Talk:Hyperion (comics)

message: *One word "NO", The Hyperion article be to big and Mini-series should have they only article !--Brown Shoes22 16:35, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *I would suggest the same thing here as I suggested in the discussion to merge the Nighthawk miniseries.  The main Hyperion page is huge already, especially the section for Hyperion III. Also, the profiles for the other Hyperions have some plot summaries, but they seem to be crucial moments in their histories, which the Supreme Power miniseries isn't really. If anything, I think that maybe Hyperion III should be given his own page, and the miniseries page can be merged into that. I've seen it on other wikis for superheroes with many incarnations, like the Flash or Green Lantern. Pitr 12:57, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Seems like a good idea. The Blur already has his own page, so new pages for Hyperion (Supreme Power) and Nighthawk (Supreme Power) would be the proper place to talk about the minis. --Pc13 12:39, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article to be merged into Hyperion (comics)

message: Two things we might need to look at here...
*Firstly, the "Squadron Supreme" vs. "Supreme Power" definition is going to get increasingly murky as time goes on, now that "Supreme Power" is now retitled - and as Supreme Power is now also an Earth-616 supervillain team with its own Hyperion...
*Secondly, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics) is very clear about avoiding roman numerals when identifying different versions of a character. Which leaves us with even more problems when describing which is which. --Mrph 22:17, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm on this one. But, untangling this takes time. Dr. Spectrum has been fixed, I've created the Squadron Sinister and touched up both Hyperion pages. I think with the change back to Squadron Supreme as a  title it really has to be one page. With just one appropriate image and the right information - not blow by blow accounts - it can be accommodated. Heck, many of the other articles for teams are longer.The overall goal is to make things less confusing for new readers, not more so.
Asgardian 09:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untangling things...

message: First, read the Hyperion page carefully. Hyperion is an Eternal, so he powers are from his heritage. This is actually a mistake on the Hyperion Page. I will change this on the page. As for Superman's healing factor, I will update it as well, since we have a verifable source. T-1000 21:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Abilties

message: Could some one tell me why the hades we've got an edit war forming up on this?
*The war between the edit boxes seems to be a fundamental coding problem within Wiki.  Tiredgamer 02:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image 

message: :Image:Defender-13.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 14:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Defender-13.jpg

message: About four years ago I read a four, maybe six comic mini-series that contained both Hyperion and Nighthawk. The series dealt with the genocide in Darfur. Hyperion was a puppet of the US Gov't and Nighthawk was a wealthy African-American who doubled as a Batman-like superhero who tried to solve the Darfur mess with both his money and alter-ego. The two would fight each other and also struggle with the best way to solve the genocide. Excellent series. Maybe this isn't enough to merit mention, Nighthawk was the bigger star, but thought I'd bring it up.
Anybody know what I'm talking about? I guess I could edit it, but I don't remember too much about it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.95.171.19 (talk) 01:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unmentioned mini-series 

message: Substituted at 21:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: removed specific bios from lead for each character. that belongs in the main article DoubleChine (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: - great, you finally started a talk page discussion. But you still need to self-revert your last (and 3rd consecutive) revert and leave the page the way it was, prior to your edit-warring. Allow others from the community time to discuss your edit and perhaps come to a consensus in regards to it. I realize you're new here, but you cant just keep repeatedly cramming your edit in, just because you think you are right. We have these guidelines for those who also think they are right, but it turns out they are wrong. Thank you - theWOLFchild 18:28, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: bios of the character are already mentioned in the lead. the lead is not the place for extensive bios DoubleChine (talk) 18:30, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Right now that entirely besides the point. You need to self-revert to WP:QUO and stop edit-warring. Then discuss your edit. - theWOLFchild 20:12, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm removing from the lead what's essentially a duplicate post. the lead is not for bios. DoubleChine (talk) 13:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, well... you need to achieve a consensus for that first, and only if you get that, then make your changes. Otherwise, leave it be. - theWOLFchild 14:35, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  leed doesnt need extensive bio 

message: Recently, an editor () that just joined WP, went on to remove mass amounts of content from this article. He was reverted, then edit warred, was warned, continued edit warring and was blocked. The article was restored. 
A short time later, another editor that had never edited this page, placed multiple tags on it. They were reverted (per wp:drivebytagging) and requested to engage on the talk page. They instead went on to remove mass amounts of content, similar to the previous editor. These edits were reverted and the editor notified of the discussion on the talk page. They still have yet to post here, but have resumed editing to remove mass amounts of content, only now spreading the removals over more edits, removing more smaller amounts, that still add up to the previous amounts removed. 
Could this editor, with the unusual username of  (ping), please stop what they are doing and start engaging on the talk page? Thank you - theWOLFchild 06:05, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Specifically, what you said was to either give reasons for my tags on the talk page or to fix it myself. I did the latter, and you reverted the edits. I then made some of the edits again, explaining my reasons in more detail, and avoiding the header, which is what you seemed to specifically objecting to in the conversation with DoubleChine. I feel that the edits I have made have been constructive and improved the quality of the article. Namenamenamenamename (talk) 06:38, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. There is quite a bit content removed, which was an issue here just days ago. As such, I had thought that perhaps you'd opt to discuss what should be changed and/or removed and why, giving others a chance to weigh-in. But if you feel you have improved the article, I'll take your word on that and leave you to your editing. Hopefully it doesn't become an issue again. Thank you for the reply. - theWOLFchild 07:07, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass removals of content