Talk:Daredevil (Marvel Comics character)/Archive 1

message: I removed the following from the article because I don't think RPG stats belong in Wikipedia.  Since large numbers of these "vital stats" sections have been added to various articles, I'm using Talk:Strength level (comics) to discuss this in general. Bryan 08:11, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Stats 

message: Fixed the origin and the intro, but the rest of the article needs a lot of work.
:A small point: The origin section (which is otherwise well-written) mentions that Daredevil's original costume is yellow and black, but a glance at the splash-page of issue #1 (vol. 1) would seem to indicate that it's actually dark-red and black. My expertise in this area is too limited to know whether the splash-page is showing up funny in the scan or whether the article itself is simply wrong about this, but somebody should take care of the problem. Buck 19:21, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin updated 

message: Massively changed the entry.  Think its significantly better than what it was.  A lot of work still can be done on the analysis portion though - most of the thoughts there arent too well thought out
GodzillaWax 21:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs Better Analysis 

message: Though a revolutionary creation by Lee and Everett as the first superhero with a disability, Daredevil was not an overly popular or influential Marvel hero until the late 1970s, when writer/illustrator Frank Miller made him a much darker character.
But isn't the DC hero Doctor Mid-Nite older?
:Yes, on Doctor Mid-Nite, a Golden Age hero.  Also, the Golden Age Daredevil started off mute - Tenebrae 21:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  First disability superhero 

message: The History section is filled with non-NPOV statements such as "...others have thankfully washed by the way-side with other ill-begotten creations (Stilt-Man)", as well as such purple-prose, non-encyc writing as
:the introduction by Wood of the now classic red costume.
:...and the early years also featured Mike Murdock - Matt's other alter-ego and alleged "true" identity of Daredevil. But mostly people don't talk about those stories anymore...
Also, "wayside" is misspelled, but there's lots more work than copy-editing needed. - Tenebrae 21:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, no wayside is not misspelled. GodzillaWax 19:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-encyclopedic tone 

message: Here are the reasons for deleting this section's unencyclopedic final paragraph:
:As of late, [Do not use temporal phrases such as that, "currently" or "recently" -- give a date]  Marvel Studios' [title?] Avi Arad has mentioned that he would make a second Daredevil 2 "in a second" once the rights revert back to them from 20th Century Fox.  [Avi Arad cannot greenlight ("make") a film. Does this unsourced quote with no citation mean he would allow another studio to make a sequel? What exeuctive wouldn't? This is just PR speak, hype] Ben Affleck has stated that he would be interested in returning as long as negotiations were made to tell some of the darker storylines that the character is known for.  [Similar to Arad sentence: Unsourced paraphrase of an actor saying he'd be interested in starring in a major movie. Not encyclopedic].
This doesn't address the grammatical and similar errors - Tenebrae 02:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie section 

message: Together with secretary Karen Page and best friend and partner Franklin "Foggy" Nelson, Murdock became the lawyer he promised his dad he would one day become.
This is saying, "Together with secretary Karen and friend/partner Foggy, Murdock became [a] lawyer." That doesn't follow.  I'll fix the syntax. -- Tenebrae 23:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Garbled phrase 

message: No one said "hear". The phrase was "determine". He smells sweat, can hear very shallow breathing, etc. I'm fixing this as well. -- Tenebrae 23:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  (→Powers - he can only hear heart rate, not other evidence") 

message: I deleted this phrase (grammar sic), from the first sentence of paragraph 2 in the intro:
:has twice in its history been flirted with cancellation, and
because it is an unproveable supposition; it may have been considered for cancellation at any of several points, particularly in its early run when there was no regular creative team. Or it may never have been seriously considered for cancellation at all. ("Flirted with" is a vague phrase, btw). Is there a quote that can be cited from someone in a position to know?  Without sales figures, a knowledge of cancellation thresholds, etc., or a properly cited quote, where did the information for this statement come from? The context is also suspect: Many, many, many comics have been considered for cancellation at one time or another. Is this fact -- if even confirmable -- of such encyclopedic weight that it should be the lead of the second paragraph of an article?
Before I'm accused of anything, please note I've left alone something else in that sentence, the fact DD was not overly popular or influential. That has history on its side (statements by Stan Lee, DD's non-inclusion in 1960s animation efforts, lack of major Marvel characters or concepts sprung from it, lack of public catchphrases such as Hulk stomp or Your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man, the frequent references to DD as a second- or sometimes third-string Marvel character when the 2003 movie debuted, etc.), and does seem important, given the series' very public, much-discussed creative revival. - Tenebrae 21:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Flirted with cancellation" 

message: Youre talking like the exemplars are some standarized Wiki rule on comic character articles.  Theyre not.  Theyre something made a few months ago (something that Daredevil predates by years, I should add) by a collection of nerds (not a pejorative, im a nerd).  This isnt like you saying I need to conform to a wiki standard, this is you saying 'this needs to be this way because other people say so'.  Well fine, but I dont agree. GodzillaWax 17:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I Disagree

message: This is a Daredevil Talk-Page copy of posting to User:GodzillaWax
Your incendiary comments (Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks) on the Daredevil History page are in violation of Wikistandards, as are your reversions of edits made in good faith. I'm not sure why you call me "pepe", but it's inappropriate regardless. You ask, "Inappropriate tone? Are you serious? What do you do for a living, write algebra textbooks?" I'm surprised that writing for a living should be a matter of denigration in your view. Factual material does not have to be dry; please read any of the articles I've created and see for yourself. Factual material does, however, have to be accurate, objective, written in a neutral point of view (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view), a.k.a. NPOV, and in any encyclopedia's case and specifically in Wikipedia's, not use such words such as "currently" or "recently" (Wikipedia:Avoid_statements_that_will_date_quickly).  Additionally, the writing should be direct and to the point. 
We are also not supposed to remove tag templates; this is not your personal article, but all of ours.
I am reporting your behavior to the admin. As a final note, and I understand you may scoff, there's just no downside to being courteous to others. - Tenebrae 21:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversion and inappropriate comments

message: Marvel doesn't give Kirby credit for a lot of things. Everett said Kirby contributed -- including coming up with the idea of the billy club, and the record shows Kirby helped designe the costume, a highly integral part of any character's creation.  
I footnoted the source in the first graf. I understand you may have missed seeing it.  Here's the quoted source, from someone who spoke personally with both Kirby and Everett:
:Comics historian and former Kirby assistant Mark Evanier, investigating claims of Kirby's involvement in the creation of both Iron Man and Daredevil, interviewed Kirby and Everett on the subject, years before their deaths, and concluded  that, "in both cases, Jack had already drawn the covers of those issues and done some amount of design work. He ... seems to have participated in the design of Daredevil's first costume. ... Everett did tell me that Jack had come up with the idea of Daredevil's billy club. ... Jack, in effect, drew the first page of that first Daredevil story. In the rush to get that seriously late book to press, there wasn't time to complete Page One, so Stan had Sol Brodsky slap together a paste-up that employed Kirby's cover drawing. ... Everett volunteered to me that Jack had "helped him" though he wouldn't — or more likely, couldn't — elaborate on that. He just plain didn't remember it well, and in later years apparently gave others who asked a wide range of answers".
I can see you've been a faithful contributor to the Daredevil entry, going back months. That's a good thing. Sometimes that can make it difficult to accept others edits, even when well-sourced and factual. That's OK. People of all different ages and temperaments work on Wiki, and by and large they make it work. As long as we're all courteous and can back up what we say. 
I'm looking forward to more of your work on Daredevil, and I know the more you do, the more interested you'll get in digging into sources. - Tenebrae 18:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kirby

message: Marvel owns Daredevil.  Marvel says DD is created by Lee and Everett.  An article about how an alcoholic Everett may or may not recall Kirby doing anything more than a sketch of the splash page does not constitute the kind of evidence that overcomes that.
So in your own parlance, that is not encyclopedia worthy.
My problem with you is that you are omitting a great deal of facts, replacing things that are relevant to the character with inane trivia, and in general making this whole entry unreadable.  Nice work with the images by the way.
You talk about being corteous: investigate whether or not something is true before you delete it.
Additionally an article not meeting your own personal style guidelines does not mean it has an "inappropriate tone".
Christ man I put a lot of effort into making this entry something that was actually worth reading and informational.  You have spent your time taking it apart piece by piece.
Explain to me how saying "wisacre banter" is not in an inappropriate tone?
Its people like you that proves the faults of wikipedia
GodzillaWax 19:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kirby is Not a Creator of Daredevil

message: Knock it off with the personal attacks.  I saw you badmouthing me again on the WikiProject Comics Page.  Be a man and do it to my face or dont do it all.  But this cowardly running around dropping insults stops now.
GodzillaWax 18:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tenebrae, Im Not Asking You Again

message: Take stock of yourself and of the comments you make to people. We've all seen the insults you throw on the History page, fulminating about the "Virgin Brigade" and the "awesomeification" of your edits. Seriously, I'm asking respectfully and calmly for two answers, and I'm hoping, to use your own phrase, you're man enough to give them. The two questions are: Why do you think you have the right to insult people and call them names, or to characterize your attempts at editing with such self-aggrandiing and non-informative descriptions? -- Tenebrae 19:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GodzillaWax, don't threaten me

message: Cut it out, the pair of you. This is not the forum for personal attacks, it is a talk page for the improvement of the Daredevil article. Comments related to users specifically should be left on their talk pages. However, talk pages aren't the forum for pesonal attacks eithe. If you have a problem with a user specifically, you should leave a polite note on their talkpage. Now I hope that you two will take note of this, and stop polluting this talk page with your domestics, instead of just flaming me/reverting this edit. Thank you for reading, --Jamdav86 16:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're both right. Please see my olive branch under "Isnt it Odd" (couple of subheads above)- Tenebrae 19:41, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: If everyone would take the time to actually look at how things on the page have been going lately, you'd notice that I have worked hard on collaborating with Tenebrae on his changes.  The only thing I've mentioned is that he needs to knock off the behind-the-back namecalling.  I haven't been blind reverting his stuff or anything, I've been working on making his stuff better.  Honestly, everyone, cool out.
GodzillaWax 17:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Put On Your Knickers, Sallys

message: I'm new here, but I've been reading a lot about Wikipedia and have been looking at Dardevil, and before I start spending time on this, is there anything I or anyone can do about people like this person? "Put On Your Knickers, Sallys" is an oral-sex reference being used in a degrading, insulting and sophomoric way. Should we go to Jim Wales and recommend that people use a credit=card number to sign up, so that minors and teenagers like GodzillaWax stop acting like Beavis and Butthead? I like the idea of a free, global encyclopedia, but I don't think people like that belong here. -- Herculaneum 04:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is there something we can do about GodzillaWax?

message: I've commented-out these two sentences in the "Bendis Comes Out" section for being opinion rather than NPOV. I give one example of my reasoning for each. These sentences also appear hyperbolic.  Requesting comments from disinterested parties.
:Bendis has from his very first issue crafted a story not seen in comics much in the same way both Stan Lee and Frank Miller had decades before.
Non-NPOV. A lot of people would say the same of Nocenti's run, for example, and that's just in Daredevil. The term "not seen in comics since" is also both vague and, given the multitude of stories told in comics from Marvel, DC, Vertigo, etc., hyperbolic.
:And it certainly hasn’t hurt that Bendis’ writing has been accompanied by the finest art Daredevil has ever seen, thanks to Alex Maleev.
Also, non-NPOV opinion and hyperbolic. Many people believe Gene Colan produced "the finest art Daredevil has ever seen". Others believe Wally Wood did, etc. The point is, it's opinion. -- Tenebrae 20:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's POV, no doubt. Delete it all! However, as seen below, I have a more sweeping and contreversial change to bring to the article. --Jamdav86 20:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-NPOV 

message: I've been trying to figure out exactly how long Iron Fist masqueraded as Daredevil, and whether or not he is still doing so.  I can't figure this out from either this article or from the Iron Fist article.  At the end of the Bendis run, Murdock was in federal prison awaiting trial.  How did that storyline resolve?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.154.2.20 (talk) 19:44, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question re: Iron Fist 

message: Doesn't anyone do research? DD doesn't have super agility or strength.
Here's proof.
http://www.manwithoutfear.com/ddORIGIN.shtml
http://www.marvel.com/comics/Daredevil
http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/d/daredevil.htm
::I'd say they have researched those pages, most of the text in the Powers section is copied from the marvel.com site. DrHacky 14:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case Marvel are rewriting the past which should also be recorded in the article.  In his first book about Marvel comics Stan Lee himself states quite clearly that Daredevil was supposed to be the complete antithesis of Spiderman.  He has no super powers, his 'real self' is actually a persona he created to please his father, Daredevil is his 'real real self', both his strength and his agility are entirely his own, and his one "Super ability" is in fact a "Super disability".  Now to me that last bit's a little contentious, but my opinion is original research and there's no doubting what Lee's intentions were.
Isn't his location sense more like radar than sonar?  In the handful of DD comics I've read, they specifically called it "radar-sense" and I never saw him have a need for sound in order to see (like in the movie).  I'm not as familiar with DD as I am with other Marvel characters, though, so I could be wrong.  JDspeeder1 01:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

text: See talk below under Radar--DrHacky 06:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Powers 

message: Daredevil is a playable character in Marvel Ultimate Alliance.  He is pictured in the Team Builder section of the Marvel Ultimate Alliance website.  It is rumored that he must be unlocked before he is playable according to Marvel Ultimate Alliance.
Bondswalterppk 23:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marvel Ultimate Alliance 

message: I notice the title of a sub-section has been changed to "Fictional character biography" from "character biography" - why? surely people understand what the word "character" means? --Charlesknight 21:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars, which is a one-stop must-see for all of his WikiProject Comics folk! --Tenebrae 00:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional 

message: This page has been stagnant for a long time, even though as far back as 6 months ago big changes were agreed upon.  So I've started the butchering to get everything together.  Changes:
* Fixed some tense issues in Origin, and rewrote some things ( I first wrote that stuff probably 8 months ago and it needed to be tweaked ).
* The creator list was big and strangely incomplete -- e.g. listing 'no regular writer, 1985-1986', that kind of thing -- so I've condensed it down to just links to categories.  There's no need to be redundant with creator listings ( especially an incomplete one ) when a category takes care of it for you.
* Moving character history stuff out of publication history and into the fiction biography. This is definitely NOT COMPLETE.  A LOT of work has to be done here.  Publication history should only be notable developments with regards to creative teams, the status of the book ( cancelled?  renumbered? ), and issues of that nature.  Character biography should be the closest thing to plot summaries this page has.
I'd appreciate any help in getting this all under control.  Like I said, I've started the moving around process, but now things need to be fleshed out.  Cheers GodzillaWax 20:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed a lot of the excess headers. Many of the sections were only one paragraph long, and it cluttered up the TOC. CovenantD 20:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul 

message: Wiki-newbie, please do not just blindly revert the origin section anymore.  You may have been trying to change the tense of what I wrote, but you also wiped out a lot of sentence changes and updating.
Additionally, your assertion that there is no past tense in fiction is flawed.  Suggestions high school English teachers give for making creative writing essays more readable does not translate into how one should recount the details of a fictional characters life.  The section heading is 'fictional character biography'.  What biography have you ever read that was written in the present tense?  The whole point is that what is being retold happened once already.
GodzillaWax 22:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Though I hope I don't create any bad feelings, the tense to be used for fictional character biographies actually gets addressed as an editorial guideline at WikiProject Comics here. --Tenebrae 15:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Past Tense / Reverts 

message: Has anyone every got any conversation out of the 172.XXX editor who keeps trying to add in that Daredevil is a genius? --Charlesknight 10:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: None here. The guy's an obsessive and clearly doesn't play well with others.--Tenebrae 15:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genius 

message: I'm deleting the link to an unproduced spec script - there are surely lots of these out there, and more notable.  Why include this one and no others?  --Chancemichaels 16:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to "Unproduced Screenplay" 

message: I just wondering. I'm Roman Catholic. I was talking with so ppl who think Daredevil is a bad character because his name had the word "devil" in it, but other say that it don't matter because he's a hero who fights for what's right. I think it doesn't matter what your name is or how you dress, it matter what you fight for and weather you're a good person or not. What do you guys think?
Without evil, there can be no good. The devil ain't so bad after all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.242.232 (talk) 05:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Good people come in all colors shapes and sizes" 

message: The caption for the infobox picture reads:
Totally gay promotional art by Alex Maleev for cover of Daredevil vol. 2, #41 (March 2003)
Am I correct in assuming that the phrase 'totally gay' doesn't belong? I'm taking it out. Valencerian 19:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox text. 

message: The graphic novel Yellow by Jeph Loeb would seem to be in stark contrast to the origin presented in The Man Without Fear by Frank Miller. Yellow presents his classic Silver Age origin, while The Man Without Fear brings it into the 80s. Which one is the proper version? I know Marvel doesn't use multiple origins and versions like DC, so one must be wrong. Feb 07 MH
:Neither is wrong, largely due to the fact that these are fictional stories. They're all right. There are lots of small variations in the retellings of the origins, and Marvel has even put out its Mythos line of books, which combine comic book and movie origin details and add more. It will only matter the next time it's written about in the comics. --Chris Griswold  (☎☓) 09:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early life. 

message: ...This article's now been graded as "A", so is considered one of the best articles within WP:CMC - which means that it probably has a decent shot at getting Good article status, if a couple of things (such as the citation requests on the fictional biographyand a redlink or two) can be resolved first. Even if it doesn't make GA status, there should be some useful feedback. Opinions? --Mrph 18:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right then. Nobody's screamed stop, and although the article's not perfect it's looking pretty good. Let's see what we get back... --Mrph 21:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worth nominating for GA status? 

message: I see five categories at the bottom just screaming at me:
*Articles lacking sources from February 2007 
*All articles lacking sources 
*Comics articles needing issue citations 
*Articles with unsourced statements since February 2007 
*All articles with unsourced statements 
Check these sort of things before nominating guys.--SeizureDog 21:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quickfail

message: Most of publication history and fictional character biography still need work.  I harp about this every few months without actually contributing much, so apologies, but it still needs work before it should be considered a model of anything. GodzillaWax 16:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs Cleanup

message: How can anyone put a "needs to cite its references" on the fictional character biography?  That's fairly asinine.  There's 40 years worth of comics that are being summarized in a few paragraphs - theres no way individual issue citations could or should be added.  GodzillaWax 16:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources For Biography? 

message: How many people actually know Daredevil's secret identity? Is Spider-Man among those who know? if so, when Did he find out and do they both know each other's secret identities? - RVDDP2501 00:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Daredevil recognised Spiderman's heartbeat when he met Peter Parker.  At some point Spidey must have found out about DD's ID because he knew that getting a message to Matt Murdock was getting a message to Daredevil.  Since I never saw how he found out it may have actually been a writer's blip... Deke42 (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Daredevil told Spider-Man at the end of the storyline where he learned Spider-Man's identity,. the Sin-Eater story by Peter David (The Death of Jean DeWolff). I've clarified the article, tho the description I wrote is wooden and needs someone to edit. Salamurai (talk) 02:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daredevil's identity known 

message: Why is it that Brubaker and Lark have their own section, but Bendis and Maleev don't? Furthermore, why does it stop chronicling Bendis's run after Milla left and suddenly skip over to Brubaker's with only a minute mention of how Bendis's ended?--CyberGhostface 00:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Becuase the article needs massive amounts of work. GodzillaWax 18:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest that for consistency the subhead be changed to reflect not any particular writer/artist but the fact that the title went from a special imprint back to the mainstream line. Just suggesting. --Tenebrae 15:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, as articles on works of fiction are supposed to be written from an out-of-universe perspective, and one of the best ways to do that (in my opinion) is to have the subheads split by writer so the article can talk about how each writer handled the character. H. Carver 11:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a valid point, but it's also an out-of-universe perspective to discuss it in terms of mature-reader imprint vs. mainstream imprint. --Tenebrae 14:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bendis? 

message: WTF is Marvel's grittier heroes should it be greater or what? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jackjohnson15 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  marvel knights 

message: In the publication section there is the following
"The team specifically addressed societal issues, with Murdock, now running a non-profit urban legal center, confronting sexism, communism, racism, dwarfism, spoonerism, and nuclear proliferation while fighting supervillains. Nocenti introduced the popular antagonist Typhoid Mary in issue #254."
I'm not a Daredevil expert, so I'm not sure what part of this is true and what is false. But I'm pretty sure dwarfism and spoonerism don't need to be there. I defer to the Daredevil fans. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Avatar of Justice (talk • contribs) 17:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was 99% about fighting against poverty and for people who couldn't afford legal representation. I don't recall any dwarfves or communists and spoonerisms is obviously just vandalism. --66.58.211.104 02:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I tracked it down. It was vandalized by User:66.28.71.162 on April 18. I've reverted it and put a warning on his page.--Tenebrae 03:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the part about racism, sexism, and nuclear proliferation (the hell?) and it seems to have been reverted. It was part of some vandalism, why would it be reinstated? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.58.211.104 (talk) 07:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This strikes me as bogus 

message: Daredevil's origin is usually explained as "radioactive waste" spilling from a barrel on to Matt's eyes, but in Daredevil 164 Matt describes it as a small radioactive canister that looks more like a plutonium rod, colliding into his face to produce a blinding explosion.  Why is the "radioactive liquid waste" origin more prolific than the "radioactive canister" explanation?
:The cannister smacking him across the eyes is the only explanation from the comic books, the getting drenched in goo thing was from the movie  --66.58.211.104 17:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: I removed the material in this section about writers and artists because my WikiComics Project guidelines and exemplar, "Fictional character biography" is an in-universe section, and all the real-world writer/artist background belongs under "Publication history". Virtually all of the inappropriate material was also redundant with the PH. This additionally solves the problem of the "Brubaker/Lark" subhead, since the FCB should never have had a real-world, out-of-universe subhead in the first place. --Tenebrae 18:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional character bio 

message: I've come across an instance of the name "Matthew Murdock" in comics before the publication of Daredevil #1- specifically, as a murdered man in the July 19 1942 issue of Michael Eisner's 'The Spirit', "M-U-R-D-E-R". It would seem to be a stretch to assume that the two writers came up with the name independently, especially given the extent Eisner's work influenced later comics. Is this solid enough to include, or do I need more? -Toptomcat 07:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the name 

message: This has been mentioned a couple of times in the talk archives, but the current version of the page says his "radar sense" is based on his hearing.
...he can "see" by means of his "radar sense", in which Daredevil is able to listen to any sound (even that well below the normal human range of hearing), and use it to "see" a three-dimensional construct of his surroundings. However, unlike sonar, Daredevil does not have to make a sound in order to see, and is able to use the ambient sounds of his surroundings to the same effect.
As far as I remember from the comics, his radar is a separate power and it was only linked to his hearing, as sonar, in the movie.
The marvel.com site (http://www.marvel.com/universe/Daredevil_%28Matthew_Murdock%29) supports this- 
Along with the enhancement of Daredevil’s normal senses, he has gained another sense which he calls his Radar Sense. According to one theory, this sense reacts to an emission of electromagnetic energy a mutation in his brain has caused, reading the reverberations of this energy as a 360º, 3-D map of objects.
I don't recall any explicit explanation of this in recent issues, and have never seen anything about a brain mutation, but the sound-based radar is IMO wrong. Can anyone quote an issue to support this? DrHacky 14:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Daredevil v1 174- the Miller run, during the first encounter with the Hand- Daredevil loses his radar-sense, but retains his hearing. That's enough evidence that they're separate senses for me. -Toptomcat 01:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I've undone Cthulhu1254's replacement of the traditional description of Daredevil's powers as Radar Sense based on what I perceive to be the general consensus on this talk page as to the general feeling of what his power is called AND how his power is described in the books published by and webpage of Marvel Comics.  I've been reading Daredevil for years and don't recall his mutated radar sense ever having been described as based on sonar (although its an interesting theory).  I won't get into an edit war over it.  If my revert is reverted, I will leave it to others to hash it out, but I think the unilateral change to calling it a sonar sense when the books and web-page and fans all call it radar sense is just POV rather than encyclopedic information. --Markisgreen 06:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radar 

message: This article embarasses me as a daredevil fan? What mental defunct said that Matt has human echolocation? Probably some joke who has only seen the movie, as his radar, in the comics, is unrelated to his sense of hearing...
I mean come on people...
MarcWagzMarcWagz
Although I have no dog in this hunt, in the latest issue of Daredevil (vol. 3, #12), his power is referred to as "echolocation."  Perhaps Mark Waid is mentally defunct?Rcarter555 (talk) 05:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reading over this articcle... Is embarassing... 

message: In too much of a rush to add this in myself properly; I believe it is indicative of the 'more realistic turn' many feel Frank Miller brought to DD (also brings up the character's Catholicism, which I didn't see mentioned in the article but is linked in the categories and is simply an awesome quote):
"I figured Daredevil had to be a Catholic, because only a Catholic could be a vigilante and an attorney at the same time." 
– Frank Miller, History Channel; Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked: Comic Book Superheroes Unmasked.
Richard Paez Richardpaez 13:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frank Miller Quote 

message: Unless someone big/noteable specifically referenced the whole 'Women in Fridges' debate re: Daredevil's love interests, then I think the whole reference should be deleted. Random gripings by some blogger, which could be well-written, is not Wikipedia-worthy, IMHO. Lots42 13:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women In Refrigirators 

message: :Image:Daredevil100.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 08:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Daredevil100.jpg 

message: I think it would be good if we could get an image of Matt Murdock without the costume here. WDavis1911 (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes enormous sense. As well, the SHB image I believe goes against MOS, which dictates as clear a straightforward front image as possible without background elements. Certainly, an image by Gene Colan or Frank Miller, his two signature artists, wouldn't be inappropriate. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Matt Murdock image 

message: The image :Image:Daredevil poster.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image copyright problem with Image:Daredevil poster.JPG 

message: Why isn't Heather Glen listed as a love interest?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boop-oop-a-doop (talk • contribs) 10:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heather Glen 

message: So Matt Murdock has echolocation does he?
It has become apparent to me that you guys have never read a dd comic in your lives.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.38.188.195 (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Echolocation? 

message: Should this article split the increasingly long 'publication history' to a 'publication history' section and 'fictional character biography' section? I feel it should... but as it is a huge, drastic edit, I'd like to point this out on the talk page first. I'm using the Spider-Man article as my idol. -- A talk/contribs 22:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you know where I stand on that... there has also been some discussion on WT:CMC that seems to indicate an FCB would be just fine if done properly. :) BOZ (talk) 17:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hah, yes. I made this post right before I made the one in the project discussion page. -- A talk/contribs 20:54, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you read the replies, though? BOZ (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why yes I have. My apologies; I have a tendency to read the replies people give me and seem to skim over to another page rather than give an actual response. I've been meaning to give a response for a while. -- A talk/contribs 12:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Thing is the PH doesn't seem that long and, as I've said on WT:CMC a FCB is unwise (and against WP:WAF). If the concern is the length of the page then "other media" could be split off (this might be a good idea anyway). I'd also not use Spider-Man as an example as it has only recently made GA and as articles progress towards FA they tend to shed the in-universe material (so the way Spider-Man is now is not the way it will be when it hits FA and is not something to aim for). Better to look towards Superman, Batman and Captain Marvel (DC Comics) (although, as some were promoted years ago I wouldn't use them as a strict template. There is room for the creation of a section looking at the characterisation of the character, for example but somehow splitting the PH to create a FCB is a step backwards from the general trend of article improvement - such changes would have to be reversed as the article moved further up the quality scale. (Emperor (talk) 13:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I exaggerate. I meant it had a lot random in-universe information just inserted for lack of better place. The characterisation section is a definate; a sort of 'character attributes' section that includes 'characterisation' and the 'powers and abilities' section should be okay. The 'love interests' section, however, really bugs me. It's not significant at all, and at least two or three of those characters are significant enough to be added to a 'supporting characters' section, probably describing how they impact the series/Daredevil. -- A talk/contribs 20:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate biography section 

message: Substituted at 20:22, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment