Talk:Daredevil (Marvel Comics character)/Archive 3

message: There needs to be a little more detailed mention of his "radar sense" in the powers and abilities section. It isn't even mentioned at all
:Isn't it just due to a combination of his remaining senses? --Newt ΨΦ 18:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah; I think the idea of an actual, pulsing internal radar has been retconned out or they're at least being as vague as possible to allow for a "combined senses" interpretation.  If this isn't so, then we could use a citation from Marvel Encyc. or somewhere for the latest edit... ka1iban 20:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My addition may need to be removed, as I used the marvel.com profile of Daredevil.  --Newt ΨΦ 20:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radar Sense 

message: I removed that shit of "Daredevil also possesses superhuman agility, dexterity and reflexes, allowing for acrobatic and gymnastic feats exceeding those of Olympic athletes. Daredevil has repeatedly demonstrated the ability to evade a bullet fired at point-blank range. He has shown unerring precision with thrown and missile weapons, and has waded through hails of gunfire and fragments without sustaining a single injury.
Daredevil has a level of physical endurance and pain threshold that seems to border on superhuman, at times. He has shown the ability to survive extreme injuries and blood loss, debilitating disease and crippling pain. In many cases, Daredevil has demonstrated himself to still be combat-capable and extremely effective in times of these great physical stresses..." 
Because it's FALSE. He doesn't have superhuman agility or anything like that. His agility is from training in acrobatics and martial arts which require a flexible, agile practicioner. Whoever put down that he is a superhuman acrobat is an IDIOT.
Check the info HERE. http://www.spiderfan.org/characters/daredevil.html
:First of all, there's no need for the flagrant cursing and belittling of the previous editors.  Secondly, Marvel.com's profile of Daredevil does list him as an Olympic-level athlete, while I agree that the "superhuman" is incorrect, there are other ways to approach disagreement. --Newt ΨΦ 17:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "superhuman agility

message: Noticed theres been a back and forth on this.  Dr Bat's argument is that theres no need for a useless redirect.  Tenebrae's argument is that the Golden Age character is essential.  Why not have Daredevil (comics) be a disambig page of its own, with links to Daredevil (Marvel Comics) and Daredevil (Golden Age)? GodzillaWax 23:37, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thank you GW, and given that are are two Daredevils in comics, both of which are prominent, and that the editor reverting hasn't brought it up in Discussion, Daredevil (Marvel Comics) and Daredevil (Golden Age) is a more accurate way to go. -- Tenebrae 22:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Resolution?

message: :I thank you GW, and given that are are two Daredevils in comics, both of which are prominent, and that the editor reverting hasn't brought it up in Discussion, Daredevil (Marvel Comics) and Daredevil (Golden Age) is a more accurate way to go. -- Tenebrae 22:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Daredevil (Marvel Comics) / Daredevil (Golden Age)

message: I agree that maybe there's too many.  IMO, the Brother Take My Hand, the collage and the movie poster could all go.  The rest I think are solid.
Im going to go ahead and be proactive about this.  Obviously feel free to change as things get discussed. GodzillaWax 20:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already stated how the pics worked. The majority of those pics fit the article and their specific sections. Its not like we just have random pics of DD posing scattered around. I'm willing to get a better pic for the Bendis run, but why have pics for two out of three of the major runs? Going to revert it.--CyberGhostface 20:47, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to muddy up the waters any further, but would there be any precedent for having an image of his "grim and gritty" Fall From Grace costume? ka1iban 21:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there's no other pic for the section, go ahead.--CyberGhostface 21:57, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reductions

message: :I think GodzillaWax's version made this page look better. Peronally, I say remove the #47, the "darker design", #50, the "God" one, #170 and even the infobox picture (and use vol 2 #1 instead).  I am not going to just do it and make waves because I know some fanboys can't hanld this page not looking the way they want it.  But that's just my opinion.  The page looks like it has too many images, imho.  We don't need 3 Maleev images, some probably don't qualify as fair use (including the #170 one that I uploaded) and It's starting to look more like a gallary than an article. Again, just my opinion. AriGold 18:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yet you're complaning because its not the way you want it. But whatever, the page is fine right now.--CyberGhostface 00:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am offering mu opinion, it's not a complaint, it's a critique. I admit that I have even contributed to the problem by inserting the Kingpin issue and that some of them probably don't qualify under fair use. AriGold 13:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: We're now up to 13

message: Theres way too many pics on this page; they dominate the actual content of the page.  Not every section needs its own image.  We should just try for landmark pics - first red costume, pic for Millers run, pic for Guardian Devil, pic for Bendis, etc.  Pic for Brubaker is good too since its topical.  But really, its gone overboard now. GodzillaWax 23:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Honestly Guys

message: I removed some pics, moved others around, and added a cover gallery.  Is this a relatively pleasing solution for everybody? GodzillaWax 18:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Compromise

message: Given that it was this legendary artist's signature character, and that he drew over 100 issues of Daredevil, it's important to have a representative piece of Colan art here.
Also, is the current superherobox image really the best shot of Daredevil? He's mostly in shadow; he's not even waist-up, let alone full body; and handcuffed is not a respenative image of the Daredevil's usual state. It's like having him there in his old costume -- yes, it happened, but it's not how the character is usually seen. -- Tenebrae 22:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: The great Tenebrae/GodzillaWax Battle of 2005/2006 has come to an amicable end, with the agreement being that Tenebrae will work on Publication History and that I will work on Character History, with each not touching the others realm.  A result though is that some things are going to be duplicated in each section (since, for example, I cant remove duplicate points from his section).  So if other editors want to contribute to making things less redundant, cheers.
I think a good general rule of what belongs in Publication History is things of historical context or issues of creator involvement and the like.  Conversely, Character History should have plot points and developments in Murdocks life. 
Cheers GodzillaWax 11:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Publication History vs. Character History

message: Per Wikipedia:Avoid_statements_that_will_date_quickly:
:Phrases to avoid include "recently", "in modern times", "now considered", "is soon to become", and "the sixties"; instead use phrases such as "as of October 2001" or "the 1960s." In many cases, such statements are also more precise.
:Imagine someone is reading your words in six months, five, ten, fifty years. Will they still make sense?
:Using precise language that will not sound dated if the article is never edited again is considered the best practice.
Per Mediation agreement (long story), I'd like to ask fellow editors to fix the "recently"s and the "not yet been seen" in the two items below (and elsewhere in the article if you see it). The whole phrase "the ramifications of which have not yet been seen" can probably go, since that can be said of any plot occurrence. They all have ramifications, and who knows what will be seen in the future even if there are immediate ramifications. (See Bucky, for instance.)
:* Luke Cage — hero for hire with unbreakable skin, has become one of Daredevil's closest friends in recent years. Matt's public denial of his life as Daredevil has strained their relationship.
:* Gladiator — former villain turned close friend and bodyguard. Was recently coerced into betraying Daredevil, the ramifications of which have not yet been seen.
— Tenebrae 20:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The agreement was just not to touch Character History - the rest is fair game I think.  GodzillaWax 20:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for wording change

message: There's no independent article on Ultimate Daredevil, and seeing as how he's only appeared in Ultimate X-Men, Ultimate Marvel Team-Up, and Ultimate Daredevil and Elektra as far as I know, I think it should probably just be an addition to the standard Daredevil (Marvel Comics) article rather than it's own.
Thoughts?
:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 07:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultimate Daredevil 

message: Howdy all.  I've been way too busy to work on this page, regrettably.  Can someone(s) help a brother out and beef up the character history part?  It was never supposed to be as short as it is.  Cheers GodzillaWax 18:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help With Character History 

message: Pretty sure DD was never a Defender...try this page http://www.marvel.com/universe/Defenders ka1iban 14:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the same article --> "The team also attracted an eclectic array of recurring associates such as Daredevil, Yellowjacket and Devil-Slayer." GodzillaWax 13:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess what's important to me is that it's an official MARVEL page, and in three lists of members (current, former, reserve etc etc) they don't mention DD ka1iban 13:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Yep, Daredevil was a Defender on several occasions. Doczilla 09:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defenders 

message: From the size alone, it is easy to see that the Ultimate Daredevil and Elektra article is a footnote and should merged into those characters' articles.--Chris Griswold 04:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge -- or Merge all three Ultimate Daredevil and Elektra miniseries into one, and put character information on their respective pages. -- HKMARKS 01:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Merge--Chris Griswold 04:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge -- or Merge all three Ultimate Daredevil and Elektra miniseries into one, and put character information on their respective pages. -- HKMARKS 01:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: The article doesn't really talk about recent issues. What happened to Murdock during House of M? Who is daredevil if Murdock is in jail? This article seems confusing to me.-Giant89 15:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: House of M, I don't remember any real mention of him.  The new Daredevil is now mentioned, but any speculation as to his identity has no real place in wikipedia. --Newt ΨΦ 15:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it's Foggy! I'll go change the articles! --Chris Griswold 18:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article talks about recent events within the perspective of an encyclopedia article. Recent events do not get more weight than other events in the character's history. According to WikiProject:Comics guidelines, we're to keep pub history and character bio as succinct as possible without adding extraneous detail.-- Tenebrae 18:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It's not like this article is supposed to be a substitute for reading the comics. It's not an episode guide for a comic book. It's an encyclopedic entry that is already too long. Doczilla 06:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's happened recently? 

message: Since an anonymous IP has been making incorrect changes to captions, it might be helpful to add this link here to Wikipedia Comics Project: Cover artwork crediting convention for guidelines. -- Tenebrae 18:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Promotional art vs. cover art

message: Can we merge the History and Origin sections?  There seems to be a lot of overlap in them, the difference being the in-universe treatment of the character in the Origin and out-of-universe treatment in History.  How 'bout it?  Maybe we can just stick to the *ahem* original origin and leave further exposition (about Elektra and Foggy, and extra about his father) out of it?  --Newt ΨΦ 19:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm all for streamlining, but I'm not sure what you mean. WikiProject Comics style is to have Publication History and Character Biography be separate. Or are you referring to something different? -- Tenebrae 00:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow: It does. I missed that somehow. --Chris Griswold 07:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm referring to the fact that the publication history really creates no need for the origin section as it's written.  However, I could see a use for an in-universe treatment (e.g. the origin story in Captain Marvel (DC Comics)) of his origin up to his beginning fighting crime as it was originally written, before later comics expanded it.  I know the WP:CMC templar has the two sections separate, but something has to be done about this overlap.  --Newt ΨΦ 12:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm looking at Publication history > Early years, and I just don't see anything about his origin (pushing the blind man away, etc.). Where should I be looking, exactly? -- Tenebrae 14:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh... I must have been at least partially mistaken.  There is still a bit of overlap, the bit about "Mike Murdock" is a repeat of above info, as is the love triangle between Foggy, Karen, and Matt.  The origin also talks a bit too much about current info.  I'll go ahead and edit out what's not needed or redundant.  I think I may have overreacted and then continued to overreact based on my previous assumptions. --Newt ΨΦ 15:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Okay, here goes.  I edited out ongoing history, because a lot of that is covered in the publication history (i.e. Karen Page, Mike Murdock, and the recent Brubaker stuff) and left the expanded origin.  Any thoughts?  --Newt ΨΦ 15:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like a sensible edit; the very detailed Karen/Foggy stuff really does seems better suited to their individual entries ... especially 'cuz this is one lonnnnng article! You might want to go in and un-ital Nelson and Murdock, though -- names of law firms aren't italicized. Just ask Jacoby & Meyers!   :-)  -- Tenebrae 15:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, did so.  Went ahead and cut out a little flowery language too.  We may need to go through and edit to instead focus the pub history on an overarching summary of the later writers'/artists' run (i.e. make Bendis and Maleev's section more like Frank Miller's) rather than arc by arc summary.  I think that could cut out quite a bit.  --Newt ΨΦ 15:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, that sounds like a good idea; different eras have different milestones, and a blow-by-blow description of each story arc probably goes into too much detail. The Pub Hist > Volume 1 stuff looks overall OK to me. -- Tenebrae 15:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is called Wiki-magic. --Chris Griswold 18:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History and Origin 

message: Here it states that even in AoA Matt got his powers from an accident. Does it actually state this anywhere in AoA? I just assumed his powers genuinely were granted by someone else like he claims they are. I'm going to edit it for now but let me know if I'm wrong.Jayunderscorezero 16:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not really sure... the recent 2099 one-shots by Robert Kirkman I *think* happened in a different 2099, unrelated to the one in the 1990s.  In the new one, he was decended from Wilson Fisk, fought crime in costume and was a criminal out of costume.  I don't know about the earlier one. -HKMARKS 23:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Age of Apocalypse/2099 Daredevil

message: The current version of the article mentions the ongoing spoiler, but fails to mention the occasion way back when Black Panther pulled a similar stunt.  It is also probably worthwhile to mention, however briefly, the storylines involving doubts about "who is the real DD".  There was one by DeMatteis involving the third and first costumes, and IIRC somewhere along the line DD and Bullseye subbed for one another. Luis Dantas 16:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And I believe the Bob Gale arc had a DD impersonator as well. And Foggy Nelson masqueraded as DD in an effort to impress Karen Page way back in Daredevil # 19 or 20. --Tenebrae 22:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other people using the DD id

message: Two issues here:
It's a falsity that there are just five human senses. The sense of feel and how our body senses heat is different. You don't touch the heat and you're not being burned by it, you're feeling it. We have a sense of balance, thirst, hunger, time, etc. These all come under the heading of 'human senses'. I heard (on QI of all places - go stephen fry) that the body has somewhere between 19 and 22 different senses. Are these all heightened in daredevil?
His radar sense has been desribed as being from his hearing. With sound, the waves pulsate outwards and are sensed by him similarly to how bats and dolphins have echolocation (making it sonar more than radar). Bendis also said once (i think it was in Underboss) that an explosion played havok with his hearing and so radar sense. Does this mean we have to assume this is the modern interpretation of the power?
Discuss :) 88.108.127.110
:The sense article only lists 9 senses anyway. The five senses are something the average person recognizes. I'll look at the article for the listing and attempt to fix if he reference is wierd.-Giant89 01:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: '''Powers and abilities'''

message: In the 2003 movie Daredevil is clearly placed as a Catholic, which also appears to be part of the Frank Miller storyline and perhaps other arcs.  As this is a notable aspect of this character and helps address issues like his attitudes towards justice and guilt, I should probably be expressly mentioned in the character biography.
There are people who like to say "X" character is like me in way "Y", and Wikipedia would be an appropriate source for people trying to quickly do that kind of survey. 
I'm not enough of an authority on the subject to be confident that what I wrote would be correct, but I'd encourage someone to do so.Ohwilleke 22:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Religion

message: One thing I'm not sure about trimming is the Everett quote from early in the article. On the one hand, I liked the look of it. On the other hand, it really didn't add anything to our knowledge of the character Daredevil. Doczilla 07:10, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trimming

message: Shouldn't Jack Batlin be listed as a notable alias? I mean, he did feature in around 40 issues of daredevil and was a large part of the plot after Matt Murdock's "death" 80.6.230.36 (talk) 14:31, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack Batlin Alias 

message: I'm gonna merge the Alternate versions of Daredevil to Daredevil (Marvel Comics)'s page. 
Crashsnake 3/13/2012  —Preceding undated comment added 20:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to explain why you're doing that and allow discussion. Spidey104 14:45, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging Alternate Versions 

message: I'm confused as to why someone feels that citations are needed for Gladiator and Jessica Jones, but not for any of the other characters in the list - especially the latter, as her line is much the same as Luke Cage's ('was a bodyguard for him') but his line hasn't been deemed in need of a citation.
My gut feeling is that all of the characters should have a citation, or none of them should. Otherwise how does one quantify which ones to cite and which not to?
: Per WP:TPYES, Please sign your posts with four tildes (~) 18:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recurring characters 

message: I didn't see a mention of Daredevil's lack of/involvement in the Civil War. I say lack of because I don't remember seeing him. Did he get up to anything in CW, and what is he up to now? {{Subst:unsigned|86.128.80.
:Matt Murdock himself isn't involved in Civil War.  He was featured in the Civil War: Choosing Sides one-shot in the Iron Fist segment and the SHRA is mentioned in, I think, Daredevil #89.  Danny Rand, masquerading as DD, did fight in the war on Captain America's side and is featured as such, although outside of the Cable and Deadpool series, he is treated just as Murdock would be and no hints are given to show that Murdock isn't in the costume. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.214.118.250 (talk • contribs) 
: Per WP:TPYES, Please sign your posts with four tildes (~) 18:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civil War 

message: Some jerk registered as User:Freddyape vandalized a footnote on May 19, in three edits beginning here. I only just now found and fixed it, but let's keep an eye out in case he comes back. --Tenebrae
: Adding date stamp so this be archived. 18:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandal 

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) 07:47, 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) 06:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the archiving proposal, and in fact had been thinking about the need for archiving on this talk page myself. Sorry for the belated response, but I figured it would still be worthwhile to let it be known that this proposal has support.--NukeofEarl (talk) 15:25, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive of older posts on the talk page 

message: I'm glad that the topic of so-called "sexual frustration" comes up about Daredevil. It would seem absurd, given that comic book heroes (and heroines) are all virtually troubled sexually. It's actually a religous staple in comicdom. Lets's start with classic Superman and go straight to the dynsfunctional families in Marlve's roster: The Sue and Ben Richards clan, the Pyms; Thor's rage at Big Daddy Odin refusal to let him sow his godly "wild oats" with any comely mortal woman. (Or was the All-Father really afraid of his son engaging in office sexual harrassment, for which all of Asgaard could be sued?)Then there are my favorites: Luke Cage pining for the ghost of his dead girl-friend, and that "Benighted Fool" Prince Namor, and his self-continuous riunation every time he gets obsessed with a blond (which gets us back to Sue and Reed Richards). Steve Rogers, for example, should really calm down and simply assume a bullet-proof secret identity, get married and spit-out a couple of little American super-soldier aryans! On Matt Murdock more narrowly, I take umbridge at at the "unsigned"'s thinly-veiled suggestion that DD is a closet fag. The Carnaughvan formulic reaction has no place here. A more rational explaination of why Murdock is attracted to femme fatals is-obviously-they are mostly sent by his enemies to kill him until he able to assuage the lies told to them. Then the womwn get all hot and sweaty with him after all that intense battling. But more telling is that the personage of Matthew Murdock, molded by the twin tragedies of his mysteriously disappeared mother and murdered father could be suffering from a form of-for lack of a better term-"BATTERED WOMAN'S SYNDROME"!!! That's right; you heard me. Y'all are familiar with this. Traumatized woman (and yes, sometimes males) are attracted to, or fall into impulsive, and-to-themselves-inexplicable laisons with people they can't stand and\or they know to be dangerous (like Tony Soprano's "cummahs". Except, in his case, he drives the troubled women he meets to farther extremes). So, this is not unusual at all. It's not that Matt can't respond amorously to "nice" girls and get to "third-base, home and a cigarette" with them; he has all these interferrances in his life (women with knives and guns, and other exotic super-weaponry coming after him, who are not wound too tight in the first place, that is if they believe lies coming from freaks like The Kingpin). And, of course the old mantra of putting a love interst in harm's way. It should be explored further that this is, in fact DD's real problem, the "battered" syndrome, I mean. It would be novel if Matt and Tony Stark clandestinely shared the same psychologist, analyzing and trying to remedy their emotional problems. In fact, their should be a group therapy session with Namor included, cautiously chained to a chair, of couse, could possibly though reluctantly participate in. Hey, wouldn't such a plot be reason enough to revive Marvels' lampoon comic. which for the moment I forget the title? 75.193.126.41 (talk) 05:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk of Daredevil's Flaws 

message: There is another aspect of Daredevil's powers that the writers incredulously missed. And that is his other tacitile sense of HEAT registration!!! We all can sense slight and subtle fluctuations in heat and temperatures in different environments (in-doors or out); and commensurate with subtle airflow and pressure (same thing). With our hero here, it's obvious that he can map an entire environment with receptors of his skin (face and fingertips, entire epidermus, even his tongue, like a snake). Also, perspiration and odor from people, and heat-generated objects, and revealatively 'cooled' objects as well. So it is that instead of a "radar sense" (which, when I first read the premiere issues of DD way back in the Kennedy\MLK era, I was fascinated that Matt Murdock had these rather bat-like attributes,) our hero actually has a more elegant I-N-F-R-A-R-E-D senses, never used and I bet never even mentioned! I got the idea from a suggestion from that bomb of a Ben Affleck movie (actually, it should be called a Jenny Garner flick, since she is fast becoming the new girl-in-the-refigerator of failed movies). Matt uses a bathtube full of water to mute all the instrusive sensory onslaught in his down-time when he needs to sleep, otherwise he would go insane. Very novel, although I assume that like most blind ppl. who learn to block out extraneuous noises even while they sleep, we also can be lulled to sleep with noisey crickets, rainfall, some low-frequency, monotonous droning, or our favorite soft music (Mine are Mozart's serenades, Roberta Flack, Dionne Warwick, and Karen Carpenter!) This is not just simple cult speculation. More and more scientist are developing exploratory instruments using higher bands of EM, or electro-magnetic field (ultraviolet, gamma,etc.) using infrared as a visual 'canvas'in astronomy, medicine, and increasingly in terrestrial meteorology and surveying. Like the more serious DC writers and artist(like Gardner Fox in the Silver age of comics,) writers then used to cut their teeth studying the latest popular scientific break-throughs and incorporated them into their characters' abilities(The Flash, Atom, Green Latern, Adam Strange,"Strange Sports Stories") to give them more believability. This unfortunately was never developed at Marvel as they never sweated over the usage of a semblance of science rationality (with the exception of Jack Kirby while he tenured there). I suppose that's it's too late at this stage for a "reboot" of Daredevil's abilities. There could have been a way to use DD's powers to have him traispe into the Supernatural, like the 70s Batman. Matt Murdock would then be a more natural ally to Doc Strange than Spiderman, whom the latter is Marvel's true "Angel of Death" Oh yes, I almost forgot: Since DD has these tactile senses, he probably could 'read' electro-musclular spasms, so he can anticipate and dodge the fast movements of any bruiser, just like Spiderman oughta. Come to think of it, if Murdock wanted a second career and identity, he would be great as a forensic medic as a day job. A better crime-fighting investigative capability, for sure 75.193.126.41 (talk) 04:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daredevil's "Hidden" Powers 

message: (This is a repost, and a response from an earlier entry about the naure of "superheroes" seccret identies).
What's so funny about the name M-U-R-D-O-C-K? After all, many english surnames have ominus origins to their dark, barbaric past. For instance, names such as TODD (I suppose from the original German toth, or tot(death); or, Mortimer (more civilly) stylized from M-O-R-T (obviously). And then there are the myriad of Scandavian surnames (Bjorke e.g. "berserker", or Scarvid, Hacker, Shriver, etc.) Just as those two clever, runny-nosed kids 'christised' their mild-mannered reporter with a prosaic name of "Clark" (Clerk in German) K-E-N-T (humble-to-nobel implication. Or Bruce Wayne; not only invoking old, inherited blood, but the name B-R-U-C-E (black,or "dark one" I think in Gaelic). So, as the prosodic monickers for superheroes such as the character Mr. Murdock is not only in keeping with comic book tradtion, but consider what the creators were thinking: That the civilian "secret identity"'s moniker could be just as compelling and r-e-v-e-a-l-i-n-g as their alternate, "action" tags. And lest some smart-ass gets a dim-bulb of an idea: Yes, Doc Savage, The second "Superman" of the pulps's name was borrowed by Shuster and Seigel for their titular four-eyed protagonist, as the former revealved in a mid-90slive forum! 75.193.126.41 (talk) 03:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's "Murder" to be a "Daredevil" 

message: A redlink editor has been adding extensive overdetail to the live-action TV section that has a main-article link. He's also violating WP:TONE, WP:NPOV, WP:DATED and citation MOS. I've asked him in the edit-summary to please stop edit-warring and discuss his issues here. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Today's edits

message: Hi Tenebrae, having come across the above article at NPP, which was a split from this article with the addition of more material. I considered it was valid and well written. The article on the 1930s-1940s Daredevil says that he is unrelated and seperate from the Marvel version.My opinion is the article should  be restored but perhaps the creator could be asked to go through the proper procedure for splitting first. Perhaps you could advise the IP as you are more knowledgeable than me on correct procedure. Thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 20:19, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be happy to. The issue for me is that even with italics, " Daredevil (comic book) " can refer to two completely different publications, and so is technically invalid as an article name. This was an issue back in 2005 or so when Daredevil (Marvel Comics) was given that name. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:30, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps a different title such as Daredevil (Marvel comic history), or something better. Have restored the split material to this article for now, hope ok, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for doing that; I'd lost track with all the back-and-forth. We honestly don't have too many, if any, WikiProject Comics articles that split "Publication history" and "Fictional character biography", though, since FCB articles are in-universe fictographies, which Wikipedia generally does not consider encyclopedic without the larger context. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:42, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

text: Hi Tenebrae and Atlantic306, thank you for bringing this to discussion. If the issue is the article title, we could move it to Daredevil (Marvel Comics series) or something else more appropriate?  I did consider the 1940s character, but when I initially looked at his article I did not really see much about where he had his own solo title (as "Daredevil", as opposed to "Daredevil Comics"), but looking again at Daredevil (Lev Gleason Publications) I do see one mention as "Daredevil #13 (Oct. 1942)" - kind of easy to miss, sorry. Regardless, obviously, that article doesn't focus very much at all on his solo title, where as the Daredevil (Marvel Comics) article focuses quite a lot on his title. I think that the Daredevil comic title has some legs to stand on its own separate from the titular character, much like The Amazing Spider-Man or The Incredible Hulk (comic book) and other such long-running titles. The sources are there for both. My feeling is that the article on the character should focus on development of the character and story details (using as much out-of-universe description as possible) and the article on the comic title should focus on the creators and publication details. My thinking was that the comic book title article has the potential to look something like The Amazing Spider-Man while the character article has the potential to look something like Spider-Man. Just some thoughts! 73.168.15.161 (talk) 02:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The article Spider-Man is pretty good in that it's very much out-of-universe and non-"fictopgraphic", with loads of citations from books and articles. Given how lengthy Daredevil (Marvel Comics) is, it's not unreasonable to split it. Indeed, my only concern was the article title, which from my perspective had the potential to create confusion. What do we think of "Daredevil (Marvel Comics character)" and "Daredevil (Marvel Comics series)"? --Tenebrae (talk) 16:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, If we go that way, I'd suggest that Daredevil (Marvel Comics) should then redirect to Daredevil (Marvel Comics series)" since most of the mentions I found are referring to the comic book rather than to the character, though a couple refer to the character. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:37, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me! Go ahead and restore the comic book series page and move it to the link as suggested above, and I will do some cleanup on it. For the character article, I would suggest a requested move discussion; some people might want it to point to Daredevil (Matthew Murdock) or something instead. 73.168.15.161 (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

text: Sounds reasonable, Tenebrae? 73.168.15.161 (talk) 01:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think most non-comics people would more likely search under "Daredevil (Marvel Comics character)" since they wouldn't know who Matthew or Matt Murdock is. But the other one sounds good to me. I'd like to hear 's thoughts. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

text: Agree with Tenebrae about the naming- seems a good option.Hopefully no information from this article or the new one will be lost overall. Atlantic306 (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

text:  Probably best if Tenebrae does it, being more experienced.Thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 22:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be happy to restore the Daredevil (comic book) article, and will leave it to Tenebrae to move them. :) 73.168.15.161 (talk) 00:49, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, along with accompanying redirects. I would ask other editors to please note this talk-page consensus. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:17, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

text: Daredevil (Marvel Comics)  appears to be locked, so an admin has to be requested to move it. I'll post a notice for one. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:20, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split of [[ Daredevil (comic book)]]