Talk:Punisher/Archive 1

message: Note: Some of the material in this article has been copied from The Punisher. See the edit history of that article for attributions.
—Paul A 01:53, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Changing my vote to Merge, since most other comics-character articles include alternate versions such as Marvel's "Ultimate" universe. (Note that while some MAX comics are in mainstream continuity, others, such as the Nick Fury miniseries, reportedly aren't. Don't know where Punisher MAX falls.) This would also address the lengthiness and over-detail here, by condensing the material to fit within a section. -- Tenebrae 18:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: I removed the following from the article because I really 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 issue in general. Bryan 08:00, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: RPG stats

message: "The Punisher was a novel character in mainstream superhero comics when he debuted in 1974 in that he was willing to use lethal force to accomplish his aims, without actually being a supervillain."
Wasn't he per se a "supervillain", since he was an antagonist to Spider-Man?
:Not all superhero antagonists are necessarily villains - there is, for instance, a long and noble tradition of two superheroes meeting for the first time and spending most of the issue beating each other up before realising/deciding that they're actually on the same side. The Punisher's first appearance belongs to this tradition: he goes after Spider-Man because he's been tricked by the issue's real villain into thinking that Spidey is one of the bad guys. --Paul A 06:51, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Supervillain?

message: Should the bibliography mention stuff like his appearances in Damage Control, Captain Marvel, or the Earth X sequels? DS 12:36, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Other notable appearances?

message: "he not only takes his vengence on the criminals who slew his family and those who ordered the hit but all criminals full stop."
I'm not sure about this. Castle repeatedly states that he's not doing this for revenge, that it's for punishment.
I think this paragraph should be amended stating that while the basic theme/premise behind the Punisher is one of vengeance, the Punisher himself does not feel that his actions are out of vengeance, but out of a desire to punish those criminals who might otherwise get away with their crimes.  Something like:
"The Punisher can be seen as the revenge genre taken to an extreme as he not only takes his vengeance on the criminals who killed his family but all criminals full stop. There is no final villain as is the case with many revenge sagas, the Punisher's war with crime continues without end.  The Punisher himself does not acknowledge that he engages in his war against the criminal underworld as vengeance for his deceased family.  Instead, the Punisher decrees to himself that he chooses to continue the War in an effort to punish the criminal elements that might otherwise never be brought to justice."
--Thenedain 05:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revenge / Punishment 

message: 72.245.34.187, this is the second or third time you've undone many of my changes. If you have a problem with them, discuss them here before undoing them again. Let me explain why I reverted them back.
1) No offense, but your english and prose leave a little to be desired. I made many changes to improve the readability and flow of the article. Pasting your text back in right afterwards without editting them in smoothly makes the overall article disorganized and occasionally repetitive.
2) Much of the content is unchanged. I don't know if you even read my changes, but if you had, you would notice that much of the information you provided is still intact. Thus, when you put back your text, the same information is often presented twice (e.g. his not-quite relationship with the assassin).
3) Some of your text reflects a somewhat biased perspective. Remember, this is an encyclopedia. While a lot of your comments are interesting (your comparisons to the Fantastic Four and Flash in particular), they're often provided in a sensationalistic, if not pro-Punisher way. While such writing may be at home in a marketing campaign, I don't think the prose fits well with the format of an encyclopedia. Regarding those examples in particular, I don't even know if that's entirely true. Yes, the Punisher is an anti-hero who is different from many altruistic superheroes, but the concept of anti-heroes is not a new one (hence why there's a name for it). So saying that he's entirely unique is a bit of a stretch.
Another section that's particularly biased is that on the Vietnam War. Saying that a generation was "lied" to is a POV. We have to preserve NPOV.
4) You removed the template regarding the merge. As far as I know, that issue hasn't even been addressed here yet. I think the suggestion is worthy of being discussed first, before removing the template entirely.
Again, please discuss the changes here before putting them back.
-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 14:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: My revert 

message: That's starting to sound like fucking ass bullshit. So nobody at all can add anything else anymore??????? Your right and everybody else is wrong???? Is that how it is now?????
:Hi. Thanks for the friendly introduction. Did you even read my comments above? One of the major issues is that the information is already IN there. If you have a problem with something in particular, talk about it instead of wildly making accusations. For the record, MORE THAN ONE PERSON has reverted your changes. In other words, most of the people here, as far as I know, appear to prefer the version I've editted. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm saying you should provide a defense for your changes before literally undoing the work I did. I kept your information and streamlined the article to the best of my ability; it has nothing to do with "me vs you."
:-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 15:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. 

message: That's starting to sound like fucking ass bullshit. So nobody at all can add anything else anymore??????? Your right and everybody else is wrong???? Is that how it is now?????
Indeed. That is fucking bullshit.
:I hope you're aware that your ip and time of post is logged each time, so everyone knows that you and only you made all of the last 4 edits on this talk page. Unless of course, you're talking to the voices in your own head, in which case I suggest registering an account for each of them. Cheers.
: -- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 17:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indeed 

message: You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. This false information. Anything that you would to put or say in will be taken out due to the fact that people hear will not agree with you.
:So I can go to any article I want and insert giant ascii penises if I feel like it because I'm "expanding" the article? No. Anyone is allowed to make edits to Wikipedia but for the good of the encyclopedia as a whole, not to further a personal agenda. That means that you have to discuss disagreements with other people, not ramrod your changes in because you think your edits are better than anyone else's. Consensus is a goal here at Wikipedia (the link is to guideline; please read it). On a sidenote, so is civility (this is a policy), something which your rants here clearly lack. Please READ the guidelines and understand them before making ridiculous claims like the above. -- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 15:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning!!! Warning!!! Warning!!! 

message: They think it's the same person...hehehe!
:Frankly, I couldn't care less if it's the same person or not. It's pretty amusing that you first said, "I agree with him or her," and now it's "We" and "he and she." What happened? Did you suddenly remember what gender you were? Let's cut the crap and get to the real issue ok? If you (or your imaginary friends) disagree with something in the article, you can refer to the topic above and discuss them like an adult. Or you can continue to play charades like a child and probably get blocked from editting Wikipedia ever again. Your call. -- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 17:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hahahah!