Talk:Falcon (comics)

HIV+?
Since when? Kusonaga 10:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

His nephew Jim Wilson was the one who had HIV and died from it. The sentence could be worded better.

The Falcon could not have been a hoodlum/pimp as described. In his early appearances he is clearly a social worker, has an office, etc. In order for him to have this position he would have had a degree- meaning he spent time in college. The guy is in his mid-to-late 20s at this point. So when in his life did he have time to be a hoodlum?? Even if the Red Skull had gone this far to create another identity for him, how do you explain his family (sister, nephew)who dont know anything about this? This is just another poor retcon, and Marvel seems to have a mania to link black characters with criminal tendencies. Maybe its a retarded version of "street cred", but The Falcon clearly could not have had this past.

Since Sam's social worker time is really just a figment of the Cosmic Cube isn't it entirely possible, the cube was used to give him everything he needed to be a social worker?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.201.188.178 (talk) 22:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

No. If Sam's social worker life was a figment, everything associated with it would have been as well. Bear in mind, his sister and nephew visited him in his office. Leila, his activist girlfriend, constantly derided him for being a social worker. Not to mention the utterly preposterous notion that the Ultimate Weapon is used ONLY to distort these few aspects of this one man's life, all as some kind of back up plan in case the Skull's plans against him and Capt America fail? Why not just erase the total history of these two in the first place? Sorry, no excuse can be cooked up to make this plausible. Sam was never a hood. Marvel needs to realize a character can be black and not have ties to thugs and hoods. They even put Joe Robertson in jail. Its ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.156.220 (talk) 02:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, Captain America was closely working wth Nick Fury and SHIELD at this time. There is no way SHIELD would not have investigated Cap's partner and discovered this so-called criminal background. Sloppy writing on the part of the men who came up with this "ret-con" of the Falcon's past. 72.42.143.134 (talk) 20:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

black/african-american
The race section seems confused. Sam's the first ASfrican-american hero, but The Black Panther's the first black hero? that's sort of backwards, isn't it? if BP is FROM africa, and premiered as someone living here, then HE would be African-american, and Sam, who was born and raised here, would be black, right? ThuranX 14:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Black Panther is a resident and king of Wakanda, a country in Africa. He is not an American citizen, at least not that I recall, so he is not African-American. He has studied here though and thus America has been a residence for him. I doubt as a ruler of a country, though, that he would apply for citizenship of another country. ArchangelX777 13:42, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Too many people forget there are now and have always been black people all over the world, not just America and Africa. They see things only through their narrow, limited vista. A black family born and raised in Canada, for example- would you call them African American??

The Black Panther is NOT African-American. He is an AFRICAN, and not a citizen of the USA. The Falcon on the other hand IS an American citizen. The section is not confused.143.250.2.10 (talk) 20:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Why is the whole racial background paragraph featured so prominently? Shouldn't this be an impartial article? Due to how racial issues have been viewed in the past, the fact that he is the first African American superhero may warrant a paragraph in the lower section of the page, but featuring this information in the header diminishes from the character's merits (it basically states that he is only important because he is black). I propose a bit of rearranging, moving away from racist-oriented information and more in line with comic-book articles in general, which focus more on the background and strengths/perks of each character, and not on their skin color. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.97.129.121 (talk) 20:55, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

C-Class rated for Comics Project
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 WikiProject_Comics/Assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Infobox image
The infobox image needs to be changed, as it does not follow WikiProject Comics guidelines for a clear, easily readable image of his costume with no distracting background elements. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)


 * What happened to the one of him that used to be in there? It a clear shot of him flying upward, unobscurred by the type of posing he was striking, etc. Why was that removed? Nightscream (talk) 02:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

There should be instead clear pictures of his main uniforms. He's had green/orange, red/white, red/white with wings, red/white with larger wings, and the red/white with "hard light" wings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.6.232.234 (talk) 02:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * There should not be images of every single uniform he's had, but I agree that the one in the Infobox is not the best one that could be used. Nightscream (talk) 03:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Disputing the assertion that the "plot description" (actually the character biography) is too long
Given the amount of information it has to cover, I don't think it's clear that the "plot description" (character biography) is too long. The Falcon has a complex history. He's also the central figure in an extensive network of friends and family that reaches into many areas of Marvel continuity. Since the other Marvel superheroes get as much wordage as it takes to summarize their backstories, I don't see why Sam Wilson/The Falcon and his numerous friends and relatives should get less. If you want an example, compare this entry with the one for Thor, the other Avenger whose network of friends and extended family is woven into Marvel's continuity. The entry on Thor runs far longer than the one on The Falcon, but no one's calling for the Thor entry to be shortened.

Also, addressing just the technical issues this raises: It's easy to cut plot descriptions and character bios down to size if you don't care how much sense they make when you're done. Shortening them without any loss of sense takes considerably more skill. As it stands, the current version of that section is clear and reader-friendly. That's not something you meddle with lightly. A clear if verbose description beats an ineptly shortened one. Unless the person doing the proposed rewrite has real expository writing chops, arbitrarily editing for length has the potential to do more harm than good. [Teresa Nielsen Hayden] 24.193.119.116 (talk) 17:18, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Who's first?
The article claims that the comic book character is the first African-American mainstream character.

However in the article for the Black Panther they make the same claim, viz.;  He is the first black superhero in mainstream American comics, debuting several years before such early African-American

You can't have two firsts in this case. Who's right?

Montalban (talk) 14:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Black Panther is not African-American. 114.77.236.196 (talk) 14:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Second this. Black Panther is African.&#42;Trekker (talk) 14:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

New Title : Sam WIlson (comics)
The fact is, that Sam Wilson is no longer Falcon, he's Captain America, and it's unlikely he'll be Falcon again. We already know he'll become Captain America again for Marvel's Generations, before anyone says anything about that. Sam Wilson (comics) is a much more suitable title as Falcon (comics) implies Falcon to be Wilson's only identity, when this is clearly not the case. Nurseline247 (talk) 11:42, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

As you may already know, Sam Wilson will be reprising his title as Falcon in the upcoming Marvel Legacy branding. There is already a slated Falcon series with him as the titular character. Comicguy333 (talk contribs) 05:56, 6 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Besides, Nurseline247, your argument is illogical. If titling the article "Falcon (comics)" implies that Falcon is his only identity, then titling it "Sam Wilson (comics)" would imply that Sam Wilson is his only identity, which is equally untrue. We go by WP: COMMONNAME, and it'll take a long, long time with Sam Wilson wearing other costumes before people stop recognizing him as the Falcon.--NukeofEarl (talk) 14:13, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

First Appearance
The first appearance of "The Falcon" as a character in Marvel Comics was in "Daring Mystery Comics" #5 (06-1940) and "The Human Torch" #2 (09-1940). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.170.255 (talk) 15:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Falcon (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://www.webcitation.org/6AklBQ0sH?url=http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/09/17/anthony-mackie-captain-america-winter-soldier-falcon/ to http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/09/17/anthony-mackie-captain-america-winter-soldier-falcon/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140326012333/https://forums.marvelheroes.com/discussion/77978/team-up-hero-faq to https://forums.marvelheroes.com/discussion/77978/team-up-hero-faq

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) 16:57, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

pop culture: video game
Super Smash Brothers needs to be added. Falcon was a video game character. Skiendog (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 9 October 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus on conciseness versus precision, which is the issue here. Red  Slash  05:48, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Falcon (comics) → Falcon (Marvel Comics) – Fails WP:NCC.  Dark Knight  2149  23:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. —  Newslinger   talk   19:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I don't see a good reason why this should be moved, there is no ambiguity about "(comics)", it is a disambiguator that meets the criteria fine and is concise and recognizable. I'm concerned that you seem to be moving a lot of articles right now without discussion, please could you dial it back and start a WP:RM discussion for them as from Category:Comics characters introduced in 2006 the convention currently is to use "(comics)", even if that's not what's written down explicitly at WP:NCC. Thanks  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:36, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It has nothing to do with what is written down, and no such consensus exists. After major discussions in 2017, WP:NCC was changed so that (comics) only refers to publications. Just because nobody has moved the other articles since then doesn't mean anything. I'm already in the process of doing that.  Dark Knight  2149  23:40, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * just stop please. You need to put these through WP:RM discussions, as they are controversial. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:41, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * They are not controversial, and we go by the naming conventions. If you have a problem with the conventions (which were thoroughly discussed before being updated in 2017), the onus is on you to open a larger discussion. I'm sorry you weren't aware beforehand. A number of articles hadn't been moved yet since then, hence the lack of awareness for some.  Dark Knight  2149  23:45, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Using the (comics) DAB for fictional character articles is what the conventions were before then.  Dark Knight  2149  23:47, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The discussion at Talk:Taskmaster_(TV_series) explicitly proposed moving the Taskmaster article to Taskmaster (character), and four separate users mentioned instead that it should be moved to Taskmaster (comics). That means the matter is clearly controversial. I have no idea what led to the page you mention being updated, but generally our articles follow the policies set out at WP:AT, which are tested by going through RM discussions. If you put a few of the examples through RMs (as you've done here), and find there is consnensus, then great. But otherwise your NCC page is simply a local guideline which doesn't follow the actual usage in real articles. But the bottom line, per rules explicitly stated at WP:RM, moves which are challenged should go through that process. I don't think that's unreasonable. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:49, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm going to try and explain this as best I can.
 * 1. The naming conventions used to call for (comics) as the default DAB for comic book characters.
 * 2. After multiple disputes and lengthy discussions in 2017, the WP:NCC was changed per consensus. (comics) is only used for publications. These discussions didn't just include WP:COMICS members either.
 * 3. A lot of articles were never moved since then, because people hadn't gotten around to it yet.
 * 4. The RM you keep citing took place in September 2017 and at another WikiProject. The people there were probably clueless that the naming conventions were updated.  Dark Knight  2149  00:00, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Could you link to any of the major discussions from 2017 that established the consensus to change WP:NCC in a way that supports this move? From a quick look at the history, it looks like the guideline was boldly changed in May 2019 to remove the advice that "(character)" should only be used as a last resort if "(comics)" is ambiguous and and "codename/real name" disambiguation can't be used. Colin M (talk) 22:06, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The only thing bold is you assuming it was WP:BOLDly changed just because you weren't aware or involved in the discussions. The biggest one from WT:COMICS is already linked at User talk:Amakuru. It was an entire ordeal involving the WikiProject and users from outside the project that encompassed filibustering at the Joker (character) FACs, WP:Articles for deletion/Joker (character), a couple of discussions at Talk:Joker (character), which all spilt over into a mega discussion at WT:COMICS (linked on Amakuru's talk page). Educate yourself and ask around any of the many people involved in those discussions (including below) instead of making baseless assumptions.  Dark  Knight  2149  23:50, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The edit summary on the May 2019 edit I linked above was "update". I checked the talk page for related discussions around that time and found none. So yeah, "from a quick look at the history, it looks like the guideline was boldly changed". If an edit is being made to reflect consensus of some discussion, the edit summary should probably mention that. "Educating myself" is exactly what I'm doing by asking for links. Chill. Colin M (talk) 14:31, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Off the top of my head (besides myself),, , , , , , , , , , , , , and are examples of the many users that participated in that drawn out discussion. The WikiProject has also been notified of the confusion going on here from Amakuru.  Dark  Knight  2149  00:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * These moves aren't controversial until someone opposes them. I support continuing bold moves to get in line with the revised NCC guidelines. If you (Amakuru) have an issue with them in bulk, you need to start a discussion somewhere more general than on a relatively obscure talk page. WT:COMICS would be an ideal spot. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose My observation is that companies are only specified in the article title dab when more than once company has published a character with the same name, as with Daredevil, Scarecrow, etc. The "Between characters of different publishers" section of Naming conventions (comics) seems to corroborate this. Is there a rationale for specifying the company when there are not multiple companies with same-named characters? I read this entire thread, and I didn't see one. If I have misunderstood, please clarify. Nightscream (talk) 00:34, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * NCC dictates that you use (character) for most characters, and you use the publisher's name when there are other characters of the same name and the character isn't the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. So the proper designation would either be Falcon (character) or Falcon (Marvel Comics). (comics) is used for publications.  Dark Knight  2149  00:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Support (comics) is vague and this subject has already been discussed to death on the Wikipedia Comics Project where it was decided that (comics) is not a good character disambiguation. It seems a lot of people here are unaware of the decision there.★Trekker (talk) 01:38, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose move to Falcon (Marvel Comics): “(comics)” as in relating to comics, is precise enough. Per WP:NATURALDIS: “use only as much additional detail as necessary.“ Specifying the exact publisher in this case would be overly detailed.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No. This has already been decided over a year ago. The comics project decided that (comics) was not a good disambiguator. I have no idea why people keep arguing for (comics) when there was a huge discussion about it already.★Trekker (talk) 04:28, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Because there is never a one size fits all answer to everything. How is “(Marvel Comics)” preferable over to “(comics)” in this particular case? (Marvel Comics) does not indicate that this article is about a character, any better than (comics). Unless there is another Falcon by a different publisher, it is better to use a more general descriptor to help unfamiliar readers.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 08:08, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is determined by consensus, and by heavily discussed conventions and policies. Through multiple lengthy community-wide discussions, it was determined that "(comics)" is not a perfectly fine disambiguator and the naming conventions were changed. If you have a problem with the current conventions, I would suggest opening a larger discussion elsewhere. The fact that so many of you are still arguing for (comics) after WP:NCC has been repeatedly pointed out is beginning to border on WP:IDONTHEARTHAT.  Dark Knight  2149  17:59, 15 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose - "(comics)" is a perfectly fine disambiguator. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Just a note that the (character) disambiguation is not a good option in this particular case. Don't limit the scope of disambiguation discussion to comic publishers. There are several other kinds of character options out there as seen on the overall disambiguation page: Falcon (disambiguation) That said, the NCC could probably use some revisiting. Two separate merge proposals to the MoS to adress a WP:POLICYFORK were tepidly supported but never actually carried out: 2014 and 2018. Also, NCC doesnt do a good job of adressing articles on charcters that also starred in publications using the same name, though drawing distinctions between ongoing and limited series would undoubtedly come into play. -2pou (talk) 06:51, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. "Comics" is a very poor disambiguator. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:25, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 17:34, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Support for consistency with other characters, which have generally already been moved to these target titles. bd2412  T 00:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Seeing as how there are still a lot of character articles with "(comics)" disambiguation, this will be tedious to bring to RM. If this is the accepted disambiguation per consensus for comic characters then all the rest should be able to be moved at RM/TR as arguments for one article are the same for all others (edge cases aside). To the matter at hand, using the publisher name as disambiguation is the same as the style used for television characters, which use the television show, so Chef (South Park) and not Chef (television). I personally would have liked for this convention to be "( character)" so Chef (South Park character) and Falcon (Marvel Comics character), but that's just my opinion. Anyways, support current guidelines which say to use "(Marvel Comics)" as the disambiguation. --Gonnym (talk) 09:34, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Prefer Falcon (Marvel character) or maybe Falcon (Marvel Comics character).Last I remember, we did decide to reserve "(comics)" and "(Brandname comics}})" for publications, but Falcon (disambiguation) has too many entries for us to use "(character)". "(Marvel Comics character)" seems to fail WP:CONCISE if "(Marvel character)" will do, and the shorter one may be more appropriate anyway these days, given that Marvel is more and more doing movies and TV series these days, so fewer of their notable characters are remaining comics-specific. 01:02, 27 October 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 27 June 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. While there clearly is no concordant consensus here and I understand the supporters’ point of view – in particular their call for consistency and disambiguation – the reasoning of the opposers is more guideline-backed and has the upper hand here.

As correctly addressed by opposers, when it comes to disambiguation the guidelines stipulate that "titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that" (WP:PRECISION) and "if a character name has been used by more than one publisher, use the publisher name to disambiguate" (WP:NCCOMICS). The only other fictional character named Falcon, is Falcon (G.I. Joe); however, as mentioned by the RM discourse he is not only a comic book character but also an animated series character and action figure. Furthermore, the Falcon (G.I. Joe) WP article has 25,925 overall views as opposed to this article's 5,938,663 overall views, thus significantly lowering the former’s general notability. If required, a mere hatnote on this article will suffice to avoid ambiguity.

As mentioned by a commentator, of the Marvel Comics male superheroes, 24 are using '(comics)' and 26 '(Marvel Comics)' as disambiguation in their article title. Therefore this RM alone will not considerably add anything when it comes to the consistency of comic characters’ article titles. Also keeping in mind that these were just the article titles of male Marvel characters.

Some have mentioned that the guidelines have failed here. I object. Policies and guidelines cannot cover everything and circumvent every potential issue. This RM discussion has raised well founded points to which there are no definite answers. I hope this outcome is acceptable and comprehensible for all sides. (non-admin closure) Colonestarrice (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Falcon (comics) → Falcon (Marvel Comics) – This is the correct title per WP:NCCDAB. It is WP:CONCISE and does not conflict with any other title. It is also consistent with other titles such as Thor (Marvel Comics) and Black Widow (Marvel Comics). I do not see a good reason for ignoring the guidelines here. IronManCap (talk) 16:27, 27 June 2021 (UTC) IronManCap (talk) 16:27, 27 June 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. Colonestarrice (talk) 10:17, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Support as necessary for complete disambiguation. I note that there are both fictional falcons appearing in comics, and other fictional characters such as Falcon (G.I. Joe), who also appears in comics. BD2412  T 00:41, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose as unnecessary disambiguation and per WP:NCCOMICS, because there is no other comic-book character named Falcon with a Wikipedia article. See the previous RM above. -- Calidum  02:22, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Using (comics) indicates the article is about a comic series, for instance Civil War (comics). That is equivalent to Tony Stark (Marvel Cinematic Universe) being titled Tony Stark (film), which would be incorrect as it would indicate it is about a film titled Tony Stark. IronManCap (talk) 11:53, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * How does having "Marvel Comics" in parantheses rather than "comics" change this so-called problem? -- Calidum  19:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Per WP:NCCOMICS, "XXXX (comics)" should most often only be for comics publications. Since "Falcon (character)" is ambiguous, this is our next best title. It's not "unnecessary disambiguation", it's following the title guidelines. Paintspot Infez (talk) 02:53, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and Paintspot. -- Netoholic @ 07:17, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per the nominator's rationale. ╠╣uw [ talk ] 09:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per . "(Marvel Comics)" does not indicate that article is about a character any better than "(comics)". I also find this dogmatic reverence of guidelines a bit disturbing especially when its being applied in situations that do not fit the criteria. Per WP:NCCOMICS, "(Publisher)" is used to differentiate between between articles with the same name by differentiate publishers. This disambiguation adds an unneeded level of specificity. Per WP:PRECISE, article titles should not be anymore precise than is needed. To BD2412's point, Falcon (G.I. Joe) is predominantly a television character. However even if you were using this to disambiguate between the comic book characters, "(Marvel Comics)" would still be incorrect as they are both published by Marvel Comics.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:20, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * G.I. Joe is a Hasbro franchise, not a marvel one. If the comic guideline is failing here, and to be honest, I agree with you that it is, then that should be brought up and changed in the guideline page. But the current title is indeed bad as the Marvel character isn't the only character with that name and since there already isn't a primary topic, the current qualifier is incomplete. Gonnym (talk) 15:22, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. There are several characters named "Falcon" and none of them are the primary of the term Falcon, as such there is no primary for a qualifier and this page should be renamed. Since the NCCOMICS guideline is pretty clear that we need to use "Marvel Comics" then that is what should be used. On a personal note, I do think that "Flacon (Marvel Comics)" in general is bad as a casual reader might think that this article is about the comic series and not the character. A longer "Marvel Comics character" might be better, however that is also longer, and I know editors here hate long titles... but that doesn't belong in this discussion. Gonnym (talk) 15:26, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Since the NCCOMICS guideline is pretty clear that we need to use "Marvel Comics" then that is what should be used. NCCOMICS is not clear that "Marvel Comics" should be used. Per the guideline, the publisher should only be used "If a character name has been used by more than one publisher, use the publisher name to disambiguate." That is not the case here.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:44, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It is the case here though, per the other entries at Falcon (disambiguation). IronManCap (talk) 15:46, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * There are no other notable comic book characters by different publishers. Again the guideline states this designation is reserved for disambiguation between publishers.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:55, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per previous RM, TriiipleThreat, and Calidum. The ideal title here would be Falcon, but that’s clearly ambiguous so we must disambiguate. The current disambiguator, comics, is sufficient because there is no other use of “Falcon” listed on the Falcon dab page to which “comics” could reasonably apply. So any additional disambiguation, including “Marvel”,  is unnecessary disambiguation. Any guideline that indicates otherwise contradicts WP:AT (WP:PRECISION: "titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that.") and needs to be fixed. —В²C ☎ 17:42, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, to address points made by the nom, Thor (Marvel Comics) is because Thor in comics (to which Thor (comics) appropriately redirects). Black Widow (comics) on the other hand redirects to Black Widow (Marvel Comics), and that article should be moved to Black Widow (comics). --В²C ☎ 21:07, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Those were two of many examples. There are also Loki (Marvel Comics), Odin (Marvel Comics), Zeus (Marvel Comics), Vision (Marvel Comics), Captain Marvel (Marvel Comics), Quicksilver (Marvel Comics), Mephisto (Marvel Comics), Echo (Marvel Comics), etc. This is a clearly established naming practice and provides a better disambiguator than simply, as having a franchise attached indicates the article is about a character rather than a comic series. IronManCap (talk) 22:01, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * All the examples you listed above are of character names that have been used by more than one publisher. They are disambiguted (Marvel Comics) to differentiate the characters between the publishers, not to indicate the article is about a character rather than a comic. Again, Falcon is the only notable character in comics so further disambigution is unnecessary.—TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note to closer: what TriiipleThreat reveals here is a fundamental misunderstanding and/or misapplication of policy/guidelines by nom and presumably much of the Support here. Their !votes weights should be discounted accordingly. —В²C ☎ 16:52, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Support. The disambiguation as it currently stands is confusing and does not follow comic disambiguation guidelines. Sean Stephens (talk) 04:10, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are over 100 Marvel Comics male superheroes, many requiring disambiguation. WIth 24 using  and 26 using   it's hard to discern that any disambiguation convention is being followed in practice. The naming convention edit which restricted "(comics)" to publications didn't specify a specific discussion but I assume it was this discussion although that discussion lacks a formal close. However a suggestion opening the discussion was to Grandfather old articles currently using (comics) as a DAB until an issue arises. – wbm1058 (talk) 04:41, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.