Talk:Trouble (comics)

message: This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject.  If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class.  The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject.  Comics-awb (talk) 17:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

message: As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T  14:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: C-Class rated for Comics Project

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Trouble (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050308165335/http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/breakdowns/52.html to http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/breakdowns/52.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050901081015/http://thexaxis.com/misc/trouble1.htm to http://www.thexaxis.com/misc/trouble1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141111222113/http://www.spiderfan.org/fans/topten/00404.html to http://www.spiderfan.org/fans/topten/00404.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:04, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Reception section seems to be clunky.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.91.13.115 (talk) 14:27, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception 

message: Right now the article claims twice that the series was meant to be the Ultimate Spider-man and once that readers who believed it to be in non-Ultimates continuity were mistaken. No sources are provided to back up this assertion.
The closest it gets to citing sources for it is this part from the Reception section:
Of the references provided: [2] goes to a piece about it getting a trade paperback release & mentions it as being intended as the primary continuity origin. Useful as showing that people interpreted it as being in the primary continuity, but not for proving it wasn't intended as such. [3] is a 1965 Spider-man issue. [4] is a 1997 issue. These last two are completely irrelevant here & I am assuming are left over from a previous version of this section where they made sense as references.
In the external links, there's an archived article from the press conference launching it. It makes only one reference to Ultimate Spider-man, which is concerned with orders for the first issue, not continuity. Comments about whether or not the story is intended to be Peter Parker's origin are met with equivocating from Millar & Jemas. No comments are made about it involving the Ultimate universe, and at least one statement of Millar's suggests (though does not state) that he viewed it as the primary continuity:
TL;DR: the article needs sources if it's going to assert that it Marvel editorial intended for Ultimate Spider-man continuity; none of the links currently present even so much as imply that. (Suggesting that it was primary continuity also isn't well supported, but with what's currently there it's better than Ultimates continuity.)
--g026r (talk) 21:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources re: Ultimate Spider-man