User talk:David A/Archive 2007

New Ranma section pages
Are you thinking of setting up separate pages by character to migrate that info out of their article space? If you could set up a sandbox and play around with what you're thinking of setting up, I think that would be a good idea for a test run (similar to what I did when I was suggesting breaking up the minor characters by anime/manga). If I am reading you right, the thing I have seen with separate pages like "battle records" or the like for other series is that they have a chance of getting nominated for deletion (AFD) because someone will think that they are non-notable on their own. So before you go ahead and create the new pages, set what you'd like set up as an experiment in a sandbox (not the WP:Sandbox because that gets cleaned out every hour) and we can discuss. --BrokenSphere 17:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Battle records in each separate page should be acceptable then?


 * Yeah, I'd second this. Unfortunately, as useful as some things are, Wikipedia community often doesn't see it that way.  You can end up wasting a lot of time working on something that some admin just gives the delete stick too.  Derekloffin 21:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be very unfortunate, given that this would be the best way to finally solve all this mischaracterisation trouble. :\


 * I could post what I have so far in the sandbox in the meantime, and let you work it over/shorten it down to what's most relevant then? Dave 12:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I worst case, could I simply send them over to the two of you so you could help keep the pages referenced? Dave 16:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * How about doing one such page as a trial run so we can see how it would look and make recommendations, then use that as a model if it looks good, before you create x number of pages and potentially waste time and effort. --BrokenSphere 17:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm currently pasting the various pages here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:David_A


 * The battle records should be ok, but many of the profiles need to be severely edited down (to a fourth the length or so), and have references added for a couple of additional volumes, and I'm not sure I'm up for any more. It would be great if other users could take it up where I left off. Dave 17:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * In any case, feel completely free to copy them for personal use or modify/improve/shorten them at will. (Including editing them here, if you prefer) Dave 00:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * These are very comprehensive, but for Wikipedia purposes (and I may be wrong), I'm not sure how they could be set up for reference purposes. You may want to get either some more veteran editor's input or an admin or two to chip in and see how they can be used.  -- Broken Sphere  04:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Couldn't we just make notices, so that any editors can look them up when they want quick check-through references for the profiles? That's almost what I originally intended anyway. The battle records should work as a separate page at least. Though we'd have to make them more easily overviewed. Dave 11:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you mean refer them back onto those records here in your user space? TBH, I have not yet seen something on here that is a comprehensive listing of all fights that go on in a particular series.  -- Broken Sphere  20:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Pretty much for the general character references (It's still possible for anyone to edit them right?). They should be very useful for all footnote editors. As for the battle records, we could always add them as a separate section for each character, or the appropriate 'fighting techniques' pages, but othervise, why not? A separate page should be a fun, informative and useful addition, as an external page to link to in each appropriate character section, much like the ones you're assembling, and it's not like it should be _against_ the rules. Dave 20:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

reflist2
See Template:Reflist. What reflist2 does is put in 2 columns, and reflist3 would put in 3 columns. So putting Nabiki's reference list in two columns shortens up the time it takes to scroll through it if it was just one straight list, as well as fills up the whitespace to the right of the list. Lots of large reference lists are formatted into columns for similar reasons.

Not sure if it applies to you or not, but if you aren't seeing a difference, it may be due to the browser and browser settings you use or something else technical. According to the documentation it only works in Firefox at the moment.

"Note: multiple columns currently render properly only in Mozilla Firefox,[1] though the feature is included in CSS3, so it should work for a larger number of browsers in the future.[2]"

Also, thank you for the comment on my talk page --kudsy 13:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

AFD nomination for Items in Ranma ½
I don't know if you know, but the article was nominated for deletion 2 days ago. In view of the issues raised with it, I'm trying to rectify those to justify keeping it (e.g. minimizing plot summary details) and am asking you for help, since you've been making detailed references, that could help out with getting the article properly sourced. -- Broken Sphere 23:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't really have the energy and commitment and energy for more than at most very few adjustments. At the moment I'm quite busy, but I will back you up in the discussion. Couldn't you just start to add a few references yourself in the same style as those I've provided myself (Tilte, Volume & Chapter references) and then ask for delay time to insert more of them? Dave 11:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm busy myself; the thing is, I don't own the Viz translations, which would help in adding manga cites. However, I'm looking at the descriptions and trimming down plot detail where possible.  -- Broken Sphere  15:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I just own the Egmont ones myself and am only motivated to improve the fighting techniques page right now, but if you simply check up your fan-translation chapters and look up the ISBN numbers for the Viz stuff (or use the ones I posted for the Swedish volumes, since Viz may not overlap perfectly with the Japanese editions) you should be ok. It's just notes about the chapters the items appeared in after all. If the censors can be stalled/give you a respite for a few weeks, you could chip off small parts now and then. Dave 14:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't know if you've been following the debate, but the page was recently deleted. :( I've asked the admin responsible for a copy of the page and its talk page for archival purposes.  -- Broken Sphere  18:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Damn, that sucks, and is completely unfair, especially given that only one person thought it should be deleted, while everyone else voted for keeping it. At least by the last time I checked the discussion 2 days or so ago. Why couldn't they simply have waited a while until the problems cleared up? Should I send a complaint somewhere?
 * Btw: Make a wikifarm of it in the meantime. Dave 18:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * TBH, I had the feeling that the article might get deleted in its current state, but have been busy and didn't think it would get deleted so quickly, although it has been a week. As to the Wikia or whatever, I'll look into that when I have more time; something similar was done with Sailor Moon and I'm not sure what they were able to or not able to put on it.  If you have issues with the deletion, I would address them to the admin responsible, but I don't know if you'd get very far.  Until this Wikia thingy is set up, it might be better not to create anything similar in the meantime, as that stands a chance of getting deleted too.  -- Broken Sphere  18:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Service award
Just came across these today. Here's one that you merit, as per. :) -- Broken Sphere  22:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh. I suspect that it's not something to be proud about, but thanks anyway. If nothing else it may get a few overzealous, pompous, irrational butt-ins off my back. ^_- (Most objectors have been reasonably sensible, but that 'President' David Palmer guy actually severely annoyed me) Dave 23:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Btw: Shouldn't you have a higher badge yourself? Dave 23:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have a lot of edits, but, haven't been on long enough yet to qualify for the others. -- Broken Sphere  14:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Lime manga image
Can you get one that shows him better? The Mint one gives an idea of what he looks like, but for Lime it's harder to tell because of his position in it and relative size. -- Broken Sphere 17:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, it had to be good battle shots that emphasised the nature of their abilities (Lime is overwhelmingly strong but doesn't rate nearly as high in speed, while Mint is the opposite), and I think those two were the best ones available, but I'll do another check to make sure. Dave 19:45, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've fixed it. The new one fulfills both needs ok. Dave 19:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Smile


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Re: smile
Hey... thanks! :D Gscshoyru 14:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * And from me, too. :) Happy that I could help. Moonriddengirl 14:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

CrystarB4 edits
He is rightly suspected of being a sock-puppet for JJonz, including that he uses JJonz 'Gaashooru' when addressing Gschoyru, but he didn't vandalise Powers and abilities of Superman or Sentry (Robert Reynolds). He's currently either blatantly trying to bait both you and User: J Greb with harmless and completely pointless, non-vandalism, edits, while feigning 'harmless pacifist' comments, or is simply some unrelated guy doing semi-stupid but harmless edits. Please keep track of whether he does reverts or just adds an 'and' or similar here and there, or he'll lure both you and J Greb into a pitfall/ban. Ridding you of much credibility with the admins with JJonz getting an open market to do whatever he wants/act silly petty tyrant again. Dave 17:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You'll note I've stopped, a while ago, for that reason. I realized. I explained what's going on on AIV, so as soon as a blocking admin gets around to it, he'll be blocked. Then I'll explain myself on the sock report. Gscshoyru 17:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok. I'm sorry if I came across as patronising. Dave 17:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

re:CrystarB4 edits
If, and a mighty big if, if it were just an arguably useful or relevant a word here or there I'd agree with you.

However
 * The user is hitting the same articles JJonz ran through;
 * This spate came right after JJonz2 was blocked indefinitely and JJonz had 2 months tacked on for blatant socking;
 * The edits, as a whole, did hit a point where it could be considered dissipative editing;
 * Based on the Sentry (Robert Reynolds), since he was adding information that was in the same line it definitely moves to disruptive. At least as I understand it.

Your concern though is noted.

- J Greb 19:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the point isn't that I disagree about him and JJonz rather blatantly being the same person, it's that he's currently being a more devious        than I would previously have given him credit for, given his consistent embracement of Lobo as a personal role model. I.e. he's doing a 'nudge-nudge wink-wink, I know you'll get this vague reference but the admins wont' double-play where he's perfectly feigning victimhood to get fallback for when admins quickly browse through his history the next time. I.e. he's blowing a few sock-puppet vandal identities, while keeping one of them officially 'pure' and hopefully getting all of us out of the way in the process, before his ip has time to get perm-banned. Sacrificing a few pawns to gain an extra queen with much looser restrictions.
 * He's without a doubt the by far worst and most detrimental wikipedian I've ever encountered. Exactly the type of vandal that is very hard to handle, since _everything_ he does is deliberate lies, distortion and censorship, without adding anything of value whatsoever, and he's relentlessly using the loopholes to get away with it. Dave 22:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey... not to discredit what you're saying here... but the admins are a bit smarter than that. They know it's a sock. Socks are desperately hated, oddly enough. And after seeing what they can do, I begin to understand why. So don't worry about it... they will assume good faith about what you were doing.
 * P.S. you're a regular contributor, not a vandal fighter... there are some really, really evil people who wish us harm. This guy is pretty bad, though, seeing as stayed under the radar for this long. Poke them and they show their true colors, it seems... Gscshoyru 01:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: barnstar
Hey... thanks! :) Gscshoyru 15:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. Although I noticed that you already had one afterwards Dave 15:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The more the merrier! ;) Gscshoyru 15:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Character images on main Ranma page
I've seen the discussion regarding these on the discussion page and the deleting admin's reasoning was what I suspected when they were pulled last night. Personally I somewhat agree with the reasoning because 1) those characters already have images on their own article pages and 2) the images were taken from Furinkan.com, some of which I've replaced based on an older message left by the webmaster months ago. If you look at other anime articles, they don't tend to have character pics on the main article space, saving these for a list of page or those characters' respective page -- Broken Sphere Msg me 20:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Minor Ranma character image reduction
Since an admin's tagged the main minor characters page as possibly containing too many fair uses images, as Derek and I discussed here, I'm going to start going through this and the manga-only and anime-only pages and pulling images for the characters with the smallest writeups. If you disagree with some of the pulls I make, add them back in before they get deleted as a result of being orphaned. TBH, I was expecting like this to happen eventually as I saw what happened a few months ago to the Naruto character pages. However I think it's better that we start pulling images where applicable and at least we were somewhat warned about it first, as opposed to someone else going in and pulling them all. Broken Sphere Msg me 15:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Silver Surfer
I deleted your POV statements on the SS entry again. The Surfer did not prove to be weaker than the Hulk in SS #125, Defenders #2, or IH #95. In SS #125 the Bannerless Hulk (a physically stronger albeit less durable version) proved incapable of physically harming the Surfer.


 * He didn't harm the Surfer, or at least not significantly, but the latter was thrown around without anything to set against him except for force-blasts, and those didn't do any damage to the Hulk either. From my perspective you're the one being incredibly POV.

The Hulk was treated as a non-threat by the Surfer the entire issue, at one point the Surfer allowed the Hulk to attack him to better analyze the Hulk's energies.


 * He was thrown around like a rag-doll without having anything to set against the hulk hand-to-hand.

In Defenders #8 no strength comparison can be drawn and your interpretation is dubious at best, the force bubbles effected the mentality of everyone in them, only the Hulk's rage allowed him to continue to struggle.


 * No everybody else was drained of energy. Hulk was the only one still capable of breaking free by getting madder and more powerful.

In IH #95 both the Surfer and Hulk were weakened, however the Surfer proved to be a threat not only to the Hulk, but to the Hulk along with his Warbound -- which have proven to be extremely powerful characters in their own rights as evidenced by WWH. The Surfer decimated the Hulk hand-to-hand in that issue and the Hulk only incapacitated him through a well executed plan which included a distraction.


 * No the Surfer didn't decimate him. In the final one-on-one combat, the Hulk pounded him to the ground into unconsciousness and cracked his hide as far as I remember, but I'll re-read the issue to check.

Do you not recall Heroim's statement to the Hulk? You show your Hulk bias on this one, the Hulk pounding relentlessly on a Surfer while he was on his knees in the process of thanking the Hulk is no proof of any physical superiority. In fact, I can make the case for just the opposite because the only scene in the entire issue where the Surfer and Hulk physically locked up it was the Hulk who was sent to the ground and got up bleeding. The Surfer was also back on his feet just panels later after the undefended beating by the Hulk. Like I said in my edit summaries, the Hulk has not proven a strength superiority to the Surfer in any of your referenced issues. Continue to make the changes I will continue to revert them.


 * So it's ok for your completely unwarranted deleting of that the Surfer had been extremely powered-up and leeched the Hulk's power on the one occasion when he matched the Hulk's strength, and that Hulk managed to overcome the strength of a 10x more powerful than normal Thor with a single arm when far more enraged (the Surfer was completely outmatched when the latter entered this warrior's madness mode), but not my far more accurate entries. Gotcha. Continue to do POV changes, and I will continue to revert them. Dave 16:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, after checking up the current layout I don't have any objections. It simply states that the Surfer can increase his strength to Incalculable levels, which he can. What I objected to was the completely unfounded "the Surfer can power himself up to insane Hulk levels". Dave 16:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I re-read Hulk #95, and the battle rundown went as follows: The Hulk greets Surfer as a friend, Surfer sucker-punches him full force to the head with a mace. When Hulk is still in a state of great surprise to be attacked by one of his perceived last friends (which he states out loud) the Surfer follows up with another hard blow. Hulk is still conscious and apparently unharmed, but the warbound attack Surfer on their own. Given that Korg was the only one of them who was moderately formidable at this point in time (Miek hadn't mutated, Hiroim hadn't received the old power and was strictly stated as a 1-ton level warrior, Ihloe didn't have a power-armour and was strictly an expert fighter human) Surfer swiftly kicks the crap out of them. Hulk and Hiroim attack simultaneously, the latter distracting the Surfer to let the Hulk land a blow, destroying the slave-disc. Surfer thanks the Hulk and is pummelled into unconsciousness by the still enraged usual friend, but wakes up 2-3 minutes afterwards and frees everyone else. You're right it's not a good gauge. The only thing we're shown is that Hulk can beat the Surfer unconscious with a few hits, and both were weakened at the time. The Defenders case is definite however, and in SS #125 the Surfer didn't seem able to compete through physical force, didn't manage to harm the Hulk with his blasts, but likewise wasn't hurt (or at least not significantly so) by the pummelling he received. Dave 17:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The Surfer never tried to compete through physical force in SS #125, he was attempting to help the Hulk the entire issue. He did comment that he could easily disintegrate the Hulk if he desired to, however.  Defenders #8 provides no strength comparison whatsoever. If you want to use IH #95 as evidence of the Hulk's physical superiority, I can make the same case for a Doc Samson physical superiority over the Hulk since he has K.O.'ed the Hulk with a single sucker shot.  TheBalance 17:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The Surfer only boasted that he could, that's completely irrelevant. He was attempting to fight back through force-blasts (which made no damage) but was thrown around like a rag-doll on a physical level. He stated himself that the current Hulk was stronger than the one he 'matched' (through severe cheats of power-up and draining) in issue #250. If I remember correctly this was also at a time when his emotions were virtually shut off, and his compassion was considerably more limited. But I'll try to find and re-read this one as well.


 * In issue 95 the Surfer was the one doing the initial sucker-attacks when the Hulk was completely open and didn't expect it, similarly to how Doc Samson took out the old far less powerful Byrne-Hulk (a man whose stated goal was to depower the Hulk to a level far below Thor) but the Surfer failed to take the Hulk out. The Hulk didn't sucker-punch him to nearly the same degree, since the Surfer was already into the battle, and was aware of the Hulk's charge, who then knocked the latter out with a few blows. Afterwards he's been powered-up far beyond this level by absorbing energy from the explosion that destroyed Sakaar.
 * I just re-read it, and the Surfer actually explicitly screamed "You must be stopped" and blasted away full force without any effect. Dave 16:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * "Full force"? Please show me where that is indicated in SS #125. Once again, more useless, biased, unsupported POV estimations with no basis in what actually saw print. TheBalance 17:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Screaming "You must be stopped" at the top of his lungs would certainly be taken by most as that he was doing his utmost to stop the Hulk.
 * "At the top of his lungs?" This just keeps getting better and better.  TheBalance 14:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh yes certainly. See your "it was never stated that the Surfer was powered up in issue #250" reference above, when this was the most repeated phrase during the story, or your refusal to admit that the Hulk currently has a higher base level than he's ever had, despite that this is the most repeated statement in the story from virtually every character. Pot meet kettle. To return to the topic: Quote: "Your heart is a cauldron of the darkest, most savage and repugnant emotions known to man. You are periliously out of control Hulk..." Zoom out to an airline view several hundred meters away. There is a globe of energy at least 200 meters wide, blast flying out of it as the Surfer unleashes his power. The Surfer's voice booming in bold text, with the speech-bubble with two additional outlines of plues and black to emphasize it, despite the faraway distance: "And you must be stopped." Zoom in to the Surfer blasting away at the Hulk but not succeeding to hurt him. As usual I do have solid reasons for my deductions, whether you agreewith them or not.
 * You have yet to prove the Surfer was "extremely" powered up when he caught the Hulk's fists and held them. Powered up, yes, "extremely so" a POV estimation as I have maintained from the beginning.  You're just not getting it, your interpretation of events is just that, your interpretation.  There was no indication the Surfer was extremely' powered up when he caught the Hulk's fists in Hulk #250.  The was no indication of the Surfer being physically outmatched in SS #125, nor was there any indication the Surfer "tried his hardest" when blasting the Hulk in SS #125 or that the Surfer yelled "at the top of his lungs".  And so on....  TheBalance 17:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The "top of his lungs" bit has already been proven given that the voice was bold + extra blue circle emphasis + extra black circle emphasis even at a several hundred metre distance. Of course it could be argued that he could scream even higher, agreed, but it's was certainly extremely high. Given that he nonetheless screamed (this we can at least agree on) "You are dangerously out of control and must be stopped", with an accompanying "awe"-moment (surrounding energy manifestation) and blasting Hulk several times over going by the stray force-blasts, I think you can agree that it would be very far-fetched to say that he wasn't trying hard under those circumstances.


 * However after rereading it I agree that there is no _certain_ indication that Surfer was physically outmatched, just because he was thrown around like a rag-doll. Excepting the massive force-blast barrage, he was essentially strictly passive/defensive. However, when the Surfer opting to use these instead of his fists Hulk had no trouble grabbing hold of him and doing so. So it's a definite "maybe so, maybe not, no go". In any case agreed on this point as well.


 * The only things we were shown in Surfer 125 and issue Hulk 95 was that Hulk can withstand the Surfer's force-blasts, and can knock the Surfer out for a few minutes with 3 blows. That we can also agree on.


 * As for the power-up in Hulk 250, "extremely" is of course relative to what you consider extreme, but it was explicitly stated several times that his powers and strength now increased in direct proportion to his rage, and that his rage against the barrier was boundless. To me that's "extremely" powered-up.


 * Come to think of it there was an official Marvel Role-playing game a few years back (much, much later than the old incarnation) which had much better power-gauges than the regular handbook (going much higher, and replacing the silly "class 100" scale with "this guy can lift a bus, that guy can throw an ocean liner). In it Thor and Juggernaut were listed at level 19 strength. Surfer at level 20, Thanos at 22, Destroyer at 24, Hulk starting at 20, but going up to 30 when sufficiently      . I've long since lost it, but maybe there is a site displaying the stats somewhere?


 * Btw: I restored the lost text from yesterday. It seems like you accidentally omitted it during a double-edit. Dave 18:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * In Defenders 8 what was explicitly shown was that all the Defenders were being drained of energy from the same contraption and the Hulk was the only one reaching a high enough power-level to break free despite this handicap. This was pretty damn explicit, much like your previous attempts to censor the far more incriminating circumstances in Hulk #250, ignoring that Hulk has been shown to reach at least 20 times his calm level to push warrior's madness Thor towards the ground, which pretty much makes your argument ridiculous, and falsely stating that Hulk was teamed up with all his warbound when attacking, who with one exception were very low-level at this point. The only help he received was a distraction from Hiroim. Dave 13:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The Hulk has never fought a "10x strength Warrior Madness Thor". Peter David made no mention of a 10 fold strength increase in the issue and true Warrior's Madness is an incurable disease that results in banishment from Asgard.  This is not what the Hulk dealt with.  That "10x strength Thor" was also totally powerless just moments before taking on the Hulk.
 * Peter David stated outright in the comic that Thor was in his Warrior's Madness mode, which was stated to increase his strength tenfold simply by entering the insanely raged state later in his book, regardless if it was forcibly triggered due to absence from Asgard, and PAD confirmed that the latter was 10x his usual level in an usenet post, like it or not. The previous powerlessness is irrelevant, Thor was stated to temporarily be fully repowered, but it decreased afterwards, he was hardly powerless however, he retained part of his abilities for a few issues until being fully repowered again. It was a gradual decrease.
 * Another check-up. In Warlock and the Infinity Watch (gawd nearly all those 90's Starlin books were horribly awful when reading them nowadays) it was explicitly stated that Thor did in fact not suffer from the warrior's madness when simultaneously beating up the Surfer and the Watch, he was strictly an insane normal Thor, which would go a long way in explaining how Beta-Ray-Bill could possibly hold his own. I.e. the _only_ time we've ever seen it in effect was Hulk #440, where Hulk oupowered an insane Thor 10x his usual level with a single arm. Again, you entire argument is ridicilous. Dave 16:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The fact that you are arguing that the Hulk was able to match Thor at 10x his normal in TRUE Warrior's Madness only shows how little you know about the character.
 * Oh yes, that must be why I've read the entire Simonson and Jurgens runs. More bland statements in the "if it's the Hulk it doesn't count" "if it's the Surfer or Thor it does". It was explicitly stated that he was in 10x warrior's madness mode. Nothing you've said has changed this and you are trying to hide it behind inane accusations towards someone who has shown far greater flexibility of thought than yourself.
 * Show me, in comic, where it says Thor's strength was multiplied 10-fold in this encounter. There was no such indication in comic.  This was not an example of true Warrior's Madness, true Warrior's Madness is an incurable disease.   TheBalance 14:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Quote: "But the time for words is long past. The Maestro knows this as as he sees the berzerker rage in Thor's face. He has no name for it. Although it is known to Asgardians as the dreaded "warrior's madness". In the end though words don't matter. Only power does. Only strength." Fact: In Infinity Watch #25 it was stated that Thor did not suffer from the warrior's madness during his encounter with Surfer, he was just insane. Fact: In Hulk #440 it was explicitly stated that he suffered from the madness. Fact: It has been stated in Thor's own book that he was 10x his usual level, which was personally affirmed by Peter David. Again, you very easily accept that Thor can get 10x stronger than normal when completely insane, but not that Hulk can outdo it. What I "feel" should be "right" is irrelevant. What you "feel" should be "right" is irrelevant. What matters is what is explicitly shown or stated. As is stated in Thor's own profile page. He currently can enter the warrior's madness and eventually leave it through supreme effort.
 * Berserker's Rage and Warrior's Madness are seperate and distinct conditions. Warrior's Madness is an incurable disease - Fact.  Warrior's Madness is clearly not what Thor was afflicted with in Hulk #440 since Thor came out of it. TheBalance 17:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Fact: The book itself and Peter David have explicitly stated that he was in it. Thus he is now able to enter and leave it at will. Odin said that the madness was dangerous because it would eventually infect all asgardians around him, which might also hold true for the current disease. He also didn't _think_ that the true madness was possible to cure, and that the same held true for Thor's then prevalent psychosis, but was proven wrong about the latter, and later shown as wrong about the former. Perhaps Thor's experience gave him control, due to eventually breaking free from a display of will? Regardless, the explicit statements hold.
 * FWIW, Peter David has also said that the considers Thor to be more powerful than Hulk, and considers both Thor and Hercules peer to the Hulk in raw strength. TheBalance 17:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Whether he considers him more powerful is irrelevant to an issue of strength, and as has been stated in the handbook the Hulk has long started out a bit into the 'class 100' league, just like they do. As for Hercules, he was shown as completely outmatched in Hulk 108 (or was it 109?) where he stated himself that the Hulk could have crushed his skull whenever he wanted, but held back. Hulk can reach _far_ beyond his usual levels when sufficiently angered. That's nothing new.
 * You mean the issue where Hercules let Hulk pound on him? Come on.  TheBalance 14:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed that Hercules tried to reason with him (and eventually succeeding) directly after the initial tussle, but Hulk's blows did far more damage, and to quote Herc (who is a character I like _more_ than the Hulk, probably my favourite in Marvel's stable along with Black Panther, Meggan and She-Hulk) himself, in reply to Hulk's attempt to chase them away by stating that he's a monster: "If that were true Hulk my skull would be as shattered as my pride." Pretty damn explicit. Dave 16:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * In Hulk #250, the Surfer had not yet drained the Hulk of his power when he caught his fists and held them. The Surfer held his fists in order to drain the Hulk's power.
 * He was _extremely_ powered up at the time and was draining Hulk's power from the moment he touched the fists, leaving the latter cured just a few panels afterwards.
 * There was ZERO indication he was "extremely powered up, there was NO indication just how powered up he was. Once again, bias.
 * Uh-huh. Quote: "Anger into strength? My anger at Galactus' barrier knows no bounds! If an infusion of gamma-rays could turn that rage to unlimited power? The nothing could hold me on Earth! Nothing!" "You want to pierce that barrier by adding to your own unimaginable might the sheer raw power of the gamma-radiation. A power that would increase your strength in direct proportion to the rage you feel?" "I think I can invest you with the power you need Surfer, but it's not going to be easy. Much of the machinery has to be adapted to our purposes." "The infuser draws gamma-rays from space. Then, modifying themso that they'll combine with your unique genetic structure.It will bombard you with a massive dose of gamma-radiation until it permeates your every cell. As my power was converted into raw power when I was the Hulk so will yours be. Until not even the space-barrier of Galactus can withstand your rage. But Bruce Banner has overlooked one fact. He was a man before becoming the Hulk whereas the Surfer possesses the power cosmic. Will not the additional power make him like unto an angry god?" "Continue! I must feel the gamma-rays seething within me. Power, pulsing, pounding in every fibre of my being. Power enough to rend a world asunder or to be free of one forever." "I need more power! More!" "Feed the power to me even as I assault the accursed barrier." "Growing angrier at the thought of his imprisonment. Growing stronger as his rage consumes all else! Witness as god gone mad! And if such power can drive a deity to madness what can mere fear do to those made of common clay?" "and the heaven-directed stream of gamma-rays is immediately cut off depriving an enraged Surfer of his added power!" "If it was you who destroyed the gamma-infuser robbing me of its power." "You are the receptable of gamma-radiation which added to what I have already absorbed will give me the power I need to smash through Galactus' barrier!" They briefly slug it out with either budging when Surfer is in this state and then he catches the fists while the power transfer is glowing from the start turning Hulk to Banner in a few panels. I'm seriously beginning to think that you're not for real. SImply a troll having fun at my expense.
 * The Surfer's response to the Hulk's exclamation that no one has ever been able to do that? "No one has ever possessed the Power Cosmic!"  Your assertion that the Surfer was "vastly" powered up at the time is a POV estimation and not supported by the story.
 * Now that's just plain deliberate lying, given that you've just read the issue. The Surfer stated himself that his power was vastly increased in direct proportion to his anger. It was the entire point of the story/the machine the Surfer and Banner built and exposed him with. You're far more POV than myself as usual, despite your arrogant delusions to the contrary.
 * The Surfer only had sufficient power to breach Galactus' barrier after totally draining the Hulk of all his power.
 * Curing the Hulk, by draining the radiation then available in his cells. When empowered the latter draws his power from extradimensional sources. It's not a constant thing, and it only provided the final push.
 * Once again, Defenders #8 provides no direct strength comparison what-so-ever, there is nothing explicit about that issue at all. If you believe the Hulk's strength is greater than the overall power of Dr. Strange or the Surfer you seriously need to pick up a few comics without the Hulk name on the cover.
 * I've picked up plenty, and unlike your own severely biased downgrading/underestimation of the Hulk, I do consider both of them as far more than a match for him if using their vast array of abilities intelligently rather than just slugging it out in close quarters, (although the Hulk did shatter the Cyttorak bands once) but it was explicitly shown that the draining managed to incapacitate both of them, while Hulk retained enough energy to break free. Hulk overpowered Onslaught in terms of pure power, when the latter channeled energies greater than Galactus' and comparable to a Celestial (Franklin Richards + X-Man at the same time).
 * More useless POV estimations. There is no evidence that Onslaught's energies were greater than Galactus', only flawed ABC logic. Franklin Richards permanently burned out his so called "Celestial-level" power reconstituting Galactus during the Abraxas Saga. To this day he remains totally powerless. As for X-Man, the Surfer recently defeated Cable at full potential in direct combat. "Beyond Galactus" indeed. TheBalance 17:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No more useful explicitly referenced stuff. Onslaught has been stated outright to have possessed their combined powers along with Xavier's and Magneto's. He created a second sun and Franklin was stated by Ashema to have power rivalling her own. All completely verified facts.
 * He's currently set to slug it out with Zom, who is at the same level. His power is in rapid flux from time to time, that's the entire point of the character, despite your completely blindsided perspective.
 * If you think the Surfer's comment in SS #125 was a "boast" you are also mistaken. The Surfer was completely devoid of emotion at the time and he even stated that it was just an observation in the response to the Hulk asking him if that statement was a threat.  :::::::His being devoid of logic severely counteracts your argument that he was trying to help the Hulk or holding back in consideration. Just because he made a statement still doesn't make it true. On a purely physical level he was shown as outmatched, resorting to energy-blasts to defend himself, and it was stated outright that the Hulk was now far stronger than the one he 'matched' when severely powered-up.
 * The fact that you try to argue that the Hulk didn't receive help from the Warbound during his battle only shows your incredible Hulk bias. TheBalance 15:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That's rich coming from you. The rundown above explicitly shows that the Surfer made two sucker-punches when the Hulk was completely unprepared/not expecting them, using a bludgeon in his hand, increasing the force of his blows, didn't manage to hurt or knock out the Hulk.
 * The hit caused Hulk to bleed, indicating damage. Wrong again.
 * As I stated right below, _beyond causing temporary pain in his jaw_. Not anything further whatsoever. He was still completely awake and not even dizzy.
 * beyond causing him temporary pain in the jaw, and aside from Hiroim (who was just above Captain America level at this point in time) the Warbound strictly attacked the Surfer on their own, also explicitly shown.
 * As Hiroim stated, if the Surfer was allowed one more pass they were all dead. This was a weakened Surfer who was unable to utilize the Power Cosmic due to the obedience slug.  Take that as you will.  Your bias is apparent.
 * Hiroim's assessment is irrelevant, as was the Surfer's that he could disintegrate Hulk when he later did his best and failed. Excepting Korg (who is Thing-level), the Warbound were pushovers at this point in time. The Brood was a spawn not a queen, Elloe had no armour, Hiroim no oldstrong power, Miek no metamorphosis. As I've always said this was a battle of strength (and using the board as a shield) alone. Hulk was just as weakened, and taken completely by surprise. Your inability to listen to reason even after I've completely crushed your every argument basically makes you one of the top 3 most blindly and zealously biased wikipedians Iäve ever had the displeasure to encounter. I.e. you're wasting my time.
 * The Hulk managed to knock the Surfer out with 3 rapid punches in succession, only using his fists, when the latter was prepared for them but stopped defending himself.
 * The Surfer was totally unprepared and in the process of thanking the Hulk for destroying the obedience slug. Wrong again.
 * No he wasn't. He was in the middle of a battle. That does not equal attacking somebody using a bludgeon when they are completely unprepared. Not fair but not the same. I don't see why you're even arguing this point as I've agreed dthat this issue isn't a particularly good reference.
 * Not a completely unprepared sucker-attack, but also not fair. So unlike yourself I'm not immune to reason or changing my mind, again showing that you're far more biased. In any case the Hulk used to start at mere Thing level when calm and currently he's stated to start considerably into the 'class 100' range, and able to increase his strength many times over, hardly the level when the Surfer could match a slightly angered 'just above the 100 range'/'equal to Hercules' version.Dave 10:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The Hulk's current "power up" is hardly relevant to the issues that played out in the past which is what was under contention.
 * No, what has been in contention the entire time was your assessment that the Surfer is as physically strong as the Hulk, which has been explicitly shown as ridiculous, especially given the "warrior's madness" and Onslaught affairs, but also through Defender #8. The other two instances are more uncertain. SS #125 strictly showed both of them at some point trying their best to hurt each other and failing to do so. Hulk #95 strictly showed both of them weakened. Surfer hitting Hulk with two bludgeon-enhanced sucker-punches The power-up is a fact, frequently referenced, hardly worthy of quotation-marks. That you are even unable to admit this with all the very explicit references during the entire crossover is quite extraordinary.
 * I suppose the constant reiteration of the Hulk's "power up" is an attempt to console yourself since it is obvious you are a rabid Hulk fan-boy.
 * Flash fact: My self-esteem doesn't hang on this, or approval from your typical delusions of grandeur Internet lunatic. It's a hobby. On the other hand I'm very easily provoked by your kinds sheer stupidity and in-your-face arrogance. It's a severe character flaw.
 * Once again, your Hulk bias shines through.
 * Uh-huh, that must be why I think the Surfer is far more than a match for Hulk if he doesn't just stand there idiotically exchanging punches and regular force-blasts.
 * I have well-founded reasons for all of my views, and have never been "rabid" in terms of reason alone. I like the character, but plenty of others as well, and have never let that get in the way. You've shown far greater bias regarding the Surfer. It shines through that when the Hulk gets ridiculously powerful moments it somehow "doesn't count" for you, i.e. the warrior's madness and Defenders issues. You have still not managed to counter any of my more important points, simply ignoring them while I consider, evaluate, accept or pick apart all of yours. Your statements of my bias are irrelevant distraction from this fact. As virtually all people who have debated me can assess, I generally change my views if I consider that the other party has a point, even if it's an unreasonable blowhard. You have consistently been unable to admit anything, simply ignoring the points and restating your feelings on the issue. Again you are incredibly arrogant, blinkered and I am apparently wasting my time on you.
 * The Surfer has also since had a "power up" BTW.
 * He has only appeared in Annihilation and FF since Planet Hulk as far as I'm aware. Was he powered-up in the former? He didn't seem more powerful when fighting the FF, but if this has been explicitly stated it will be unconditionally accepted. Dave 18:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I also suggest you pick up Tales to Astonish #92 - #93 for the first example of the Hulk being outclassed by the Silver Surfer. TheBalance 17:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Read it, but it's just as irrelevant as Loki being an even match in those days. He was far less powerful in those days and has shown vastly greater abilities on multiple occasions. Dave 18:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Editor issues
I've noticed this several times with some of your edits. Usually you're good to catch it, but it seems a few of your late ones got through. I think I got them, but you may want to look them over again to ensure what I put in was what you intended.

If possible, I'd advise against using that editor, or at the least see if you can find some options on it to remove the word blocking. Derekloffin 03:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It happened again? I thought changing my browser would take care of it. Thank you very much for the help in any case. It seems to mostly strictly block out Taro's last name. Dave 12:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pulling the images on the Ranma character fighting techniques page
31 is better than the previous 53, so hopefully this will hold if scrutinized, so thanks for your understanding. If we can pull out more, even better, but additional pics shouldn't be added in. Broken Sphere Msg me 18:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem at all. This works fine for me. In worst case we could modify it a bit more. Please change the parts where the layout is unsatisfactory, and if you could find somebody to help with copying and pasting references from the images that would be even better. Dave 15:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, right. As usual all mentions of Taro's last name were omitted from my last revisions. Possibly only Ryoga, but I think there was another one as well. :\ Dave 15:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

me]] 17:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Editor issues
I've noticed this several times with some of your edits. Usually you're good to catch it, but it seems a few of your late ones got through. I think I got them, but you may want to look them over again to ensure what I put in was what you intended.

If possible, I'd advise against using that editor, or at the least see if you can find some options on it to remove the word blocking. Derekloffin 03:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It happened again? I thought changing my browser would take care of it. Thank you very much for the help in any case. It seems to mostly strictly block out Taro's last name. Dave 12:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pulling the images on the Ranma character fighting techniques page
31 is better than the previous 53, so hopefully this will hold if scrutinized, so thanks for your understanding. If we can pull out more, even better, but additional pics shouldn't be added in. Broken Sphere Msg me 18:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem at all. This works fine for me. In worst case we could modify it a bit more. Please change the parts where the layout is unsatisfactory, and if you could find somebody to help with copying and pasting references from the images that would be even better. Dave 15:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, right. As usual all mentions of Taro's last name were omitted from my last revisions. Possibly only Ryoga, but I think there was another one as well. :\ Dave 15:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Ranma items page
I have it in my user space, but no, it's just sitting there still. Broken Sphere Msg me 17:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, that's too bad. Have you contacted some semi-benevolent editors? Dave 17:02, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Nope; other than you, me and Derek, do you know of any other semi-regular editors who work on the Ranma pages? I wouldn't worry about the items so much as trying to improve the existing pages.  -- Broken Sphere Msg me 17:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What was that girl called? Dave 18:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah right, Kudoshido. That's her handle. Sorry. Dave 17:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hulk (comics)
The Hulk has demonstrably, confirmably, unquestionably destroyed enormous amounts property and created enormous amounts of destruction countless times through the decades of his comic-book stories. If you believe this is not so, please call for an WP:RfC. --Tenebrae 23:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Before going that far, I've created a discussion link at WikiProject Comics/Notice Board. --Tenebrae 23:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The Hulk has gone on 4 actual rampages over the years. After being turned into a mindless state by Nightmare. After his body was left without his mind, by Doc Samson. After his mind was severely impaired by imbedded shrapnel from a grenade, and he saw it as a sacrifice to make him a target rather than allow the entire world to go to war. After he took a gamma-bomb to the face and went insane. The copy-Hulk controlled by Tyrannus also went on a rampage. Excepting this, and the villainous Gray Hulk, all the instances I recall are that somebody attacked him and he acted strictly in self-defence. The "Onslaught" event spliced his mind. In this deranged state he once "took over" an island for a few days, to signify a point to the army after they kept attacking him despite giving them a literal "line in the sand". So no, beyond the usual superhero battle property destruction while defending themselves and bystanders against attacking villains, the whole "Hulk regularly goes on unprovoked rampages" bit is basically an urban myth. If mind-control counted it would count for any hero forced to do something against his or her will. This was not the case for Superman when he took over the world, and this is not the case for anybody else.


 * Hulk has also repeatedly sacrificed himself to save many billions of humans or aliens over the years. Your zeal to classify him as an "anti-hero" or "villain" severely signifies that you're not matter-of-factly segmenting him between incarnations, which I modified. That you likewise simply categorised his seeking of justice for his people as revenge, likewise doesn't convey the more complex situation. So no "countless times" (math teachers these days...) only goes if you mean it in the same way as general slugfests. Dave 15:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I've asked an admin to take a look at the talk page and article history, and to give us his take on the changes and on consensus. Thanks. --Tenebrae 17:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * And what does this admin know about the character? Nothing? And this "consensus" has this been backed by a single actual reference rather than bland opinion that appeared after your very transparent attempt to bait for attention by misrepresenting my views above? Have I even had the chance to enter the discussion for more than an hour before you've taken the cowardly way out and not allowed me time to make my own case? Have you even been able to actually counter a single point rather than playing with words and trying to get somebody else to handle the argumentation for you? Have any of the ones you've managed to interest do so? You're certainly a very talented strategist and "I'm oh-so innocent no matter what I've actually done" actor, I've got to give you that, you'd make a "good" lawyer, but cutting to the meat of it the only thing that matters and, as always, will immediately convince me, is matter of fact references. Dave 17:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Your edit of 17:57, 18 September 2007 appears to address both your and the other editors' concerns. Thank you. --Tenebrae 18:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It seemed succinct enough. It neither implies "rightness" or "wrongness", they consider him a potential threat (which he evidently is), not stating that he's regularly wantonly destructive and threatening human lives without external influence (which he evidently doesn't), and likevise not stating that he's wrong or right in what he does (personally I think they should just have presented the evidence for various courts or at least chosen a battleground outside of the city), just that he's convinced that he's in the right. In any case he apparently won't manage to go through with actually killing them, but it remains to be seen what happens. Dave 19:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Threading etiquette
In regard to the problem with how you responded to the multiple editors at Talk:Hulk (comics), you method screwed up three things: - J Greb 20:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Formatting and continuity of other editors' comments. When an editor hasn't opted for bullet points, either by writing complete paragraphs or using enumerated points, it's because they are putting forth a complete, coherent comment. Politeness would be to answer, or rebut under the complete comment. In cases where points are enumerated, it's better to reference the number or numbers in your response rather than interrupt the formatting and screw up other editors' option to respond in kind to the original comment.
 * 2) What exactly the other editors said. By breaking up the comment, you leave latter editors the task of piecing together who said what with out being able to fully trust the signature lines.
 * 3) What exactly is attributed to you since you didn't add a signature line to each one of your comments.
 * I tried to insert a signature at the end of responding to each editor, and always prefer to discuss each point one at a time. It's what me and others have done in the past as the most efficient way of "cutting to the grist", as they (to me) don't present coherency, but several separate points (or accusations) but I suppose I could try your way. It's just that it generally turns much harder to keep track of (and thus answering) all their arguments, and I prefer to address every single issue. Still if other people's minds work differently than my own in this regard, I suppose I'll have to adapt. Dave 20:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Anime character articles
I was checking my list of contributions (Yeah, I do that sometimes) and saw we once talked about what it would take to make "Ryoga Hibiki" a Good article. By Quasirandom's initiative, discussion began a while ago on creating a guideline for character articles.

If you're interested in participating, go here.--Nohansen 11:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Nah, from what I've seen we'd basically need to butcher almost everything from the articles to make them 'good', i.e. completely non-in-universe/adapted for non-entertainment articles or ones with a great social reference impact and lots of guidebooks/almost no information at all. I'd rather keep all of them B-class. It serves the readers looking for information much better. I appreciate the thought though. Dave 17:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Revised FUR requiring article parameter
I've updated my uploads because I started getting the notices; I did pull many of the movie ones because they only appear that one time. Also, after I orphan my own images I tag them with to indicate that it's OK for them to be speedy deleted; this way I don't get bombarded with orphaned image notices. Broken Sphere Msg me 17:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I've updated the FURs for only those images that had them in all the Ranma articles. The bot notices seem to affect only these for the moment. I didn't add FURs for those images without them. Broken Sphere Msg me 20:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Just to clarify, did you handle _all_ of them (the entire battle records pages etc. All in all it would make up over a 100 images for the entire Ranma section) or just the ones with warnings (for the time). If you need it, please check Derek's page for a long list of warnings. He's uploaded almost as many as I have. Quite a lot of them may also have less 'fair use justifications', but just copying the modes for the ones I've uploaded should handle that as well. Best Wishes and thanks a lot for the help. Dave 08:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Need to do better
I think you need to do some reading regarding:

1. Wikipedia policies and how to talk to other editors. You just failed at Civility. Also, try and avoid non-thinking edits. You kept a sentence with wonky grammar that I just fixed. Asgardian (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Uh-huh- A statement of fact about blatant censorship and view-pushing is incivility, but doing so in the first place is ok, and I should be a smarmy deceitful      , i.e. say "quite frankly", or "if I may" before, and limit my logical-analytical thinking in the process. Or for that matter make disparaging comments about my intelligence and matter-of-fact editing is also considered ok, if done with a certain panache, rather than honest discussion. Got it.


 * As for sentence structure that's never been my aim at Wikipedia, and remarking on it is a nonsensical diversion. It's to correct factual errors, and outright lies. You see the problem with several mainstay comic book editors (but not manga ones, they're generally a nice bunch) is that according to my experience several mainstays are seemingly virtually immune to logic. I can have superior arguments and foundations for my conclusions in every respect, and it will usually be met with underhanded means and ignored rather than re-evaluation. I.e. insults, demagogue lies to gain 'support' by people who have no idea what's going on beyond what the person in question has told them, twisting rule-quotes to suit personal ends (if it's an 'unfortunate' brief fact reference to a work it can easily be countered with 'copyright infringement', if not by 'original research', cummulatively countering any Wikipedia edits whatsoever, no matter how rational.


 * Yes, that is exactly what I am talking about. "Outright lies" is far too emotive, accusatory etc.


 * I go where my logic takes me. I have extremely bad experiences with the pack mentality in this particular community. Beyond the above there is a rampant use of sockpuppets rather than standing for your own edits. But all right. You in particular haven't been a problem, unless you've used a sockpuppet I'm not aware of, and you've actually been upfront, so I apologise. It's still cherry-picking though, and the hypocricy of making backhanded, inproperly veiled insults, rather than as a consequence of matter-of-fact observation, doesn't sit well with me. Speaking of which, another example would be would be easily to slam me with a "sarcasm" if I said "you're not exactly lacking in the hypocricy department" instead, even though the statements are identical. Again, conveniently twisted around out-of-context paragraph quoting is the biggest problem with Wikipedia, since anyone can push anything if they find an appropriate clausule.

Asgardian (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

2. The Marvel Universe in general. Galactus IS the balance between Death and Eternity. Just read his entry, then that of the Living Tribunal. Then go and read Fantastic Four vol. 1, #257.

Asgardian (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I read that story, and thousands of others. I've got his history pretty much memorised. As I said Galactus is the balance, not the equal. His power had to combine with Uatu's to even summon Eternity. No feat or battle he has engaged in has ever remotely indicated this. It's wishful thinking hyperbole at best. Dave (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Try Silver Surfer vol. 3, #10. Equals.

Asgardian (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Will re-check, but he has never ever been shown anywhere close to that scale, whether ranked far below in Infinity Gauntlet, battles with Mephisto, (from Stan Lee himself none the less) In-Betweener,(Englehart, much like issue 10 if I remember right, which contradicts your single dubious reference, rather than outright demonstrations) a Watcher in the "Last Galactus Story", teamed with the Stranger in "Infinity Gauntlet", consistently described on a scale of power with the Watchers, Odin and the Stranger, and the Celestials being higher in Gruenwald's official OHOTMU, beaten by Tenebrous and Aegis in the same "Annihilation" arc you brought the quote from (which I didn't censor), stood up to by regular Thanos, fought on an even level by original Tyrant, easily taken out and then fully repowered by Gravity, or referring to Eternity as father (which is the way I understood Thor#168-169 as well) and not even being able to summon him by himself, he's never ever shown remotely that level, while Eternity, Infinity, Oblivion, and Death are consistently stated as having practically unlimited power, with certain M-bodies more easily handled... then again that is an aber. Dormammu killing him would actually place him at Galactus level if not using the "M-bodies only have as much power as they manage to synch up" failsafe...


 * In any case, he's a quasi-physical tip-of-the-scales, while they are wholly conceptual and by nature higher-dimensional/levels of infinity above anything, and you can't limit the evaluation to two cherry-picked instances, when the actual power-demonstrations, and larger amount point in the direction that he's one among several, rather than a single character comment that he's "the most powerful in the universe". That's just an in-universe opinion, much like "Sentry has the power of a million suns", not demonstrated fact. Dave (talk) 17:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Thought I'd bring this to your attention
There's an editor named TTN who has been going around merging standalone fictional character articles into the list of x characters for the series that these characters belong to on the grounds that they don't meet the notability guidelines or cite enough real world information as per WP:FICT to stand on their own. He's also redirecting individual episode articles to the list of x series episodes, although this doesn't really affect the Ranma articles. This was first brought to my attention here. He hasn't touched any of the Ranma ones yet, but he did merge a whole lot of the Urusei Yatsura characters back into the larger list. This pattern of editing has been brought to the Arbitration Committee which accepted the case but hasn't made a ruling yet. Nonetheless I think it would be worthwhile to start digging up secondary sources for the Ranma characters online, in print, or on DVD commentaries say, to get enough real world info into the articles so that they can pass scrutiny, as TTN is still proceeding with his merges or otherwise questioning the notability of these types of articles. -- Broken Sphere Msg me 06:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be really awful, but I'm not sure how to do this in regards to specific characters. I did in fact go through, and add the available cited information from, all the available Takahashi interviews, as well as the Memorial book, which is as much as I know of. I don't see his rationale, as there is usually a definite limit to how much one can dig up from these in regards to fiction. As long as the article accurately and neutrally cites from the appearances of the characters there should be no reason to merge them together for no good reason. 'Space-consuming' would be a pretty irrelevant issue after all. The more accurately informative for those interested in the work the better. A better option would be to categorically create initial real-world referenced head pages for those simply interested in this aspect. The interest itself shows the great appreciation dozens of millions of visitors have for the more extensive variants. Why such a need to completely exterminate this feature, beloved by so many, even if it may not be a personal cup of tea, rather than restructure, or prohibit an GA or A rating? By extension, should all B-level articles be destroyed? At the very least individual pages for the most noteable beloved characters, frequently in works viewed in many millions of copies, should be allowed to remain. Dave (talk) 19:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It would be hard for me to condense the whys and hows of what TTN's been doing, as the record is already long, so it's better to read for yourself to get an idea of what's fully involved. I've proposed the creation of a Ranma Wikia on the Ranma ½ talk page as a counterpart repository of info that is currently here.  Derek has already put in his thoughts.  I may shop the idea around to the other big Takahashi projects, InuYasha, Urusei Yatsura, and Maison Ikkoku for a combined Takahashi Wikia as there should be enough contributors from all 4 of these series to warrant a Wikia creation and continued maintenance.   Broken Sphere Msg me 19:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, based on the Talk page, there exists very widespread, well-worded objection on the subject, definitely not consensus. We should look into the option of compressing all the used real-world references into a co-existing page, to provide both options. Dave (talk) 20:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)