User talk:Paulley/Archive 6

Question
Hey Paulley, who are the guys wrestling in your pictures?
 * Answer

* Chris Andrews - VPW School of Excellence star trainee * Robbie Everest - VPW School of Excellence trainee (great kid) * Kris Kay - Rising British star from Gosport * The UK Kid - Trained by Shawn Michaels * Eamon O'Neill - Irish rising star * "Filthy" Phil Powers * Joel Redman

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gyah3.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gyah3.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Master Man.PNG
Thanks for uploading Image:Master Man.PNG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 00:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I forgot to add the date a few times today didn't I, lol! -- Paulley (talk) 00:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC) (see i can do it lol)

Fair use rationale for Image:RBWWelterTitle.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:RBWWelterTitle.jpg. 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 Wikipedia articles 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter
You are receiving this because because you are listed as a member of the Professional Wrestling WikiProject. If you would rather receive a notification of the newsletter sent to you, please add your name to this list. If you no longer wish to receive any notice of the newsletter, please add your name to this list. Delivered: 23:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Happy Birthday
--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * FROM YOUR FRIEND:
 * No problem. Its my job to wish those a Happy Birthday. And Happy Holidays. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Vicky Swain
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Vicky Swain, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Vicky Swain. Jeepday (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nagasaki.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Nagasaki.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Pit Bulls
An editor has nominated The Pit Bulls, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 15:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SpecialK.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SpecialK.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Spider-Man villains-related
Is it necessary to merge some of the villains into the List of Spider-Man enemies page even though they had more than one appearance? When it comes to Boar, Beta Ray Bill had help from him to defeat him. Rtkat3 (talk) 10:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:El gran luchadore.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:El gran luchadore.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Cheers, L  A  X  06:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Initiative07.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Initiative07.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:NWE 1024x768.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:NWE 1024x768.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thor
Well...we really have to go with "definates" as opposed to "if's and maybe's". Casting is notorious for constantly changing, and is usually not considered canon until the film's in the can. I think the mention of the cameo is good as it is sourced and happening, but that's probably enough for now.

Asgardian (talk) 16:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Red Hulk gun.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Red Hulk gun.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rivercottage logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Rivercottage logo.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 14:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Albion
I'm afraid I can't help place the handbook. If you have tried but failed to find it then I'd suggest either remove it or comment it out with a note for people to be more specific about which one they are referring to.

I agree the Corps will need looking into but we don't have much to go on. At the end of Die By the Sword there are only Albion, Captain UK and Justicer Bull but as they are the main Captains in the fight and the Corps it may mean they have were the token presence at the funeral. We could switch the list to include them, then have an unconfirmed list and an ex-members list. However, trying to second-guess plot is tricky and it might be we just have one list and explain their current status as it appears to us. After all they could easily pull something out of the hat to do with Jaspers reality warping power - while I think it would b tricky to bring back someone who was turned into a Fury and then blasted into bits by other members of the Corps, you can never know. So either just have 1 list or three - the top one containing only the 3 we know survived, a big unconfirmed, and a past members one. I think either way is OK - at the moment the current two lists don't really work. (Emperor (talk) 20:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Ah now - on the Comic Book DB the other Albion profile suggests they are featured in the 2006 handbook #1 . Could that be the source referred to (possibly in error)? (Emperor (talk) 20:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Yes that has come up before - the list is so long I didn't spot them. It touches on the main issue - there are alternative versions of Captain Britain, there are members of the Captain Britain Corps and there are alternative versions of Captain Britain - the three groups interesect but aren't the same thing. For example a number of the Captain Britain Corps are alternate versions of Captain Britain but not of Braddock (as the list makes clear), the Age of Apocaylspe version of Braddock isn't Captain Britain and equally the Zombieverse and Ultimate versions of Captain Britain are not in the Corps (as far as we have seen - problematic with the former - although I may write to Marvel about the possibility of a "Captain Britain Corpse"). So remove those and any other alternative Braddocks/Caps who aren't shown in the Corps as they are already dealt with elsewhere. (Emperor (talk) 22:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Side Note - Hey. Not that handbook.  The premiere hardcover one released in May 2008 (#2 is from Baroness S'bak to Crimson Dynamo with the first part of a "complete" alternate earth designation list).  It pretty much updates the Corps (with a four page spread not including Braddock's 3 page spread in the same book) with the real names of the known members, which earth they are from, who is currently classed as a corpsman and who is formerly one, a picture index, an updated history and a brief who's who and what their Earth is like and the first appearances of the listed known ones.  Hope that helps StarSpangledKiwi (talk) 11:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * How about I save us both the trouble and do you one better? :p. Back in mid-May, I pretty much added the currents and formers to the article already, so for the sake of simplicity, I've "scoured" the history of the Corps and just dropped them off here :P.  I think it may be a tad easier for you to work off this maybe.  I'd say just wipe out what's below once you've done what you need to.  So, below is the list from that handbook of the current and former Corpsmen.  Because the blurbs of almost each Corpsman will take a tad more time, if you want I can add them in once you've upgrade the article or just put them here and you can reword it so you/i/we/the wikipedia doesn't get slapped with a "plagerism" thingy?  I would do it now but I have work in less than 8 hours, so have to be all peppy and shite for that (and also downloading Dr Who since we don't get the latest season here yet lol) :p  that and I'm in a "it's Sunday night and I'm lazy" mood.  Yay me :)   StarSpangledKiwi (talk) 09:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it does take place after X-Men: Die By The Sword but before CB & MI13, so I'm guessing now that Braddock is classed as former. No worries about the helping hand.  Never had to "team-up" with someone on here before. :)  Once you need the additional info, just drop me a line. StarSpangledKiwi (talk) 22:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Just to say good work on this everyone - I was a bit concerned this might get into WP:OR territory but tracking down the source (and putting in the hard work to get things in line with it) have really helped cover al the bases. (Emperor (talk) 18:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC))

Hi Paulley
It's been an obscenely long time. How've you been, man? Cheers,  The Hybrid   10:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Eh, can't complain. My schedule has been erratic lately, but that always happens to me at random times during the year.  The Hybrid   04:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

CB & MI13
Or we could just ask him ;)

He dropped in here and would probably be amenable to a few questions as his latest blog entry is a de fact letters page - although I suspect the answer to big questions will be "wait and see". That said it seems to be lacking in any good "letters" so far so we might do well!!

Also note this blog entry has more on the reception, including getting featured in a political cartoon and hearing Jon Culshaw reading Gordon Brown's lines out on the radio. (Emperor (talk) 22:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC))


 * The world is full of False Emperors - there will be a reckoning. (Emperor (talk) 22:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Indeed. It'd make the title look a little silly after all. OK then questions. I was thinking of hitting him up with:


 * Dear Mr Cornell (this is a letter column after all),
 * Thanks for the opportunity to write in and thanks for injecting some life into the UK Marvel heroes scene as it needed something a little different. As it is early days I thought I'd pitch some broader questions and hopefully avoid falling into fanboy territory.
 * When you do your research is it all cold, hard fact-mining or do you try and get under the characters skin and let them speak for themselves?
 * Is there any specific interpretation of Captain Britain that you felt best gelled with your take on him and/or was there some little fact/trait that helped click the character into place in your mind?
 * How far ahead do you have things plotted out? Also how far ahead are the completed scripts that are sitting on the desks at Marvel?
 * We have to assume Captain Britain is returning (after all his name is on the "door") but are there any plans to split the series and have him go his own way or did the Die by the Sword events put him in a place where his multiverse commitments are less and he can stay in a UK-based team. As I don't expect (or want) you to show us all your cards a yes/no/maybe would be fine ;)
 * As you are introducing British Marvel characters (both Marvel Comics and Marvel UK, the latter at least hinted at) is there the possibility that some of these characters might be spun-off into their own series (mini, maxi or ongoing)? Christos Gage's Union Jack mini-series was great for what it was (Gage can clearly write superheroes well, as his work at Wildstorm shows, which has a lot of people excited about the titles again), but it seemed an odd choice of character for the plot and you could have parachuted another character in and changed the setting and the story wouldn't have changed much - a properly utilised Union Jack still has a lot of potential, I'm just not sure that was the best setting to show him off. Equally there are a lot of us Marvel UK fans hoping to see a bit more life in the old characters - even if a return of the imprint seems a remote dream. A long rambling question for which you may be only able to reply yes/no/maybe/dunno.
 * How closely do you work with the artists? As Kirk isn't British do you have to give him extra background material (compared to, say Trevor Hairsine)?
 * The reception has been overwhelmingly positive - is this a great relief or more pressure to keep the quality up?
 * Cheers


 * I thought I'd keep things broad while try and tease out a few details future plans (although as I say he is probably keeping his cards close to his chest). It also leaves the door open for you to ask more specific questions if you want. Thoughts? Too much? (Emperor (talk) 23:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Also fun supplementary question:
 * How big do you think Captain Britain is (the non-nuked version)? Alan Davis presented us with a big guy but not unusually so, in the party scene at the start of Die by the Sword he is the size of a cow and a very big cow - this cow in fact. It hadn't struck me until then but I has always felt while he wouldn't measure up against some of the vast American heroes, he always had an edge due to mystical powers, a fancy pants suit and probably liberal supplies of tea (and probably the kind of pluck and gumption that built an Empire, minus all the oppression).
 * Or something like that. (Emperor (talk) 00:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC))
 * Good points - I'll fish out a bit from a review where they comment on his Mr Kipling gag. I'll leave the rest for a follow-up as my list of questions is already a little lengthy ;) (Emperor (talk) 13:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC))
 * Good one!! I'll polish up what I've got now (and throw that in) and get it off in an hour or so. (Emperor (talk) 14:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC))
 * Questions away - seems he is getting a good response. See how it goes and you can jump in with more specific questions (if you want). (Emperor (talk) 03:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC))
 * That is great - I've added a supplementary note but might follow-up with something more substantial when the sales estimates are out (although the numbers might be slightly skewed by the second printing not seeming to be out yet). I might be more excited than I already was (which I thought was difficult) - 12 issues guaranteed and with good sales and what he said about having a lot of ideas for story arcs, it sounds like this could be around as long as he can keep going (other work commitments possibly putting a dent in things). What might be interesting is, as you say, looking at what he doesn't address - no mention of any spin-offs (despite the series giving thn a polish and a higher profile). (Emperor (talk) 15:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Yes I think I saw a press release on that but got a bit confused as it seemed to suggest either the second printing of the first edition had sold out or it was the first edition of the second issue, or something, possibly both. I might try and find it and reread it to see if it makes more sense now. (Emperor (talk) 20:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC))

Geldoff
Thank you so much. I couldn't remember for the life of me what he had done in USM. I thought it was going to have to wait until Monday when I could get to a library. Rau's Speak Page 23:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I intend to help as well, but only after I get my hands on the issues. My collection covers #46 through current. It's kind of a "what the hell??" situation... Rau's Speak Page 08:23, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh yea, definitely the best ongoing. I started reading them at the library with number one, but I had read all of their issues so I started to buy them. I can't wait for the next arc to start. Ultimate Venom rules, he even inspired the new cartoon one. Rau's Speak Page 20:44, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea, I never finished the game. It glitched and I couldn't see the boss I was fighting so I never got to finish it. Rau's Speak Page 22:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

MVP
Tricky one on MVP - I don't read the series so can't be much help there but I did find a few bits and bobs: interview at Comic Book Resources and review at Newsarama. Remember that, as long as it is not controversial you can include things like blog posts from creators about what inspired the characters, etc.

And volume 2 is a good trade paperback - one of my favourites (although I think I have most of the originals too). (Emperor (talk) 13:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC))

Wisdom article
It strikes me we might want a Wisdom article. Despite the name it is really the first major outing for MI:13 and it would make more sense to have it on its own and we can have their history link through to the Wisdom limited series and then CB&MI13. I was drawing together reviews and sales figure to make a "reception" section and it strike me as odd because the reception wasn't his reception but the trades so seems a bit odd. (Emperor (talk) 13:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Good plan - I'll start the sandbox later.
 * Nifty link - I had seen the Blade/Spitfire cover but that is a great piece. I'll have a proper read later and see what can be added to the Spitfire article. Also Mindless Ones? Interesting. (Emperor (talk) 15:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC))


 * Good stuff - I'll have to see if someone uploads it to YouTube or something.


 * Anyway I have started the Wisdom article in my sandbox: User:Emperor/Sandbox/Wisdom (comics). The simplest division of labour would b if you started on the plot (keep it tight and focus on story and character development - see if we can't find some good quotes from Cornell) and I'll sort out the reception (as I've read through everything and have it all sorted in my mind). I can then pitch in with the plot and we can do a few run throughs to iron out any wrinkles.(Emperor (talk) 17:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC))


 * No worries I've been caught up elsewhere - but will pitch in later. (Emperor (talk) 12:39, 28 June 2008 (UTC))

Red Hulk
I agree with your edit. Very good compromise and fits nicely in that section better than having its own.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apoklyptk (talk • contribs) 13:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Geldoff and out-of-universe perspective
Actually writing out the issues makes it out-of-universe? Huh, I didn't know that. Well that makes that a helluva lot easier. I only ever did that if I felt it looked better written out. Thanks for pointing that out. Rau's Speak Page 13:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And by adding the issues you turn most of that into out-of-universe. That almost seems like cheating. I think I like it. Rau's Speak Page 14:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Green Hulk vs. Red Hulk
Who won the battle between The Green Huk and The Red Hulk or was it a draw? The K.O. King (talk) 20:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I have two more questions I would like to hear your opinion on...(1. In a drag out brawl who do you think would win between the two Hulks and why? (2. Who do you think would win in a battle between The Hulk (Green) and Superman and why? The K.O. King (talk) 00:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Thamks for giving me your opinions on my questions and I think they are great. If you don't mind I always give my opinions... (1. I think The Green Hulk would beat The Red Hulk intelligent or not, because in issue 2 of HULK it was stated that The Red Hulk emits Gamma Radiation and if you'd ever read the Future Imperfect Hulk comic series (involving the Hulk's evil future self Maestro) the Hulk grows stronger as he absorbs radiation and the madder the Red Hulk gets the more radiation he emits and the more radiation The Green Hulk gets the stronger he will get, plus The Green Hulk has no limit to his strength (the madder he gets the stronger he gets) Red Hulk does. (2. I think Hulk could beat Superman because The Hulk has no limit to his strength, Superman does, The Hulk heals, Superman doesn't, Hulk has also beat people much stronger than superman (The Abomination and The Juggernaut, whom he stopped from moving foward which was seemingly impossible) and The Hulk has beaten people faster than Superman (Can't think of their names but my dad knows). Sorry for the long message. Please tell me of what you think of my predictions on the fights. PLEASE!!! And thank you. The K.O. King (talk) 14:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

O.K. even if The Red Hulk's strength does increase with anger, his gamma radiation output does as well, which would make The Savage Hulk even stronger (not to mention his strength increasing with anger as well). I know The Hulk has been beaten before (he was once killed by the Abomination), but he has always been beaten by superpowered villians or heroes, Superman has been beaten by non-powered villians (Lex Luther). The reason for the questions is I just saw you liked Marvel comics and thought I would ask you questions. The K.O. King (talk) 23:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheech (wrestler)
Hi, you have put a deletion proposal on the above article which expires tomorrow - any chance you could hold off for another week while I merge this article with Cloudy (wrestler)? Cheers --Apsouthern (talk) 15:01, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, I'll have a look over the weekend and see what I can come up with--Apsouthern (talk) 15:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That's right, they were also Lacey's Angels for a while in ROH, and Up In Smoke in Chikara. Also The Miracle Ultraviolent Connection is 3 people as it also includes Brodie Lee so there should be plenty of info knocking about for them--Apsouthern (talk) 18:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Merlin/Merlyn
It is a tricky situation that I have possibly not explained well.

Merlyn is the usual "Merlin" in Captain Britain who appears to be a gestalt of all the other Merlins from the Marvel Multiverse - we see a scene in (I think) Alan Moore's Captain Britain when he walks along and morphs between various aspects including an insect one and a historical one (the main Merlin (Marvel Comics)). This is another Merlin aspect who appeared in Doctor Who Monthly so is technically a Marvel character but there is some suggestion there might be licensing issues (as Merlin also appears in the TV series so the comic character may not be Marvel's to do with what they like).

The important thing (as Cornell touches on) is that this Merlin is also Merlyn and vice versa and Merlyn is also all the other Merlins in Marvel. We could imagine that Merlyn is a kind of Hyperdimensional Merlin and the others are lower dimensional reflections of this. This would mean that Merlyn could have a fragment of Fury enter him and then Merlin have it leave.

Just guessing but I suspect there is a broader plan at work - possibly the reason Die by the Sword was so clunky was that it had to fit so many things in to transition things for two teams and set up some longer term storylines, which we haven't yet seen play out. We haven't seen Merlyn so we don't know if he (and all the other Merlins) is fixed and there is certainly something afoot with the Furies. It might be, for example, that this Merlin is fixed while the gestalt Merlyn is still mad and carrying a fragment of Fury. Do we even know why he was mad and attacking Roma in the first place? I am trying to work that one out. If not then I suspect there is a whole story both before and after DbtS that has yet to be told.

I also wonder about the Doctor Who links - it might be they are thrashing out some kind of deal to use some of the characters as the specific stories referenced are all rather close in the comic. Time War was #47, 51 and 57 while Merlin appears in #60 and then the "Tides of Time" #61-67. It could be we are in for some time-travelling adventures later on (Time War also bringing in the Special Executive, so lots of interesting toys to play with - especially for someone so knowledgeable about Dr Who. Perhaps a crossover of some sort?)

So that is my take on it (well the first two paragraphs - the second two are speculation and extrapolation). He might be using the Dr Who Merlin because he liked the look of him but the name dropping seems to suggest otherwise, but it might be. As long as they aren't too explicit they can probably get away with it (or they are being cagey because they already have this in the pipeline) due to the ominversal nature of Merlyn (interestingly most explicitly expressed at the end of DbtS which might suggest they are clarifying his situation to set the foundations for an adventure - one thing to consider, if it is a time-travel story could that explain Merlyn's odd behaviour if DbtS? He has certainly manipulated people to a higher end and Time War was fought backwards in time - more guesswork).

Hmmm I seem to have gone off on one again but the hints offer lots of possibilities which is interesting. In summary it is wise to point out this is Merlin, not Merlyn, as there is a difference between the two - it is just unclear why this specific one but it may be you can use whichever Merlin you like as they are all effectively Merlyn. Or there is a deeper reason for this. (Emperor (talk) 22:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC))


 * I just checked out his blog for what he says on this and a few people flag the Merlin/DWM thing and Paul Cornell doesn't address the issue. Cards being played close to his chest? We'll see. I've add Merlin (Marvel Comics) as it helps round out the other appearances. Anyway one to watch. (Emperor (talk) 22:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC))


 * Yes but Merlyn is all Merlins - the relationship is unclear but it appears that something that happens to Merlyn can therefore happen to the Merlins. I saw that edit and it is difficult to know how to address the situation as it is Merlyn, but it isn't or it may be that they have used the excuse to give him a makeover at the same time they have given Captain Britain one (might be worth a mention somewhere too as Paul makes it clear he isn't going to get his helmet back any time soon). So it might be that we are seeing Merlyn with the look of the other Merlin as opposed to that Merlin aspect. It may be worth trimming it down to just a mention that it is an aspect of the gestalt we saw earlier - it might be something throw away that someone else will pick up later and do something completely different with or it might be part of a bigger plan (Claremont passes the baton to Cornell who adds a bit and passes it on). We'll have to wait and see.


 * It also might be worth a direct question about the Higher Evolutionaries (from Time War) getting mention just before the Dr Who Merlin aspect appears (both drawing on stories in Dr Who Monthly within a year of each other). Might be coincidence but as they always say "write what you know" and he knows Timelords and time-travelling adventures and the Special Executive link clearly links that exact set of stories with Captain Britain (and it isn't like Excalibur haven't had time-travel adventures - which I believe the current Clan Destine hooks into too). He would have been 15 in 1982 and a lot of writers go back to their teenage comic roots (Grant Morrison is certainly turning up a lot of obscure Silver Age characters in his run on the big titles at DC). I suspect if you do ask the question he either might not activate it or side step the question - which itself would be a sign he is playing a longer game here. (Emperor (talk) 00:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC))


 * I think those edits you've done help - it is a tricky one to try and explain but I think that is the best approximation to what is being portrayed with what we can prove. I suspect there will be further clarification further down the line but we might be waiting a while for that and this at least links the bits together and puts the relevant explanation in the relevant place so someone should be able to get the information they need. (Emperor (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC))

Request to move article Weapon Omega incomplete
You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Weapon Omega to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:


 * 1) Added    at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article.  This creates the required template for you there.
 * 2) Added  NewName  to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
 * 3) Added  PageName  to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 05:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of WWE World Tag Team chamiopship
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you.  S R X  14:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Red Hulk.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Red Hulk.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

CB's SI over
Damn. I'm not going to be able to avoid the spoilers on that one am I? I have the sales for #2 so will update later today and I'll see if I can find issue #4 reviews. (Emperor (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC))


 * Thanks for the warning!!


 * I've dug out the reviews and cribbed a few notes so will try and do a larger update later. Also found the trade - probably makes sense to have this as a thin one (better than lumped in with some other SI stories to make up the volume, or doubling up the reprints as they did with Nova and Annihilation). He was talking about doing longer story arcs so I suspect they'll be about trade length. (Emperor (talk) 15:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC))

Thor vs. Red Hulk
In the battle between The Red Hulk and Thor how did The Red Hulk Win? The K.O. King (talk) 21:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

What does Loeb mean and how did thor lose? The K.O. King (talk) 11:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I must agree with you on that one. I mean first he kills the Abomination...with a gun (the Abomination was bullett proof), second he makes Rick Jones the A-Bomb, third he makes the Red Hulk beat The Mean Green Hulk (which is impossible), and now Thor gets beat by Red Hulk...so I defiently agree with you. I would respect if you didn't use cuss words on my page though. God Bless! The K.O. King (talk) 23:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Loeb wants to make The Red Hulk seem invincible and All-Powerful (which he isn't) I mean, and no offense intended, but he stinks at writing Marvel storylines. The K.O. King (talk) 02:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 20:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Mad Jim Jaspers.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mad Jim Jaspers.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 12:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)