Talk:Red Raven (Marvel Comics)

X-Link
I don't think the X-Men link should have been changed to direct to X-Men instead of Uncanny X-Men. It's a reference to him appearing in that specific series (simply titled X-Men before Uncanny was added), so it should direct to that specific series. --JamesAM 03:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

further appearances
There are a lot of appearances missing. During WW II he appears in Invaders. After X-Men, the character next appeared in Sub-Mariner (early 70s) then the plot continues in Incredible Hulk with the Bi-Beast (70s) (twice). He was seen recently in Busiek and Larsen's Defenders. This appearance would be following an appearance with Diablo who would have revived Red Raven, Bi-Beast and the whole avian race. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.103.101.76 (talk) 12:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

more appearances
The charcaterppeared besides the X-Men appearance. After that he appeard in Submariner around 1971 where he thought he had killed all his race, the plot continued in Hulk with the Bi-Beast, then someplace else where he was reintroduced, explaining that the charcater that died in Submariner was a robot, his daughter was introduced also and then they both appeared in Busiek's Defenders series. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.103.101.72 (talk) 22:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:MS 04302005 0029.jpg
Image:MS 04302005 0029.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Rtkat3
The reason I ask you to break it down into seprate edits, is that I (and other people) look at diffs to compare the previous version of an article with what an editor did to it, so that I can see if there is something they did which needs fixing or which is inappropriate and needs to be reverted. As you can see based on your diff, it is impossible to tell what you did without a great amount of work on my part, because not only are you moving sections around but you are making little edits to things here and there, and it is throwing off the changes tracking. It is a courtesy to your fellow editors not to make such changes all at once, especially with only a brief edit summary, because believe it or not we are supposed to be here to help each other. I do a lot of cleaning up after other people, but edits like this make it very hard to follow what you have done. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 00:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed move

 * The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Events having overtaken the request and rendered it no-longer-reasonably-contestable, closing the discussion and recasting as an uncontested move, see discussion Herostratus (talk) 18:17, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

– I honestly don't know about this, so I'm asking. There is now another Red Raven, Red Raven (gastropub). And as you see at Red Raven (disambiguation) there are kinda-sorta other Red Ravens. And the Marvel Comics Red Raven is extremely obscure (per Toonpedia, "he might as well not have existed at all"). So I dunno if he rates as any kind of Primary Topic for anything. Are the great majority of the people searching on "Red Raven" really looking for this sub-obscure nonentity? On the the other, most of those other Red Ravens kind of fade away if you squint at them... The sports mascot is the Red Raven s  and that's not really the same thing. The Teen Titans Red Raven does not have his own article and is so very very obscure (and his link is illegal under disambig rules)... the other Red Ravens don't have articles and likely never will and arguably don't belong in the disambig page... leaving only Red Raven (gastropub) which is a bistro in some East Jesus nowhere town and which may not be in business in three years. And the Marvel Comics Red Raven is listed in the GoldenAge template, and its a reasonably large article and look at all those external links, so somebody cares about this ridiculous birdman. If nobody votes I'll make the move, but if anybody wants to weigh in on this here's the place. Herostratus (talk) 03:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Red Raven → Red Raven (Marvel Comics)
 * Red Raven (disambiguation) → Red Raven


 * Support – the comic book character is too obscure to have a primarytopic claim. Dicklyon (talk) 02:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - WP:PRIMARYTOPIC doesn't exist in such "least obscure" contexts. Also music seems to pick up a lot of Red Raven polka references. And the fact that French wp and Japanese wp have Red Raven (manga) as primary confirms there's no primary. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:14, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. In ictu oculi made another Red Raven article, Red Raven (polka) and added still more entries to the disambig page, one of which I then made into a stub Red Raven (manga). There are now so many Red Raven articles and disambig entries that it's no longer reasonably feasible to have this article be the primary topic, so I'm closing this and will request the move as an uncontested move. Herostratus (talk) 18:08, 7 April 2014 (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.