 16:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Martin Goodman began publishing in 1933 and throughout used a variety of company names for both his comics and magazines. Names such as Timely, Marvel, and Atlas are largely used for convenience prior to the early 1960s official adoption of Marvel as the company name.
The company traces its origins to 1933 for the obvious reason that that's when Goodman began publishing. This is significant too because while you may want to phrase it differently, Ka-Zar is Marvel's oldest copyrighted character/title. And this character preceded Marvel Comics #1 and in turn was featured in those early issues. (The Wiki link to Ka-Zar explains the differences in the characters.) The 1936 character is indexed in the All-New Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe #6 (2006). Nyutko 17:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
You make a good case (and having written the bulk of the Timely and Atlas entries, I know a good case about Marvel when I hear it!). I'm thinking this information would be well-placed as the lead of the first section, "Publication history", since it's a background historical point.
I guess, too, it'd be good to know, even if in a footnote, the exact relationship of the first Ka-Zar to Marvel. The Ka-Zar Wiki entry is less than helpful since it only says, "In the 2000s, the David Rand Ka-Zar was integrated into mainstream Marvel continuity, in the All New Official Handbook to the Marvel Universe" -- without saying exactly what that "integration" was. Thought? --Tenebrae 17:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
As far as I can tell that integration only consists of the one page handbook entry for the 1936 character, but it does mention a 1941 meeting with other superhuman champions. Was the character used by Roy Thomas in the Invaders? I don't know. It's unclear where this 1941 meeting happened.
While I believe this Ka-Zar bit should be featured prominently on the Marvel page, it frankly seems like any elaboration regarding differences in characters belongs on the Ka-Zar page. Characters evolve all the time. Look at the Blue Beetle as a good example. His origins can be traced to 1939, but it's a starkly different character from today's Blue Beetle. Ka-Zar's differences superficially look less striking. He was then and is now a blonde haired Tarzan-like jungle character.Nyutko 18:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
It's probably a viable compromise to include your material as you had it and to place it as the lead sentence of the "Publication history" graf, though perhaps without the confounding Ka-Zar mention and going with Goodman's publishing company. While I believe it's a stretch, compromise and consensus is the basis of Wikipedia. Other editors can take it from there. What do you think? --Tenebrae 19:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I'll pop it back in place and you can edit it as you see fit. I'm inclined to think some mention should be made of Ka-Zar though, both because it's their oldest character and because it establishes a continuity between Goodman's pulp fiction and his comics publishing.Nyutko 20:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. I think the connection is tenuous at best, but like I said, compromise is the Wiki way.--Tenebrae 20:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Footnote 11

The following text added to this footnote doesn't appear to make sense. What's it referring to? What exactly does that report say that contradicts the citation? Please explain.

Should be noted that this source may be wrong. See '"Comic Books and Juvenile Deliquency: Interim Report of the Committee on the judiciary" 84th Congress report, 1st Session (1954)'.

--Tenebrae 03:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thundercats Comic Question - name the extra story? Danweb.uk 21:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I am a new poster and have been inspired to get people involved one this one. I apologise beforehand if I make some error in my posting, feel free to flame me or not!

Back in the 80s I used to get the Marvel Thundercats Comic, it was probably fortnightly.

My question is...

What was the additional story that was in the Thundercats Comic for some time. All I can remember was that it was about 4 children (all related brother & sisters). That had some special powers. One could alter his density, and I cannot really remember much else. Other than that one might have been called Jack.

I believe it was also out before the Thundercats comics, and was a bit of a re-run to fill the comic.

Does anyone else remember it? Specifically the name of it?

Fingers crossed!

Dan

you are talking about Power Pack.

[edit] offices?

Offices Located in New York City, Marvel has been successively headquartered in the McGraw-Hill Building (where it originated as Timely Comics in 1939); in suite 1401 of the Empire State Building; at 635 Madison Avenue (the actual location, though the comic books' indicia listed the parent publishing-company's address of 625 Madison Ave.); 575 Madison Avenue; 387 Park Avenue South; 10 East 40th Street; and 417 Fifth Avenue.

first it says its in the mcgraw-hill biulding the in a suite in the empire state biulding which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.174.229.135 (talk) 15:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MC2?

Is MC2 a imprint or in Defunct? The only ongoing title is Spider-Girl and mini-series Avengers Next ? 68.148.177.120 12:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Marvel Comics group

There is now a proposed project or project subgroup relating explicitly to Marvel Comics at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Marvel Comics. Any editors interesting in working with this group should indicate their interest there. Thank you. John Carter 17:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marvel Digital Comics Unlimited

Newsarama are tracking newspaper reports [2] which should offer more sources as they appear - it'll probably be a bit of a news event for a while so if anyone spots anything you can throw it in here. Although I doubt it will need its own article it might be worth its own section eventually. (Emperor 03:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC))

I see from your discussion on the comics wikiproject page that you were thinking about this too, and you're aware of Frecklefoot's article at Marvel Digital Comics Unlimited. I started a discussion on the talk page there on what actually belongs in the article and whether or not it should be merged into the Marvel Comics page. I look forward to any further discussion there. joshschr (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

On a related note, is the mention of a Bittorrent tracker removing Marvel comics from its torrent list really notable?

[edit] Torrent C&D Noteability

In response to the above unsigned comment on the subject.

I don't know if the Z-Cult is notable or not as I've never really been clear on the Wikipedia notability requirements. If I recall it did have an entry in Wikipedia, which seems to have been removed (well I can't find it). So in and of itself it probably isn't notable enough.

But the combined efforts of DC/Marvel to "Cease & Desist" a number of p2p comic sites at the time (not just Z-Cult) before the launch of Marvel's digital service certainly is worth note somewhere in this article (rumors are DC has a digital comic service in the works as well).

While the paragraph does a good job of summarizing it's source it is not a great summary of the overall situation. Unfortunately, I 'm a poor choice to make any edits to that section as I would likely be considered in conflict for that particular section (if I recall Wiki guidelines correctly).

Iamme-meiam (talk) 21:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Marvel Movie Universe

Considering Robert Downey Jr's upcoming cameo in Incredible Hulk, and the fact that Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America and The Avengers have been announced, it would appear that the movies done by "Marvel Studios" will be interconnected, as if it was a live version of the Ultimate Universe (or the 616). So it would probably make a good article here linking all the movies and such.

SteveJRogers (talk) 23:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)