Talk:Captain America/Archive 1

message: I removed the following from the article because I really don't think that 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 08:01, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed text

message: Hi.  After reading this article, I found it too much on the side of fiction.  Most of the article describes the character's "history" by telling the story lines used in the comic books.  That is, of course, fiction (and sometimes, as it is common in comic books, way far fetch).  I'm not saying that this shouldn't be done, but it should be accompanied by reports of real-life conjuncture that led to any particular developement in the comic books.  This is done only briefly at the beginning of the article, but it is not recovered later on, as the text focuses on fiction only.  For instance, the early paragraphs state that the character was revived without much success in the 1950's as an all-out opposer of communism, and that when it was again quickened in the 1960's, that segment of his "history" was retconned away.  But since the article only describes the stories later on, this procedure is not made completely clear, since the story told is [I imagine] the retconned one.  The article should expand on that aspect, tell the story as it was developed in the 50's, then mention the decision to retcon it a decade later and explain the changes made in the character's story line to retcon it.  If not for that quick introduction, I would never have noticed that the story had been retconned, and many might not make the connection, not to mention that other nuances might go unnoticed for the uninitiated (such as myself).  This article needs some reviewing, in order to be more encyclopedic.  Regards, Redux 02:32, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Redux. The article spends to much time on the fictional history of the character and not on the real history of Captain America as a work of fiction. I don't suppose there's any need to take anything out of it, but if someone is knowledgeable about the real world history of the characters it would be nice to see a lot more about it added. That's what I came hear looking for and was very dissapointed. There's a much shorter but overall more informative article at Toonopedia.--Heathcliff 02:18, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reality vs. Fiction 

message: Is is just me, or is this image too good not to use!? -leigh (φθόγγος) 00:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Kirby! 

message: According to this character comparison tool on the Marvel website,  this edit summary is wrong. If you compare Shang-Chi and Iron Fist on the 10 point scale of 'fighting abilities' on the 'Abilities' tab you'll see that Captain America is indeed a better fighter than these two. Kind of pedantic, but I couldn't help myself. (Bjorn Tipling 09:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would take that chart with an incredible pinch of salt, since I don't think we've ever seen Shangi Chi and Cap go head to head. Ultimately, perhaps we should leave it as "one of the best" until shown otherwise in an actual story. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 09:31, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Don't forget Fist battled Cap once (IF8?) & it was a draw, because Danny didn't want to hurt him.  Trekphiler 08:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best Fighter 

message: I don't believe this section is notable enough to include in the article. Besides just being a crossover stunt to increase sales, Captain America was only featured in a single issue. I'm sure throughout Marvel's past there have been single issue alternate Universes where there existed different versions of Steve Rogers but we don't include those. The only reason this has been included is because it happened recently. I think an article just about the House of M is fine, and I bet that Captain America will not feature prominently. To give House of M and Ultimate Captain America the same amount of article space and recognition is silly when one is a single issue of a tiny crossover story that lasted two months or so and the other is an entire series of Ultimates specific comic series lasting a few years now with some comics selling better than the original universe's counterparts. At best maybe we should have a section of 'Other' and include House of M with some other versions... (Bjorn Tipling 17:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  House of M section for CA is not notable 

message: How is it possible that there is no substantial mention of the Falcon?? He was partnered with Cap at least till the 80s, and was even double billed on the covers back in the 70s. Whether you like him, love him, hate him, you cant just not mention a character who has been as integral to the Captain America history as Sam Wilson.
Perplexed!
At first I thought you were totally wrong about Falcon not being in the article, and then I saw you were right. I notice now at least something has been added. However, I'm curious as to how this oversight could have happened in the first place. They had all the references to Bucky, Nick Fury, the Invaders (created by Roy Thomas in the 70s!) and even modern story lines like House of M. Its like they went out of their way not to include him. 131.37.206.6 17:17, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Never attrtibute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:26, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Falcon 

message: "Some stories" say Steven Grant? Isn't that canon? It was in an ish CA I saw it... And "Reinstein" being "codename" is a retcon.  Trekphiler 08:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I believe Erskine is the retcon, not Reinstein. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "Some stories say Steven Grant", though. Elaborate? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 09:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need a Grant 

message: I was thinking of giving Cap's shield it's own entry, borrowing the information from here and expanding it. Any objections?
:Do it up and let's have a go at it — if it's not substantial enough or merely duplicates info, it might be better merged back into this article, though. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:56, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: hey, finished it earlier today. Could probably use a bit more cleaning up, but I packed it with info. But it's pretty good, if I do say so myself Captain America's shield Elijya 01:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Shield 

message: There is this little line down near the bottom, below the movie explanation: "Rumours of a new Captain America movie have circulated since 2009, but have thus far not produced anything concrete." I'm reasonably certain we haven't reached 2009 yet, but I don't keep track of Captain America talk to know how long the rumors have been circulating. SavannahLion 20:14, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should be 2005. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 20:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2009? 

message: Wondering why Kyle Baker's pre-Cap take on things hasn't made it onto the page. I don't have the knowledge to add it, but I'd say it was a significant addition to both the Captain America and "Weapon X/Ten" chronologies. --MattShepherd 20:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's there - last three paragraphs of the section on the 1940s. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:37, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nothing on Weapon Zero / The Truth? 

message: I used to read the comic in the 80's and I seem to remember Steve Rogers either quitting or presumed dead. Anyway, there was a new Captain and a new Bucky who was Black. Then there was a controversy because Black slaves were called "bucks". So they changed Bucky's name to something I don't remember. Does anyone else remember this and think it should be mentioned in the article?MrBlondNYC 07:30, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Captain America#1980s and Bucky#Others. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 07:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "new" Captain America 

message: There have been so many different people who have gone by the Cap title at one point or another in the 616 universe that I think there should be a clear list of each one in the article somewhere.
Its complicated because there´s been so many retcons over the years and the chronology of which Cap is no. I, II etc. is all messed up. 
Anyway here are some if the versions I could come up with quickly:
* Colin MacIntyre (Protocide, though Im unsure if he ever went by the title Captain America)
* Isaiah Bradley
* Steve Rogers
* William Naslund (The Spirit of ´76)
* Jeff Mace (the Patriot)
* The 1950s anti-communist Cap (later "the Grand Director") 
* Sam Wilson, (the Falcon briefly took on the identity in two part  retcon story, set in the 1970s era, in Captain America Sentinel of Liberty series published in the late-90s). 
* Bob Russo (called himself "Captain America" very briefly during the 70s Nomad storyline)
* "Scar" Turpin (same as above)  
* "Roscoe" (briefly "Captain America" during the 70s Nomad storyline, killed in action by the Red Skull)
* John Walker, later known as US Agent.
* The Anti-Cap from the recent Captain and the Falcon series (though Im not sure what the story was with this guy).
In reluctant to post this or anything like it as I clearly dont have all the info. Anyone else more expert in Cap-lore interested?Hueysheridan 20:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I second this; sadly, I do not have the knowledge of the nomenclature. --Chris Griswold 14:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds like a really good idea.  While the info is there in the text, a succinct, thumbnail guide would be a great help for quick perusal. You've halfway done it here already. I guess the only component still needed would be the respective issues were each was revealed. -- Tenebrae 14:46, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing of all the different Caps? 

message: Is it consensus that the ultimate Captain America SHB should be removed? --Chris Griswold 18:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultimate SHB 

message: How is the legendary Werewolf Captain America storyline not in this entry? It's criminal. Does anyone have the comics that it appears in? --Chris Griswold 05:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have some of them and I agree the story is glorious. But I disagree about its needing inclusion here - Capwolf deserves an entry all of its own to highlight its true magnificance. I just hope you are up to it Mr. Griswold. Hueysheridan 20:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, you called my bluff. You win, alright? I have an unhealthy, ironic fondness for a story that I only read part of solely because of the dog-eared copies available in my orthodontist's office when I was 12. --Chris Griswold 13:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was joke (as I assumed your original comment was). No offense meant.Hueysheridan 20:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I understood. It has been increasingly apparent to me that editors oftem vehemently assume otherwise, so it is understandable that you might need to caution me to your joke. --Chris Griswold 07:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Cap Wolf? 

message: Can we get a quotations section?  Cap has had some great ones, including my personal favorite from the Ultimates, "Surrender?! Do you think this A stands for France?!"  Classic.- Wakefencer
:Great idea! You should put it here. --Chris Griswold 02:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations 

message: If Peak Human strength still enables the person to lift double their own body weight up to 800 lbs., Cap lifting 540 lbs. doesn't mean he has superpowers.  Nothing else he's done has been beyond peak human ability.  (There are real-life weightlifters who can lift three times their own body weight, so curling 540 wouldn't be a stretch for him, with the Serum in his veins.)  70.49.242.85 02:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strength 

message: Quoting  "Throughout World War II, Captain America and Bucky fight the Nazi menace both on their own and as members of the superhero team the Invaders (beginning with 1970s comics), which after the war evolves into the All-Winners Squad (in 1940s comics)."
Rogers, imho, CAN'T "fight (..) into the All-Winner Squad" because, as the sentence correctly reports, it operates "after the war", when Rogers is presumed dead (freezed). Afaik All-Winner Squad first mission is set in 1946 agains isbisa... The Cap of All-Winner Squad so is Spirit of '76/naslund... the same for Bucky.  --88.149.169.237 01:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also inaccurate in that the Invaders didn't "evolve" into the All-Winners Squad. I've tried to fix it. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 01:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Rogers and All-Winner Squad 

message: Why is there no mention on Cap's history in volume 2 and volume 3?Sage99 23:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Captain America volume 2 and 3?? 

message: I know this has been discussed before, but I am thinking we should now separate the Captain America Article, since Bucky has been cap for a while now AND he is going to be part of the New Avengers. We should have one for Steve Rogers and Bucky, and then one that is just the name of Captain America with info on the other people who have used the name Captain America. What does everyone else think.--  Phoenix741(Talk Page) 19:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think that we don't need it. A year isn't long in terms of comics, and we're only on the second storyline with bucky as cap. ThuranX (talk) 22:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  If it was just in his own series I would agree, but he is now part of the New Avengers(or at least he will be), which I think does mean something.--  Phoenix741(Talk Page) 03:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He's going to be part of the New Avengers for the duration of the next crossover event. This article is not so long that we can't be more circumspect in our plot coverage, which is really what you're asking us to reflect, not real world content, and leave it all at one place. If we had significant real world commentaries on the new character, it might be more worthwhile. As it stands, however, we're looking at a few months of in-universe time, and less than three years of his time in the role, real-world.  I think we're fine as is. ThuranX (talk) 04:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think we should simply rename this article 'Steve Rogers' and have the term 'Captain America' link to a disambiguation page where the user can choose between Steve or Bucky, or others who have used the name. 58.175.168.199 (talk) 10:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we make a Steve Rogers articles. 

message: There are a total of 11 non-free imags, which I believe can be parred down, as it doesn't reflect minimal use. I would suggest keeping the box image, the Comic Art sketch, Cap#1, Avengers #4, and dead-Cap.  -Sharp962 (talk) 20:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: Shouldn't we make an article for the new Steve Rogers: Super Soldier mini-series? Leader Vladimir
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
the Article is wrong cap started out with super strength and lost it during a story in the 90 thats when he became a human in perfect physical  condition the only source i can think of off hand is Avengers Forever when wasp sees cap use his super strength she knows its him from the past. 
65.183.214.150 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 04:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Rogers: Super Soldier 

message: According to the opening of the publication history, "Joe Simon conceived the idea for Captain America ... in 1941", but the first issue of Captain America Comics was "on sale in December 1940".  One of these dates must be wrong. --石猴 (Shí Hóu) (talk) 06:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem in publication history 

message: As noted by the deletion of Fictional history of Green Goblin and other recent decisions, WikiProject Comics follows Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction), which does not allow "fictography" and under which fictional-character articles must be written with a real world perspective. This article's FCB, like those of the deleted articles, violates these guidelines and WikiProject Comics consensus. This article requires a group effort to radically trim, to add third-party WP:RS sourcing, and to be brought to encyclopedic standards. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:34, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  FCB currently violates Wiki guidelines 

message: Today I found a mistake everything captain america at the start of the page was thor can you fix this mistake?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.52.197.11 (talk) 16:27, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Rogers is Thor???? 

message: There Is a comment by Simon that seems to warrant explanation. On the creation of CA: 'Simon noted, "When the first issue came out we got a lot of... threatening letters and hate mail. Some people really opposed what Cap stood for." ' Who wrote the hate mail? Other Americans? What were they objecting to? Does the source of the comment give details? 23:12, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objections to CA? 

message: In the beginning of the lort on Cap (at the end of the first lort in the world ), it says his uniform had a swastika on it.  Is this correct?  I've never seen this particular version of his costume.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.3.20.226 (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the symbol correct? 

message: In the very first issue of C.A., the operation, in which Steve turns all frail to all powerful, is known as Operation: Rebirth. But in the article, it is known as Project: Rebirth. I do know, over the years, they changed the name, but which one should we use? Should we still have a little mention of the former name, Operation: Rebirth? Bonkers The Clown (talk) 08:53, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project/Operation 

message: The first citation had read:
"The 1995 Marvel Milestone Edition: Captain America archival reprint has no cover date or number, and its postal indicia says "Originally published... as Captain America #000." Timely's first comic"
While the 1995 reprint does not have a cover date or number, the original 1941 comic book did. As can been seen at the Grand Comics Database http://www.comics.org/issue/1313/cover/4/ there is indeed a date (March) and a number (No. 1). There is no mention of the 1941 original's indicia reading #000. Neither the Grand Comics Database, Don Markstein, Les Daniels, Roy Thomas, or Peter Sanderson refer to the first issue as anything other than #1. I believe that a previous Wikipedia editor took the claim that the 1995 reprint was exact a bit too seriously.
I added several citations verifying the March 1941 and issue number.
Mtminchi08 (talk) 06:33, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover date and issue number for first appearance 

message: As several of the posts on this page are rather old, it would be good to move them to an archive page. Everything would still be available for viewing but it would "clean up" the talk page for current topics. Mtminchi08 (talk) 07:38, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the MiszaBot/Archive to this page as it has been nearly two weeks with no objections to the archiving suggestion. Mtminchi08 (talk) 06:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive of older posts on the talk page 

message: Why is Captain America Comics redirected here? The article is about the character, but I was looking for information about the golden age comic series. Other characters have separate articles about the character and the comic series (such as Amazing Spider-man, Action Comics etc.) The article is in itself too long, it would seem to me unreasonable to have the magazine and character in the same article. I look forward to the response.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.16.8.23 (talk) 23:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Captain America Comics 

message: In the References section, a lot of articles are used that apparently were in ¨Gilbert, 2008¨, however, there is no previous mention of the work and it can therefore not be found by, for example, searching for it on google (scholar), even with the name of a specific author or quote. Providing info as to which work is referred to the first time, later just referring to it as Gilbert, 2008, would fix this. 77.173.19.251 (talk) 10:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  References unclear: Gilbert 

message: Why do the main box mention March 1941 as the first appearance of Captain America if there are many evidences and references that Captain America's first issue was release in December 20, 1940?
Usually magazines has later dates on their covers simply because of distribution problems...
I will edit the article mention both dates...
PS: The references were wrongly edited...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.42.18.22 (talk) 23:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Standard practice is to use cover dates for periodicals such as comic books. The specific on sale date is available for this particular comic book but not necessarily for every issue.  Mtminchi08 (talk) 01:25, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover date > actual release date? 

message: The article states that Captain America first appears in his own series in 1969. However, I know of him to be included within #3 of Avengers 1968.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.131.240.139 (talk) 15:44, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error Check - Justin Arnold 

message: I have been reading a book on Captain America which contains 9 old comics and a bio about him. Throughout the whole book he is constantly referred to as Cap. Should Cap be mentioned in the lead? I think it should. I was going to but I thought I would just post here seeing what people say. That first part of my post there probably didn't need saying but I said it as some sort of proof that he is called Cap for short. –DangerousJXD (talk) 02:18, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I could see it being mentioned somewhere, as long as we aren't referring to him that way at any point in the text. 50.141.204.194 (talk) 23:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes just one mention. DangerousJXD (talk) 23:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Cap

message: More of Captain Americas abilities should be added. He is one of the best martial artist in the whole Marvel universe, and that doesnt even get a mention?
2601:4:3400:254:C4FD:9858:1ED9:7731 (talk) 02:08, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 02:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2015 

message: If he's a HYDRA agent
Means his team list should be update with it as well.
118.137.229.167 (talk) 06:05, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 06:55, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 May 2016 

message: Please remove the word "imminent" from this sentence: "The character is usually depicted as the alter ego of Steve Rogers, a frail young man enhanced to the peak of human perfection by an experimental serum to aid the United States government's imminent efforts in World War II." "Imminent" means "about to happen," and is clearly misused here. I'm not sure what word the original author intended, or I'd suggest substituting it.
Userboy87 (talk) 11:32, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Killer Moff (talk) 13:32, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 May 2016