Talk:Punisher/Archive 2

message: Well, here's an odd question, and I'm sure I'll get flamed for it - has anyone thought of adding the weird storyline where Frank Castle kills himself and is turned into an agent of God to the Wikipedia entry? He gets imbued with mystical powers and his origin is tied to that of a demon, or somesuch. It's definitely not a very good story... and obviously not canon, but was likely planned as a revamp of the character (which was pretty much unacceptable). If not, I can dig up some of the issues I got which mention that, and add an entry. Kitsune Sniper / David Silva 06:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless of whether it's canon, it is part of the character's history and should be detailed, partially since it is so absurd. --Chris Griswold 00:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Angelic Punisher 

message: Does anyone else think this article could use a re-write? It doesn't mention much before Ennis took over. It doesn't even mention Microchip or any big Punisher stories (Suicide Run, The Final Days, etc.). It seems as if someone just read the Marvel Knights/MAX and decided to write it. It needs to be more in-depth. Brunbb 20:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Much of it does need rewriting to bring up to encyclopedic standards. I've made a pass at it, but it still needs work to excise POV speculations and conclusions, redundancy, and level of minutiae. -- Tenebrae 21:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite?

message: Please don't remove this from SHB. Not sure why someone did. --Chris Griswold 09:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secret Defenders 

message: "Frank is well-versed in the arts of warfare and hand-to-hand combat, his styles of choice being MCMAP (Marine Corps Martial Arts Program) or the Marine Corps LINE combat system as well as unarmed combat training received in the military."
Where does this come from? Frank would have not learnt either MCMAP or LINE as the first was not introduced until 1980 and the second around 2001!
Do we have a source?
--Charlesknight 13:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hand to hand combat methods? 

message: Punisher is an article about character and Punisher: MAX is just a description of one of series. Why does anyone want to merge this specific series into this article? Makes no sense for me, on wiki all series have their own articles and it makes sense. Why do You want to remove this one and leave the others?
I think You should remove this whole merging concept
Jakilcz 20:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: there is a difference, the MAX in the bibliography article basically lists all the issue titles (for encylopedic reference) while the punisher article is the complete description of the character  †Bloodpack†   argh!  16:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging punisher with punisher Max makes no sens 

message: i think there's no reason to place them here since we already got the whole list under the bibliography article, what do you guys think?  Bloodpack   argh! 12:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  moving the regular series, one-shots, limited series to the bibliography 

message: its starting to get annoying, off and on i see the punisher archive site added and yet deleted in the references, why is it always being removed? and who keeping it added? *sigh*  †Bloodpack†   argh!  15:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  the punisher archive 

message: Whoa... I seen other comic book psychopaths, but strange, the article didnt mention he is a psychopath.
Triple-Quadruple 03:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: no, he isnt a pychopath, there's more to his personality than being crazy, everything is detailed in his bio   †Bloodpack†   argh!  04:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you could find a good few reputable sources that call him a psychopath.  He's more a sociopath than a psychopath.  Yes, that's a POV.  Anyway, my understanding is, nothing can be added to this article that does not come from a primary or secondary source. --Newt ΨΦ 04:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psychopath 

message: should that also be in his weapons/armory? like a merge?  †Bloodpack†   argh!  22:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  battle van section? 

message: It seems to me that this section could use a considerable rewrite.  It's not that the information isn't pertinant; it's just that it reads more like a "character traits" section than a true summary of the Punishers history.  There is no mention of the Tyger one shot, no mention of his Nam' activities.  These are all formative experiences for the character and it seems curious that they would be ommitted in a character history section. Is anyone else in agreement on  this? Alsosprachmiyamoto 03:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character History Rewrite? 

message: Ok Fellas - what seems to be the problem? And how can we move forward?
--Charlesknight 21:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks =] actually, its about the trivia section of the article. I have a copy of the Punisher 1987 series #98. At the back of the issue is the fanmail section wherein a fan can write to the editor/writer about the book. A fan asked Don Daley 3 questions: 1) Who created the punisher. 2) About his costume. 3) Whats the punisher definition of justice. Since questions 1 & 2 are well known to every punisher fan, i added Don's answer to question #3. I added it in the trivia section and wrote it as exactly as whats printed in the comicbook and that is The Punisher's version of justice is clasically based as an eye for an eye. Now what tenebrae did is he added additional infos which are not written or found in the source (The Punisher #98) like the code of hamurrabi, etc. etc. So my question is, is it right to add ideas to original statements?  †Bloodpack†   argh!  21:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok as a first remark - I have that issue in a longbox and should be able to dig it out tomorrow to confirm what you are saying (please don't take that to mean that I think you are making it up, it's just that two editors who have read the same thing make a better case for inclusion!)
Tenebrae - could I ask you just to explain why you think that the code of Hamurrabi should be included and if there are any sources that mention this code in regards to the punisher?
--Charlesknight 22:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If Don Daley had said, "The Punisher's take on things is the classically based 'a rose by any other name would smell as sweet'," wouldn't you agree that "classically based" sounds ignorant? It's Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, and to not state it sounds like a negligent omission. I was perefectly happy to compromise and use both "classically based" and the actual source of "an eye for an eye," but if compromise isn't acceptable to another party, I can't force it. I can only mount a case that this isn't trivia in the first place, but something that belongs in another section, "Views on the criminal justice system". --Tenebrae 01:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: wow, its not for us to determine whats going on inside the mind of don when he answered that letter. Its like saying, we have to know why david mustaine said his music has been commercialized Point is, we have a source of an item here, we add it exactly and precisely, no more no less. Putting that hamurabi thing is your own opinion. You believe don made a stupid reply to that fan thats why you beautified his sentence and decorated it with other infos such as hamurabi. My concern is the readers. Have you considered that there are people who use wikipedia as their source of reference? the next time a punisher fan read that portion, hell believe don was referring to hamurabi when he made that reply when in fact were not even sure if he (Don) even knows the code of hamurabi. this most probably would lead the readers astray. Regardless if don made a stupid comment, its up to the readers to judge that, not us. we only lay down the facts. you dont quote a person and then add wordings of your own. its dangerous. THIS ISNT ABOUT COMPROMISING, YOU SABOTAGED A TRIVIA SECTION, YET YOU WANT ME TO ACCEPT IT AS A COMPROMISE? YOU CANT AND SO YOU DELETED IT. I TRIED TO BE REASONABLE AND POLITE BUT IF DELETION IS YOUR SOLUTION THEN SO BE IT  †Bloodpack†   argh!  12:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to the trivia section 

message: since we already have a seperate article for the Punisher (game), do you think we need to trim this section a little bit (seems too broad to me especially with the character list appearing in playstation/xbox). if not, should we merge the punisher video game to this article? Bloodpack 03:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  video game section 

message: I've a ref for the DVD sales, but is a brazilian website. The content is in portuguese, obviously, but confirms that it sold about 2 million copies soon after it was released. 
In the lusophon wikipedia, we can use references in other languages, since most times they are in english, but i'm not so sure if this is possible here, since i've already seen non-english websites be removed from articles.
Any comments about if I should add it or not?
FlavioTerceiro 03:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source of DVD sales 

message: Proposed merge - History of the Punisher into Punisher. I know this has been briefly mentioned before, when discussing other merges, butWikiProject Comics editorial guidelines state that plot summaries "should not become so enlarged as to become separate articles" (as per WP:NOT) & "articles focused on describing storylines should be avoided unless significance is established through real world sources". I'm not convinced that this qualifies. --Mrph 00:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal - History of the Punisher

message: *Merge and trim --Mrph 00:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: * Most of the History article concentrates on Vietnam, and it's in more detail that the Wikipedia guidelines would suggest. Better to edit it down and add it here? --Mrph 00:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: This sentence:
:In his current incarnation, he does not drink or consume any type of drugs, but he has been portrayed drinking in comics past ("Holiday Special #1", etc.).
could be said of virtually every single heroic character in the Marvel universe, few of whom outside Tony Stark and Wolverine have ever been seen with so much as a beer. Unless we're going to include this line in virtually every single character bio, it doesn't seem to make sense to include it here. -- Tenebrae 00:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from that it breaks the perpetual present of fictional characters, and mistakes the Punisher for a real person with a continuous history. --PsyphicsΨΦ 17:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reason for "does not drink" etc. deletion

message: could someone cite the quote in the trivia section from mustaine, i've already got the website http://megadeth.rockmetal.art.pl/interviews_guitarschool1993.html thanks, i just dont know how to do it properly
:no prob buddy, btw, pls sign your post with 4 tildes †Bloodpack† 21:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cite a reference for me

message: im just wondering with regard to the Ultimate Punisher under the "Other version" section of this article. Do we really need to place it here? i mean, its not only the "ultimate" version of the punisher we have, he also had other versions under his bibliography. Can we just redirect the section? or if not, can we also create a separate article for other punisher versions then place it here? (i.e A Man named Frank where the era is set in a western world), or should we also need to include the 2099 version of frank in this article?  †Bloodpack† 03:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other version section