Talk:Spider-Man/Archive 2

message: I am not familiar with the character Tarantula.  In what DC comic did this character appear?
Rick Norwood 01:36, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tarantula 

message: *Spider-Man: Mini-series
*Spider-Man: Crossover events
*Spider-Man: List of significant stories (preceding unsigned comment by Brown Shoes22 (talk • contribs) )
:In words of one syllable: No. - SoM 18:10, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What about Spider-Man: List of insignificant minutae and detail? Dyslexic agnostic 00:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Some one made the article "Bibliography of Spider-Man titles" and it good !--Brown Shoes22 01:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Make new Articles of.. 

message: There seems to be a lot of back-and-forth editing taking place with respect to who gets mentioned on the short-list of "most famous" villains since the Spider-Man Enemies list was shortened to a "see also" link.
Obviously Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus and Venom (despite the nearly equal love/hate ratio for that last character) deserve this mention, but is that all?   I've seen various names such as Carnage (unlikely), Mysterio (maybe), and the Lizard (guilty, I'm afraid) added to that entry, but it's always a temporary change.  Doc Ock first appeared in 1963, Green Goblin in 1964, and Venom in 1988.  Are there no other Spidey villains from all those intervening years that deserve to be added to the elite "most famous" list?
The Lizard 15 November 2005
:Hmm. The problem is that there are three very clearly well known villains who have a visibility beyond all others - look at the films and cartoons (especially the UK DVD releases) to see their selling power outside of comicdom. I don't think any of the other villains have anything like as much public recognition, though perhaps this may change in another film.
:For a "five/seven best known villains" it gets a lot messier. The Hobgoblin, Vulture, Scorpion, Mysterio, Electro, Lizard - who's to say? The Kingpin would have a very strong claim for a top five, but is probably now thought of more as a Daredevil villain. And let's not even get started on Dr Doom. Timrollpickering 22:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spidey's "most famous villains" are.......? 

message: List of significant stories as a new Article, with more detell info.
Brown Shoes22 06:03, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Article 

message: I actually totally lost what was going on here when they decidd that every bloody story would involve a cross-over!. I stopped buying them at about that time, which is a pity because they are fantastic comics. I recently purchased them all on CD (well, up till about2004, anyway) and was so frustrated by this again that I missed the entire clone wars. Is it possible to buy the Spectacular Spiderman, etc. on CD? - Ta bu shi da yu 13:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Apart from putting the new comment section at the top instead of bottom of the talk page, you did right, ta :) - SoM 19:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Its easier to just go to the last unvandalized version and click "save page". :)--Kross | Talk 19:06, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spider-Man 

message: Im new to wiki and while i was roaming discovered that some moron had deleted the whole Spider-man article. I went into the page history and copyed the pervious unvandalized code and pasted it to make the aricle work again. Hope i did it correctly thanks, Toxin 11:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Apart from putting the new comment section at the top instead of bottom of the talk page, you did right, ta :) - SoM 19:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Its easier to just go to the last unvandalized version and click "save page". :)--Kross | Talk 19:06, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wipeouts

message: If Spidey's new costume affects all the canonical titles, should it replace the main shb image until the original one is restored? --DrBat 22:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not. The costume is temporary, and people identify the classic blue and red with Spidey.--Toffile 22:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that red-blue Spider-Man should be the main image, but still, I feel like there should definitely be an Iron Spidey pic in the article, and there currently is not. --Rocketgoat 20:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be so for sure. Lajbi 21:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iron Spidey 

message: Someone added the category Fictional Protestants. Since when has any religious affiliation for Peter Parker ever been established? On the assumption that someone got carried away, I'm removing it. If I'm wrong, please correct me and tell me when that was established because I'd like to know. I read the article about his probable religion. It did not rule out Catholicism. It did not establish that he's Christian. Wryspy 00:04, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional Protestants??? 

message: I just skimmed through " A detailed analysis of why J. Michael Straczynski's 'Sins Past' storyline does not fit into the established Spider-Man mythos"
Erm, is this really an important enough opinionated, self indulgent rant to warrent a link? i mean, blimey.Mister cope 05:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links? 

message: Why is Spider-Man in the anti-hero category? Granted, he acts without police approval and has been known to let anger/obsession get in the way of what he does, but when I think "anti-hero", I think of Punisher or Wolverine.
Did the poster that put him in this category confuse Peter with the Ben Reilly version (which I am not familiar with) or are they basing his judgment from the Alien Costume saga or one of the "revenge" arcs?
:He falls into the "flawed hero" category, see Anti-hero page. T-1000 05:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-hero? 

message: Does anyone else think the Spider-Man#People_who_know_Peter_Parker_is_Spider-Man section would better serve as a list?  It's getting rather long and such extensive knowledge isn't really relevent to the general page.  Really, who cares if Carrion or Scorpion know he's Peter Parker?  A sentence or two summarizing the important people who know who he is should suffice, yes?  --Rocketgoat 23:45, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  People who know identity 

message: I removed this new name from the list of people who knows Spider-Man's identity, because - as I intiated - the uploader marked the number of issue when the act of revealing happened as being the one published in Marvel Team-up vol. 14. I've just read it and it's about Narmor, the Sub-Mariner and a new villain called Fish-Man...Lajbi 23:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entry about the Invincible 

message: The article states that the little light in his belt buckle displays an image of his mask, but isn't it actually an image of the circular red spider from the back of his costume? In the animated series it was, at least.
(btw isn't it odd how he has web-shooters and a utility belt under his costume, yet being a full-body skintight suit you'd think you'd be able to see them?)
:No, it's a circle based on his mask, with the white eyes on a red with black-webbing background. - SoM 00:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spider-signal 

message: I'd like to remove the argument about whether or not Spidey will be wearing a black costume or not in the new movie. Here's what the official movie site has to say, "You may think you’re looking at a black and white photo. Look closely, Spider-Man wears a black suit in Spider-Man 3. Tobey Maguire returns as Peter Parker / Spider-Man in Spider-Man 3. In Theaters 5/4/07." Anyone object? -Digresser 05:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spider-Man 3

message: Hello,
There is a weird sentence all at the end of the wikipedia entry. I cannot delete it. What is it please?
"i am in love with spiderman he is awesome i LOVE him i KNOW HE IS REAL he loves me ok im not crazy he LOVES me ok i love him were getting married and you cant stop us ok"? Yeah. I removed that before you commented. Vandalism. I hope (s)he seeks help if they were serious. You probably tried to edit it out right after I finished. The Anti-Gnome 19:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence in the end of the Wikipedia entry 

message: It's not original research; it specifically states in Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man that they activate against magical opponents. Thanos6 08:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool.  I figured, which is why I didn't delete, it sounded like canon. Can we get an issue number? Newt 12:32, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Issue #7, I think; it's the second part of the "Mexican wrestler" story. Thanos6 19:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  IT REALLY DOESN'T SAY THAT. FIND THE EXACT QUOTE AND PUT IT ON HERE OR I'M TAKING IT DOWN. Sorry about the caps, just wanted this to stand out. The fact the stingers popped out of his wrists were to do with Spidey being told he was about to be unmasked! He clearly puts it down to panic later on. Any mentions of magic are between the villain of the piece, Spidey and Iron Man representing "for magic", "against" and "maybe" as to where spidey's powers come from. There is certainly no definitive answer and all that's sure is that the stingers DO NOT POP IN THE FACE OF MAGIC. HE SIMPLY cannot control them at the moment. ChocolateRoses 00:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: LISTEN YOU'RE IGNORING ME NOW. DO NOT CHANGE IT BACK TO BEING MAGICAL. I JUST READ THE BLOODY ISSUE. YOU'RE BEING A NUISANCE. MY CORRECTION IS MORE THAN SUITABLE. THERE IS JUST NO RELEVANCE IN THE SUPERNATURAL BEING PRESENT WHEN HE USES HIS STINGERS. IN NUMBER 7 OF "FREINDLY NEIGHBOURHOOD.." HE USED THEM AS A LAST RESORT, THATS ALL. MAGIC HAS NO PART IN THAT. JEEEEEEEEZ, SOMEONE BACK ME UP HERE. ChocolateRoses 00:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't be a dick. --Chris Griswold 05:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll definitely back Chris up.  Please don't type in all caps, it comes across as shouting.  Throwing tantrums on Wikipedia will get you nowhere.  I appreciate we have a factual dispute here, but there are constructive ways to resolve this - that is, to check references and attempt to come to a reasonable consensus.  In the meantime, please calm down and show some respect to your fellow editors.  Thanks.  — Estarriol talk 07:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Calm down, dude. You didn't have to go in caps. You chose to. You also choose to continue an aggressive method of discussing this, one that is preventing others from understanding your argument, cogent as you may believe it to be. I, for one, have little idea what your argument is, other than that you are angry. Someone said the wrist spike things only react to magical threats? Change it to say that so far they have only reacted to magical threats. There. It's done. We can all drink punch and eat hot dogs and potato salad. On flimsy paper plates poised in our laps. On the steps. Alright? --Chris Griswold 16:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I think you are getting people confused. --Chris Griswold 20:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I think ChocolateRoses is being unnecessarily hostile, and should seriously consider whether he or she is ready to be editing Wikipedia.  Please maintain a respectful attitude to your fellow editors.  Being hostile and aggressive in the way you have been regarding this issue is in no way constructive.  Wikipedia is not a schoolyard.  Please take a deep breath, calm down, and play nice.  — Estarriol talk 12:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Oh, and please don't edit a talk page to remove some of your comments, it gives a false impression of the history of the discussion.  If you wish to take back some comments, please surround them with  and  to strike through them.  I have restored your original comments for the record.  — Estarriol talk 12:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stingers