1425:
tried. You demonstrate, repeatedly, that you don't really care about civil discourse, but about using that cycle of comment, response, stubborn reply, until someone says or does something you can wedge in as incivil, thus diverting to that, then back to the beginning, lather, rinse, repeat, until others walk off. Your approach to the article has been roundly rejected. It's an inconsistent position for you, so I suggest, quite seriously, that you drop it. Either learn to get along here, or unwatch the article here, like I did long ago for you over at Thor. I see that article's still not an FA, though you seemed so sure you'd have it there. Go work on that, but you need to either change here or move on.
485:
430:
412:
289:
262:
384:
299:
231:
858:
IF you're going to go running for support, then I think I'll notify all the people who opposed the last major slash-and-burn you ran on this article. Since then, you've consistently reverted for months, preventing any adjustments to the article. Youv'e never explained why this one article is so wrathfully hawked over, but it's tiresome.
1217:
establish variations within those 'other media' sections, but having some reasonable guideline for the categories is worthwhile, and with the numerous revisions done in, for example, spiderman's multiple animated series, we could see a single character qualify for a fat stack of categories thoroughly irrelevant to the comics version.
1736:
Civility threats aren't the same as addressing the issues behind the edits. Strawmen are good in farmer's fields, so please go outside and build them there. Otherwise, the content of the edits is what should be addressed here. That you are unable to do so after two requests says to me that you can't,
1216:
I fully agree that the balance between comics and film versions articles needs to be monitored, and 'reasonable' coverage of significant AVs included. However, if that comment about 'mentality' refers to my comment regarding categories, I meant it to apply to that aspect only. We can write about, and
1075:
I think it is well worth naming the film in the lead - it is a high profile media appearance and one where quite a few readers will know him from. says it should be a summary of the article, of which this is his biggest in other media appearances and, given the length of the article, the lead should
920:
I have reverted your edit, Asgardian, because, as I said before ,the name in the lead is perfectly acceptable, as is minimal context ,which you continue to delete. It was absurd, and objected to in
January, and it is still absurd, and objected to. I note that you do this on a few articles, but not on
1912:
In addition, not sold on clumping all the media together in one paragraph as it reads like a bit of a muddle. This section is supposed to be broken into sub-sections for easy reference. The opening statement is also unnecessary as it is repetitive and overstating what the lead paragraph claims. Such
1699:
So, linking to a guy who's in the process of getting a topic ban lashing out is your way of 'proving' anything about me? Instead of dealing with your edit warring, which you've been to the admins before about? Stop edit warring. discuss. BRD. two editors support a wording that you didn't write. Live
1657:
Although two editors have worked to clean up the film section, Asgardian is reverting without any justification beyond the usual he's right, everyone else should get off his page attitude. Asgardian, bring any problems HERE, or stop edit warring, which is what you are doing. Proof of that is in the
1424:
the page, which is what you are doing. As I stated six months ago, you do not act like this on every article you work on, just a few. You do not edit in this style on every article, just a few. I don't know why you act like this, nor do I care. But it's over. Enough civil discussion on this has been
1403:
Two other questions - why mention the film in the lead when all the other examples are not? We are listing genres, not examples. That's what the sub-sections below are for. TV shows don't get a mention in the lead, so why the film? Also, why is an
Alternate version not listed in Other versions? This
1399:
In the interests of keeping the peace (such as it is), I've removed the date tags. Now, the appearances themselves can be padded out so it reads less like a list - although it is accurate - but the information added must be encyclopedia standard. I can't offer too much here as I haven't read all the
1096:
Overall the article is difficult to read and just comes across as "and then he appeared in this and then that and then this", the dates of issues in particular should be footnoted as it doesn't help with the flow. Equally dividing into decades is pretty arbitrary and the PH should be divided up into
857:
NO, I'm not writing like a fan. The lead should reflect the content. Naming the film is perfectly acceptable in the lead. You have a bad habit on this article, reflected clearly on this talk page, of going against any consensus and just persistently reverting over and over to your preferred version.
624:
The addition of a sourced real world critical assessment of the character should be kept in the intro. While not substantive enough to start a full section of the article with, it immediately highlights the real-world notability of the character, which is required for any article on
Knowledge (XXG).
1908:
OK, in the interests of peace, I've tried to separate some components for a clearer article, and hopefully clarify some points. There is now a PH - complete with a short Origin - if we can find such information, and the
Biography as I've called it cites the most significant stories with all sources
1175:
We really need, as a project, to re-think the "Comics version only" mentality. Right now it's doing a good job of removing material covering how characters are adapted in other media. The presumptions seem to be going along "minimize in the comic character article as the film article will cover it"
711:
This is about improving this piss-poor article (pardon my French). I was going to add edits to
Blonsky's 2005 video game article and Abomination in the 2008 Hulk film. That's all I wanted. Plus some jerk added --THIS IS ALL THAT IS REQUIRED IN THIS ENTRY. MUST BE ENCYCLOPEDIA STANDARD AND NOT A FAN
654:
Without such others ,it's better to leave it establishing notability in the lead. When, and if, we get more such content, then it certainly should be incorporated into the body of the article, but as it's currently the only such information, the rest having been exsanguinated months long, long ago,
2117:
I am sorry if it's not a recommended way to address this, but I've just noticed that link of some of the articles are broken. For example article 1 which tells about the IGN ranking of supervillains is gone. IGN currently have a new ranking. The second source link is broken too. I'll try to update
1231:
Also, I tried to rebuild the article with some context a while ago. I'd like to continue that earlier effort, if no one minds. I'll have some time later this week to do so, if no one minds me taking that job on. I'll wait a couple days for some replies nad consensus, but I had a good start before,
1157:
The film... again, something more than a one line after thought is proper. And no, "It should be covered elsewhere" doesn't cut it. There may be some of the information covered in the film's article, but there should also be a reasonable presentation of the information relevant to the character as
804:
Oh, knock it off, asgardian. You put up a gigantic fight here against multiple editors, who walked away from yet another page where you edit war nonstop to get your way. Your combative style is rearing it's head again here, and once again you're going to push more editors away. You do not own this
1049:
Not attacking you, "ThuranX". I'm well aware that alternate media doesn't always have automatize categories like cap., majors, or soldiers. I've been warned about this before, but I wasn't aware it applied to numerous characters other then "A-Bomb" (Abomination for short). Thank you very much for
1024:
Categories are based on the 'original media' character. In the comics, Blonsky was a spy, which doesn't automatically mean military. Please note that I have supported many of your changes, but this one isn't in line with what should be included. Attacking me now won't help you. And stop with this
1529:
I moved the sentence because it felt out of place in such a small lead. I mean, the lead basically goes like this for the reader: "The
Abomination is a fictional character in Marvel comic books... Oh! And he is ranked as one of the greatest comic book villains of all time on this website." Small
1617:
I don't know what all this talk about superheros and comics is about. This is supposed to be an encylopedia. I came here looking for information about the word "Abomination" and somehow comic book crap comes up?? And not even a link to perhaps other uses of the word? What is going on here?
1865:
Consensus, formed above, after MUCH argument, was that as it's the only external criticism currently sourced in the page, it was best in the publication history. As to the death, it's a comics death, and insignificant in that regard. It fits into the character history, and that's enough.
1916:
The same applies to the Other
Versions sentence - we already know this and it is repetitive, not to mention problematic as by that logic all the articles have to have this sentence, which the very sub-title spells out. It was a nice try, but comes across as unnecessary padding. Regards
1395:
Secondly, most of the "additions" since the lock was lifted have been very poor, and the article has degenerated as a result. Passion for a character is a fine thing, but the articles cannot be written in a fan style, and some adherence to the general standard is required.
766:. There was also some serious link overkill - the fact that the character is a Marvel Comics super villain is usually enough. I'm fact I'm going to put a case that a lot of these unnecessary links are sidelined as they are often misleading. For example, many characters are
1658:
fact that your last few reverts are so blanket in nature that you reintroduce spelling errors into the article, just to go back to your own earlier versions without examining the diffs between to find actual, completely non-objectionable, edits which should be retained.
1025:'I'm not allowed to edit here', because I've been quite clear in my support for your edits overall. A-Bomb is a different character, albeit similar, and as mentioned, Blonksy, (by which I assume you refer to the film) isn't correct because it's an alternate media.
1142:
There is very little chance that there will be an article on the
Ultimate Abomination. Taking the time and space here to fairly treat that AV would be a good idea. Full or detailed summary of the related story? No. Something more than a one line afterthought?
996:
He was mutated by gamma radiation, therefore a mutate. Soldier and Major, or
Captain applies for the film article, if someone can edit it. Whatever I do, it's conflicted with someone higher up. Superhuman speeds also applies to Blonsky/A-Bomb, as well.
761:
that creeps in, and sure enough, it did. In these articles things such as video games just warrant a mention, not a blow by blow account. The language was unfortunately very lazy and colloquial. We only go with facts, and they must be presented in a
1965:
Actually, in thinking about it, fewer sub-titles would be a good thing. So long as the information is separated when there is a large amount, fine. The 3rd party argument still needs debate, as some like myself opposed tags in the last discussion.
2035:
I suggest this because, as it stands, since Bullet point #3 comes after Bullet point #2 and Bullet point #3 doesn't clearly state what movie the reused footage came from (it just says "from the film"), it implies that the reused footage came from
1441:
Your conduct kills any credibility your message might have. Also, study the changes. "Telling the story" does nothing for the article. If you've read the issues, outline some points that can be put into sentences. This is how you can help.
921:
many, many more. I'm getting tired of your 'revert till they are cowed into leaving' style, and I'm done putting up with it. I have provided reasons for my changes, and I plan on a lot more changes, because this article needs improvement.
1419:
let me help you out here. Everyone else commenting thinks your version is a problem, not the other versions. That is no different than months ago; the only difference is that now I'm not going to back down and walk off when you
1514:
DCIncarnate moved the IGN ranking from the lead to it's own section. Because it's such a small section, positioned so low on the page, I'd like to move it back to the lead for the real-world notability which that represents.
898:
At least fix the article. Keep some of the categories and mention some storylines like him killing Betty, being matched up with Samuel Sterns/Leader, etc If you can fix the alternate universe stuff, then do the rest for the
655:
we have to use it in the best way we can. That would be establishing some aspects of real-world context and notability in the lead, so that new readers understand that he character has been noticed outside the in-universe.
1909:
relegated to footnotes. The addition of a third-party source tag is unnecessary as frankly, we all know they need such things. All comic articles. Spelling out the obvious with a tag just makes the article look unsightly.
164:
1545:
That's relatively reasonable... though... It's either something that should be on par with the IOM, not a subsection of it, or integrated into the PH. Given the size, working it into the PH would be a better option. -
1125:
There needs to be consistency when applying "Alt versions". Right now the rule of thumb for article on main-stream MU characters has been "non-616 characters are AVs, period." The AV mentions shouldn't be in the PH,
1932:
You cannot simply remove cleanup tags without addressing the issues. Also, you split the publication section in two without moving the bit about the Wizard poll ranking at the bottom of the new "biography" section.
1795:
Would anyone mind if I added a subsection, within history, for the paragraph about the death of the character? I feel it is a very important detail in the history of the character, and as such, should be separated.
736:
Well, Add the info. I see no one reverting you. Make edits, see what sticks. Don't bitch about it before you try. And erview this talk page, it's not like you're up against a huge crowd of opposition, are you?
1566:. The "by the way" style doesn't work in the lead, but it does when placed chronologically in the PH. Also, the issue of genres still needs to be addressed for the sake of consistency across the articles.
1803:
information about the fictional history of the character, and should be moved to the Media section, in an
Internet subsection. If there are no objections, I will make these changes at the end of the day.
2055:
Abomination's fictional character biography starts off after he turns into Abomination and battles Hulk, that should be edited to include his origin story and the character's early life (if revealed).--
1261:
to be able to just cat sections, but the only way I can think of doing that is to create individual redirects for the variants. Such as, and I think this is an example that was floated a while back,
1949:
Done. Again, note all the articles could use 3rd party sources. Are you going to tag them all, from A to Z? Also, note that Alternates are now sourced as footnotes, as per the rest of the article.
2025:
Bullet point #3: talks about footage being reused, of Abomination rampaging through Harlem, in the Marvel One-Shot "The Consultant". (but does not state what movie the reused footage came from)
1718:
One, you may not in fact be supporting a great version. Two, the link shows, and does this conversation, your lack of Wiki-etiquette and civility. "Live with it" is not an acceptable response.
2047:
should be "Obvious". But just remember that you, the experts, may think it's obvious, but the people that are coming to this page, to learn more about the subject, may not think it's obvious.
1133:
The PH is choppy as hell. Best case, it should be reworked to minimize the appearance list feel. If an appearance list is really wanted, do it right as a table and slot it in before the AVs.
582:
This is one of the worst comic character wiki's i have seen it need a summary of the characters history, not just issues it appeared in. much the way a novel gets a plot summary. - WiT
1339:
only needs one update and can be properly categorised (I picked the Ultimate version as there is a lot of interlinking between Ultimate characters and that could very easily fall apart).
393:
272:
2029:
I suggest that Bullet point #2 and #3 should either be swapped or Bullet point #3 should clearly state that the reused footage (of the Abomination rampaging through Harlem) came from
1301:
the film section is large enough - not 1 line and includes the reason for the cat - a "see also...for related articles" line can be added. So the "Film" section of Blob would get:
1079:
I am unsure why so many categories were removed - the powers categories in particular (if there are concerns with categorising by powers then this should be addressed elsewhere).
158:
838:
Firstly, when you write in that style it is " fan orientated", not Wiki-orientated. Secondly, your previous immature comment (yes, I saw it) and the above show you are both
2352:
2327:
1391:
First of all I'm disappointed none of the more experienced editors addressed the civility issue. A look at two editors Talk pages indicates this goes beyond this article.
446:
1836:
I see that there has been concern over the potentially low placement of the ign rating. If it is very significant, it could be placed at the top of the media section. --
2219:
2215:
2201:
1186:
sub, at the least. The television and video game cats likely also need this. And it would alleviate the quibbling point about having the parents on articles like this.
322:
55:
2288:
1119:
Notable items should be at the least mentioned in the lead. The appearance in the film and the limited series are, with in the context of the topic, are notable.
2347:
1283:
Wonder if that works. It'd be good fro those looking for category qualifiers, but it's sort of 'one-way'. And 'non-specificity' of your comment noted, thanks.
437:
417:
328:
90:
2118:
the ranking and article links later. In the meantime, can someone experienced can fix it up, I am kinda a newbie and do not want to vandalize a popular page.
640:
Actually, it should be added to a "Reception" type section with refs and some information from those source(s), which should then be summarized in the lead.
332:
1885:
on both points. Suggestions are always good, but we have to keep an out of universe perspective, and remember that these are fictional characters. Regards
970:
There's no reason at all that you can't fix it. This is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. Just do so cautiously, making sure you don't include conflicts.
2337:
374:
549:
So you went back to before the overhaul, and brought all that back, on top of the overhaul? that's worse than either version alone. I'm reverting it.
879:, not actual specifics. After all, every comic; video game; TV appearance etc is not named in the lead - there are sections in the article for this.
96:
2332:
2322:
873:
You are both being uncivil, which is a breach of Knowledge (XXG) policy. Not good. As for the lead, it has been corrected to read " a feature film
693:
I don't see in the edit history where you're having such conflicts, can you provide diffs? there may be good reasons why your edits were removed.
364:
1139:
Right now the AV and IOM sections feel like "I don't want this trivia here" reworks, which is really a disservice to the article and the topic.
501:
201:
2098:#1-2, April-May 2014. If anyone has a a definitive idea of which volume number it should be identified as, please add it to the citation. --
1460:
No it doesn't. But multiple sections and editors opposing your edits DOES kill and credibility you have that yours is the preferred version.
1136:
The PH subheads do seem forced. The character has what is effectively a ver unified PF/in-universe history. There are no natural subsections.
533:
I copied and pasted the bio on Blonsky and i added it. It needed a more intimate approach to a good character. Sorry to upset some of you. (
2342:
2277:
One or more images currently used in this article have been nominated for deletion as violations of the non-free content criteria (NFCC).
1093:
There might be good reasons for some of this but doing everything all in one go means they can't be properly explained in the edit summary.
641:
41:
2281:
340:
1619:
589:
774:
move at superspeed, but people still insist on putting the links in. That said, I corrected the two alternate universe mentions. The
110:
2299:
2167:
179:
115:
31:
146:
2317:
1183:
85:
2157:
1154:, and so on can and should be re worked into a paragraph noting how the character was altered for those stories or story lines.
677:
Who is in charge of this articles boundaries. I can't even add a single paragraph to A-Bomb in Hulk 2005 game, and 2008 film? (
1331:
Categorisation of redirects is a great fix to this (and other issues) and it also keeps everything joined up, as links to say
312:
267:
242:
1343:
1122:
I can see why two or three of the cats were removed. One is redundant and two are there because of a standing quibble point.
76:
1601:
Oh for goodness sake. Who are you talking to? You should have read the comments following first. Not good editor conduct.
1347:
713:
to make matter's worse. Not to mention somebody keeps removing fictional secret agents, superhuman speed, strength, etc. (
2295:
2262:
140:
1637:
with a brief breakdown on what each entry is. The comic book article will not come up unless you click on that link.
336:
1176:
and "minimize in the film article as a character article will cover it". This tends to leave almost nothing covered.
2291:. If you are not familiar with NFCC-related deletion discussions, I recommend reading the post linked above first.
1400:
issues and would rather not add anything incorrect or misleading (although those are all Abomination appearances).
196:
1497:
You complain about the level of maturity, ability, and competence of other editors. Fix you own bad habits first.
1350:
and "Comics characters adapted for television"). You might want to give jc37 a nudge and see what he thinks too. (
136:
120:
1305:
1266:
2218:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
513:
210:
1179:
645:
1336:
248:
1623:
1069:
This has now been protected so I'll throw in my thoughts, partly based on one of the more wide-ranging edits
593:
186:
2253:
2149:
2086:
title) the various reboots and resets for the Hulk books over the years have bounced back and forth between
2060:
35:
1262:
585:
1253:
That being said, I can see the reason to try and limit the categories. Catting an article on a character
66:
2237:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
2225:
1938:
1535:
445:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
2148:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
2123:
1250:
a specific, narrow set of removals. It's a general state of mind where we try to push the material out.
81:
2192:
2141:
2103:
1837:
1808:
1346:
which really needs hooking into some kind of structure like "DC Comics television characters" (under
230:
1991:
1971:
1954:
1922:
1890:
1760:
1723:
1687:
1642:
1606:
1571:
1447:
1409:
884:
847:
792:
172:
152:
2168:
https://web.archive.org/web/20081013230843/http://www.kcra.com/entertainment/16574962/detail.html
2082:
series, but I wasn't sure what volume number to cite for this series, as (aside from the 2013-14
2056:
1366:
519:
215:
2280:
You can read more about what this means and why these files are being nominated for deletion at
2222:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1595:
1539:
1524:
1509:
1413:
1088:
Why is the Marvel Zombies version mentioned in the 2000s section and not the alternate versions?
867:
831:
796:
686:
2238:
1871:
1778:
1742:
1705:
1663:
1591:
1520:
1465:
1430:
1355:
1288:
1237:
1222:
1102:
1055:
1030:
1002:
975:
948:
926:
904:
863:
827:
810:
742:
718:
698:
682:
660:
630:
609:
570:
554:
538:
62:
2158:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090511133106/http://comics.ign.com:80/top-100-villains/54.html
1934:
1563:
1551:
1531:
1505:
1404:
is the norm everywhere else. Why is this article different? Thoughts, not attacks, welcome.
1316:
1274:
1196:
515:
484:
442:
212:
2245:
1421:
2099:
1165:
appropriate to a notation of how the character was adapted for use in the shows and games.
2171:
17:
1982:
Can anyone fine the link to the discussion that was had a few months ago re: notability?
2204:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1987:
1967:
1950:
1918:
1886:
1756:
1719:
1683:
1638:
1602:
1567:
1443:
1405:
880:
843:
788:
2244:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
2211:
1678:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:ThuranX&action=edit§ion=95
2311:
1374:
1332:
304:
2282:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Comics#Image deletion nominations for NFCC 8 and 3a
2303:
2267:
2127:
2119:
2107:
2064:
1995:
1975:
1958:
1942:
1926:
1894:
1882:
1875:
1867:
1859:
1830:
1782:
1774:
1764:
1746:
1738:
1727:
1709:
1701:
1691:
1667:
1659:
1646:
1627:
1610:
1587:
1575:
1555:
1516:
1469:
1461:
1451:
1434:
1426:
1378:
1359:
1351:
1320:
1292:
1284:
1278:
1241:
1233:
1226:
1218:
1200:
1106:
1098:
1059:
1051:
1034:
1026:
1006:
998:
979:
971:
952:
944:
930:
922:
908:
900:
888:
859:
851:
823:
814:
806:
746:
738:
722:
714:
702:
694:
678:
664:
656:
649:
634:
626:
613:
605:
597:
574:
566:
558:
550:
542:
534:
517:
214:
1586:
to all of our questions. Turns out, the entire edit warring was to PROVE A POINT!
2161:
1547:
1501:
1312:
1270:
1192:
429:
411:
2210:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
298:
294:
1050:
you're assistance. I'm far from attacking you, I'm just stating my opinion. (
842:, not Knowledge (XXG) editors. Finally, I am bringing in some cooler heads.
383:
288:
261:
604:
yes, well, any attempt to alter it meets with a temper tantrum. Good luck.
1370:
2005:
In the Film section (under "In other media") there are 3 bullet points.
1913:
a change would need strong consensus, rather than an experiment here.
1755:
Not a case of "can't", just don't wish to because you can't be civil.
317:
1634:
If you type in "Abomination", Knowledge (XXG) will list this page
1246:
No ThuranX, it's not something I'm leveling at a specific editor
1481:
Lumping contentious edits in with other, potentially good edits.
1335:
can easily be broken and are difficult to fix if changed, while
1257:
that the category applies to all versions of the character. I'd
1082:
Why is the mention of the Abomination mini-series being removed?
2043:
I know the connection between the reused footage and the movie
520:
478:
224:
216:
26:
2017:
Bullet point #2: talks about the Abomination's appearance in
2009:
Bullet point #1: talks about the Abomination's appearance in
2177:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1635:
1172:
A couple of last thoughts that go beyond just this article:
382:
316:, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to
2152:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1807:
My apologies for making the changes without consensus. --
1342:
I also agree about the categories as we have things like
1161:
With both the television and video game sections, it is
327:
If you would like to participate, you can help with the
2145:
1677:
1583:
1070:
2172:
http://www.kcra.com/entertainment/16574962/detail.html
782:
Finally, you blow your credibility when you lead with
171:
2287:
You can participate at the deletion discussion(s) at
441:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2214:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
2078:I added the Abomination's reappearance in the 2014
1530:section? Well so is the "Future Imperfect" section
185:
2289:Knowledge (XXG):Files for discussion/2020 April 30
1799:In addition, the bit about ign is most definitely
822:Dude, it's not fan info, IT's stone cold fact. (
455:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Fictional characters
44:for general discussion of the article's subject.
2200:This message was posted before February 2018.
2162:http://comics.ign.com/top-100-villains/54.html
565:Jeez. Sorry dude. Everybody needs to relax. (
8:
1673:You are over-reacting. And to judge by this:
805:page, despite your presumption that you do.
778:series does belong in the Alternate section.
1184:Category:Comics characters adapted for film
712:SITE. ANYTHING ELSE WILL BE DELETED--: -->
406:
339:the attached article or discuss it at the
256:
2353:WikiProject Fictional characters articles
2328:C-Class Comics articles of Low-importance
2140:I have just modified 2 external links on
875:which is acceptable as we are naming the
458:Template:WikiProject Fictional characters
2051:Fictional Character Biography incomplete
1484:Editing more than one section at a time.
2094:so many times. So, I just cited it as
1682:Not getting any better at being civil.
408:
258:
228:
2189:to let others know (documentation at
1852:
1823:
1477:Asgardian, stop doing the following:
1232:and would like to fix it up. thanks.
7:
2348:C-Class fictional character articles
2001:Suggested change to the Film section
1839:
1810:
435:This article is within the scope of
310:This article is within the scope of
1311:It's a hedge, but it could work. -
1085:Why were three video games removed?
247:It is of interest to the following
34:for discussing improvements to the
2038:Iron Man & Hulk: Heroes United
2019:Iron Man & Hulk: Heroes United
349:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Comics
25:
2338:Marvel Comics work group articles
2144:. Please take a moment to review
1855:
1826:
1493:trivial to "bullet point trivia".
943:Can you fix this article, then? (
61:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
1846:
1817:
1072:(but touching on other points):
483:
438:WikiProject Fictional characters
428:
410:
297:
287:
260:
229:
56:Click here to start a new topic.
1737:so I think this topic is over.
764:concise and professional manner
757:I posted that note to stop any
369:This article has been rated as
2333:C-Class Marvel Comics articles
2323:Low-importance Comics articles
1773:Can't. Got it. Moving on now.
1365:J Greb is likely referring to
1348:Category: DC Comics characters
1344:Category:Smallville characters
1:
1996:03:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
1976:10:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
1959:09:02, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
1943:02:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
1927:03:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
1849:
1820:
1611:07:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
1596:05:31, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
559:01:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
543:22:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
449:and see a list of open tasks.
391:This article is supported by
53:Put new text under old text.
2273:Image deletion nomination(s)
1843:
1814:
1130:if it is as an in-story ref.
461:fictional character articles
2343:WikiProject Comics articles
2268:20:28, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
1895:07:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
352:Template:WikiProject Comics
2369:
2231:(last update: 5 June 2024)
2137:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
2065:22:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
2045:The Incredible Hulk (2008)
2031:The Incredible Hulk (2008)
2011:The Incredible Hulk (2008)
1876:20:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
1860:20:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
1831:20:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
1647:00:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
1628:20:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
1487:Reducing material that is
672:
375:project's importance scale
2128:00:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
1783:15:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
1765:01:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
1747:13:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
1728:08:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
1710:06:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
1692:06:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
1668:06:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
1576:02:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
1556:22:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1540:21:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1525:19:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1510:10:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1470:04:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1452:02:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1435:02:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1414:00:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
1379:15:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1360:14:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1321:11:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1293:04:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1279:03:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1267:Category:Fictional boxers
1242:02:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1227:02:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1201:01:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
1107:13:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
1060:03:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
1035:03:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
1007:03:27, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
980:03:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
953:03:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
931:03:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
909:03:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
889:02:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
868:02:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
852:02:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
832:02:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
815:02:27, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
797:02:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
747:05:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
723:00:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
703:12:03, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
687:05:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
575:21:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
423:
390:
368:
282:
255:
91:Be welcoming to newcomers
18:Talk:Abomination (comics)
2108:10:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
1337:Reed Richards (Ultimate)
1180:Category:Film characters
1146:The remaining variants,
665:02:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
650:02:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
635:02:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
614:04:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
598:02:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
394:Marvel Comics work group
2318:C-Class Comics articles
2304:00:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
2296:The Squirrel Conspiracy
2133:External links modified
1562:Actually, I agree with
1308:of similar characters."
1097:more obvious chunks. (
784:Plus some jerk added...
36:Abomination (character)
1333:Reed Richards#Ultimate
1158:seen in the film here.
387:
237:This article is rated
86:avoid personal attacks
2040:which is incorrect.
1791:Slight Reorganization
1263:Blob (Wolverine film)
386:
241:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
111:Neutral point of view
2212:regular verification
2142:Abomination (comics)
452:Fictional characters
443:fictional characters
418:Fictional characters
320:on Knowledge (XXG).
116:No original research
2202:After February 2018
2181:parameter below to
2113:Broken Source Links
2088:The Incredible Hulk
341:project's talk page
2256:InternetArchiveBot
2207:InternetArchiveBot
1367:Blob (X-Men films)
388:
313:WikiProject Comics
243:content assessment
97:dispute resolution
58:
2232:
1116:I tend to agree.
588:comment added by
526:
525:
507:
506:
477:
476:
473:
472:
469:
468:
405:
404:
401:
400:
223:
222:
77:Assume good faith
54:
16:(Redirected from
2360:
2266:
2257:
2230:
2229:
2208:
2196:
1857:
1854:
1851:
1848:
1845:
1841:
1828:
1825:
1822:
1819:
1816:
1812:
1306:Fictional boxers
1152:Future Imperfect
840:acting like fans
673:Who's in change?
600:
521:
498:
497:
487:
479:
463:
462:
459:
456:
453:
432:
425:
424:
414:
407:
357:
356:
353:
350:
347:
307:
302:
301:
291:
284:
283:
278:
275:
264:
257:
240:
234:
233:
225:
217:
190:
189:
175:
106:Article policies
27:
21:
2368:
2367:
2363:
2362:
2361:
2359:
2358:
2357:
2308:
2307:
2275:
2260:
2255:
2223:
2216:have permission
2206:
2190:
2150:this simple FaQ
2135:
2115:
2076:
2053:
2003:
1906:
1793:
1655:
770:mutates and do
675:
622:
583:
531:
522:
516:
492:
460:
457:
454:
451:
450:
355:Comics articles
354:
351:
348:
345:
344:
303:
296:
276:
270:
238:
219:
218:
213:
132:
127:
126:
125:
102:
72:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2366:
2364:
2356:
2355:
2350:
2345:
2340:
2335:
2330:
2325:
2320:
2310:
2309:
2274:
2271:
2250:
2249:
2242:
2175:
2174:
2166:Added archive
2164:
2156:Added archive
2134:
2131:
2114:
2111:
2084:Indestructible
2075:
2068:
2052:
2049:
2027:
2026:
2022:
2021:
2014:
2013:
2002:
1999:
1984:
1983:
1979:
1978:
1962:
1961:
1946:
1945:
1905:
1902:
1900:
1898:
1897:
1863:
1862:
1792:
1789:
1788:
1787:
1786:
1785:
1768:
1767:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1731:
1730:
1715:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1675:
1674:
1654:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1631:
1630:
1614:
1613:
1581:
1579:
1578:
1559:
1558:
1495:
1494:
1485:
1482:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1455:
1454:
1438:
1437:
1393:
1392:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1340:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1309:
1302:
1251:
1229:
1208:
1206:
1205:
1204:
1203:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1177:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1159:
1155:
1144:
1137:
1134:
1131:
1123:
1120:
1111:
1110:
1094:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1086:
1083:
1080:
1077:
1076:be longer too.
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1010:
989:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
983:
982:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
956:
936:
935:
934:
933:
915:
914:
913:
912:
893:
892:
855:
854:
820:
819:
818:
817:
780:
779:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
729:
728:
727:
726:
706:
705:
674:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
642:67.175.176.178
621:
618:
617:
616:
581:
579:
578:
562:
561:
530:
527:
524:
523:
518:
514:
512:
509:
508:
505:
504:
494:
493:
488:
482:
475:
474:
471:
470:
467:
466:
464:
447:the discussion
433:
421:
420:
415:
403:
402:
399:
398:
389:
379:
378:
371:Low-importance
367:
361:
360:
358:
309:
308:
292:
280:
279:
277:Low‑importance
265:
253:
252:
246:
235:
221:
220:
211:
209:
208:
205:
204:
192:
191:
129:
128:
124:
123:
118:
113:
104:
103:
101:
100:
93:
88:
79:
73:
71:
70:
59:
50:
49:
46:
45:
39:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2365:
2354:
2351:
2349:
2346:
2344:
2341:
2339:
2336:
2334:
2331:
2329:
2326:
2324:
2321:
2319:
2316:
2315:
2313:
2306:
2305:
2301:
2297:
2292:
2290:
2285:
2283:
2278:
2272:
2270:
2269:
2264:
2259:
2258:
2247:
2243:
2240:
2236:
2235:
2234:
2227:
2221:
2217:
2213:
2209:
2203:
2198:
2194:
2188:
2184:
2180:
2173:
2169:
2165:
2163:
2159:
2155:
2154:
2153:
2151:
2147:
2143:
2138:
2132:
2130:
2129:
2125:
2121:
2112:
2110:
2109:
2105:
2101:
2097:
2093:
2089:
2085:
2081:
2073:
2069:
2067:
2066:
2062:
2058:
2057:Paleface Jack
2050:
2048:
2046:
2041:
2039:
2033:
2032:
2024:
2023:
2020:
2016:
2015:
2012:
2008:
2007:
2006:
2000:
1998:
1997:
1993:
1989:
1981:
1980:
1977:
1973:
1969:
1964:
1963:
1960:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1947:
1944:
1940:
1936:
1931:
1930:
1929:
1928:
1924:
1920:
1914:
1910:
1903:
1901:
1896:
1892:
1888:
1884:
1881:I agree with
1880:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1873:
1869:
1861:
1858:
1842:
1835:
1834:
1833:
1832:
1829:
1813:
1805:
1802:
1797:
1790:
1784:
1780:
1776:
1772:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1766:
1762:
1758:
1754:
1753:
1748:
1744:
1740:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1732:
1729:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1716:
1711:
1707:
1703:
1698:
1697:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1689:
1685:
1680:
1679:
1672:
1671:
1670:
1669:
1665:
1661:
1653:Recent edits.
1652:
1648:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1633:
1632:
1629:
1625:
1621:
1620:76.112.199.81
1616:
1615:
1612:
1608:
1604:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1585:
1577:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1560:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1527:
1526:
1522:
1518:
1512:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1498:
1492:
1491:
1486:
1483:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1471:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1453:
1449:
1445:
1440:
1439:
1436:
1432:
1428:
1423:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1411:
1407:
1401:
1397:
1390:
1389:
1380:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1363:
1361:
1357:
1353:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1307:
1303:
1300:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1290:
1286:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1264:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1249:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1230:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1190:
1185:
1181:
1178:
1174:
1173:
1171:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1153:
1149:
1148:Marvel Zombie
1145:
1141:
1140:
1138:
1135:
1132:
1129:
1124:
1121:
1118:
1117:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1095:
1092:
1087:
1084:
1081:
1078:
1074:
1073:
1071:
1068:
1067:
1061:
1057:
1053:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1008:
1004:
1000:
995:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
981:
977:
973:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
962:
954:
950:
946:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
932:
928:
924:
919:
918:
917:
916:
910:
906:
902:
897:
896:
895:
894:
891:
890:
886:
882:
876:
872:
871:
870:
869:
865:
861:
853:
849:
845:
841:
837:
836:
835:
833:
829:
825:
816:
812:
808:
803:
802:
801:
800:
799:
798:
794:
790:
786:
785:
777:
773:
769:
765:
760:
756:
755:
748:
744:
740:
735:
734:
733:
732:
731:
730:
724:
720:
716:
710:
709:
708:
707:
704:
700:
696:
692:
691:
690:
688:
684:
680:
666:
662:
658:
653:
652:
651:
647:
643:
639:
638:
637:
636:
632:
628:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
602:
601:
599:
595:
591:
590:173.67.40.194
587:
576:
572:
568:
564:
563:
560:
556:
552:
548:
547:
546:
544:
540:
536:
529:Character bio
528:
511:
510:
503:
500:
499:
496:
495:
491:
486:
481:
480:
465:
448:
444:
440:
439:
434:
431:
427:
426:
422:
419:
416:
413:
409:
396:
395:
385:
381:
380:
376:
372:
366:
363:
362:
359:
342:
338:
334:
330:
329:current tasks
326:
324:
319:
315:
314:
306:
305:Comics portal
300:
295:
293:
290:
286:
285:
281:
274:
269:
266:
263:
259:
254:
250:
244:
236:
232:
227:
226:
207:
206:
203:
200:
198:
194:
193:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
131:
130:
122:
121:Verifiability
119:
117:
114:
112:
109:
108:
107:
98:
94:
92:
89:
87:
83:
80:
78:
75:
74:
68:
64:
63:Learn to edit
60:
57:
52:
51:
48:
47:
43:
37:
33:
29:
28:
19:
2293:
2286:
2279:
2276:
2254:
2251:
2226:source check
2205:
2199:
2186:
2182:
2178:
2176:
2139:
2136:
2116:
2095:
2091:
2087:
2083:
2079:
2077:
2071:
2054:
2044:
2042:
2037:
2034:
2030:
2028:
2018:
2010:
2004:
1986:Many thanks
1985:
1915:
1911:
1907:
1904:Latest Edits
1899:
1864:
1838:
1809:
1806:
1800:
1798:
1794:
1681:
1676:
1656:
1580:
1528:
1513:
1499:
1496:
1489:
1488:
1476:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1298:
1258:
1254:
1247:
1207:
1162:
1151:
1147:
1127:
878:
874:
856:
839:
821:
787:
783:
781:
776:Abominations
775:
771:
767:
763:
758:
676:
623:
580:
532:
489:
436:
392:
370:
333:notice board
331:, visit the
323:Get involved
321:
311:
249:WikiProjects
195:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
105:
30:This is the
2294:Sincerely,
2193:Sourcecheck
2090:and simply
2070:Citing new
1935:WesleyDodds
1564:DCincarnate
1532:DCincarnate
1143:Definitely.
899:character.(
584:—Preceding
159:free images
42:not a forum
2312:Categories
2263:Report bug
2100:Pennyforth
1304:"See also
1128:especially
2246:this tool
2239:this tool
1988:Asgardian
1968:Asgardian
1951:Asgardian
1919:Asgardian
1887:Asgardian
1840:Darktower
1811:Darktower
1757:Asgardian
1720:Asgardian
1700:with it.
1684:Asgardian
1639:Asgardian
1603:Asgardian
1584:an answer
1582:Finally,
1568:Asgardian
1444:Asgardian
1406:Asgardian
1265:to house
881:Asgardian
844:Asgardian
789:Asgardian
502:Archive 1
99:if needed
82:Be polite
32:talk page
2252:Cheers.—
1297:(shrug)
1182:needs a
759:fan info
586:unsigned
490:Archives
197:Archives
67:get help
40:This is
38:article.
2179:checked
2146:my edit
2120:Abhi347
1883:ThuranX
1868:ThuranX
1775:ThuranX
1739:ThuranX
1702:ThuranX
1660:ThuranX
1588:ThuranX
1517:ThuranX
1462:ThuranX
1427:ThuranX
1369:above.
1352:Emperor
1285:ThuranX
1255:implies
1234:ThuranX
1219:ThuranX
1099:Emperor
1052:JoeLoeb
1027:ThuranX
999:JoeLoeb
972:ThuranX
945:JoeLoeb
923:ThuranX
901:JoeLoeb
860:ThuranX
824:JoeLoeb
807:ThuranX
739:ThuranX
715:JoeLoeb
695:ThuranX
679:JoeLoeb
657:ThuranX
627:ThuranX
606:ThuranX
567:JoeLoeb
551:ThuranX
535:JoeLoeb
373:on the
239:C-class
165:WP refs
153:scholar
2187:failed
2074:series
1548:J Greb
1502:J Greb
1422:WP:OWN
1313:J Greb
1271:J Greb
1193:J Greb
877:genres
620:Intro.
346:Comics
318:comics
273:Marvel
268:Comics
245:scale.
137:Google
180:JSTOR
141:books
95:Seek
2300:talk
2183:true
2124:talk
2104:talk
2096:Hulk
2092:Hulk
2080:Hulk
2072:Hulk
2061:talk
1992:talk
1972:talk
1955:talk
1939:talk
1923:talk
1891:talk
1872:talk
1779:talk
1761:talk
1743:talk
1724:talk
1706:talk
1688:talk
1664:talk
1643:talk
1624:talk
1607:talk
1592:talk
1572:talk
1552:talk
1536:talk
1521:talk
1506:talk
1466:talk
1448:talk
1431:talk
1410:talk
1375:talk
1356:talk
1317:talk
1289:talk
1275:talk
1269:. -
1259:love
1238:talk
1223:talk
1197:talk
1163:very
1103:talk
1056:talk
1031:talk
1003:talk
976:talk
949:talk
927:talk
905:talk
885:talk
864:talk
848:talk
828:talk
811:talk
793:talk
743:talk
719:talk
699:talk
683:talk
661:talk
646:talk
631:talk
610:talk
594:talk
571:talk
555:talk
539:talk
337:edit
173:FENS
147:news
84:and
2220:RfC
2197:).
2185:or
2170:to
2160:to
1801:not
1490:not
1371:BOZ
772:not
768:not
365:Low
187:TWL
2314::
2302:)
2284:.
2233:.
2228:}}
2224:{{
2195:}}
2191:{{
2126:)
2106:)
2063:)
1994:)
1974:)
1957:)
1941:)
1925:)
1893:)
1874:)
1781:)
1763:)
1745:)
1726:)
1708:)
1690:)
1666:)
1645:)
1626:)
1609:)
1594:)
1574:)
1554:)
1538:)
1523:)
1508:)
1500:-
1468:)
1450:)
1433:)
1412:)
1377:)
1362:)
1358:)
1319:)
1299:If
1291:)
1277:)
1248:or
1240:)
1225:)
1199:)
1191:-
1150:,
1105:)
1058:)
1033:)
1005:)
978:)
951:)
929:)
907:)
887:)
866:)
850:)
834:)
830:)
813:)
795:)
745:)
721:)
701:)
689:)
685:)
663:)
648:)
633:)
612:)
596:)
573:)
557:)
545:)
541:)
335:,
271::
167:)
65:;
2298:(
2265:)
2261:(
2248:.
2241:.
2122:(
2102:(
2059:(
1990:(
1970:(
1953:(
1937:(
1921:(
1889:(
1870:(
1856:5
1853:4
1850:3
1847:2
1844:1
1827:5
1824:4
1821:3
1818:2
1815:1
1777:(
1759:(
1741:(
1722:(
1704:(
1686:(
1662:(
1641:(
1622:(
1605:(
1590:(
1570:(
1550:(
1534:(
1519:(
1504:(
1464:(
1446:(
1429:(
1408:(
1373:(
1354:(
1315:(
1287:(
1273:(
1236:(
1221:(
1195:(
1109:)
1101:(
1062:)
1054:(
1029:(
1009:)
1001:(
997:(
974:(
955:)
947:(
925:(
911:)
903:(
883:(
862:(
846:(
826:(
809:(
791:(
741:(
725:)
717:(
697:(
681:(
659:(
644:(
629:(
608:(
592:(
577:)
569:(
553:(
537:(
397:.
377:.
343:.
325:!
251::
202:1
199::
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
69:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
