Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Iron Man/archive1

Iron Man

 * Nominator(s): The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 03:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

When engineering genius Tony Stark was kidnapped and forced to build a weapon, he turned the tables on his kidnappers by designing a powered suit of armor and fighting his way out. With this new armor, he pledged to fight evil as the superhero Iron Man! First created by Marvel Comics in 1963, Iron Man has since become one of the company's most popular characters, in no small part because of his central role in Marvel's films. In the 60 years since Iron Man was first created, the character has appeared in countless comic book stories and other media, commenting on issues like Cold War politics, alcoholism, and technological progress.

There's little precedent for comic book superheroes as featured articles. The topic area is rife with articles that depend on primary sources and go into excessive detail, both things that I had to address when I began working on this article. I've cleaned out the comic book citations entirely, replacing them with analytic, scholarly sources, supplemented by reviews, news articles, and character handbooks to fill in the details. I'm hoping that by refining this article to FA standards, it will create such a precedent for other articles in the comic book topic area. The big ugly alien ( talk ) 03:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Image review from Nikkimaria

 * Suggest adding alt text


 * File:Iron_Man_(circa_2018).png needs a more expansive FUR. Ditto File:Tales_of_Suspense_39.jpg, File:Iron_Man's_armors.jpg


 * File:TalesOfSuspense48.jpg: source link is dead. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Alt text added, source link replaced, and non-free use rationale improved for File:Iron_Man_(circa_2018).png. I don't see any missing non-free use information for File:Tales_of_Suspense_39.jpg or File:Iron_Man's_armors.jpg. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 04:59, 17 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Generally speaking, the more non-free content is included, the stronger the rationale required for each. These rationales have no empty fields, but they are also not strong enough to justify having so much non-free media. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Drive-by comments from BOZ

 * Comment: "I'm hoping that by refining this article to FA standards, it will create such a precedent for other articles in the comic book topic area.". I hope so too. :) There are a great many comic book characters, superheroes having dominated the field for most of the media's existence, that have this kind of potential; right now at GA we currently have Captain America, Joker (character), Norman Osborn, and Spider-Man which have the most potential for FA, and several others that are GA but may not be suitable for FA, and easily dozens of other characters that could be GA or better if someone could find the time and energy to find the sources and basically rewrite them from scratch. Batman and Superman are former FA articles, so it would be nice to see a comics character back up there. BOZ (talk) 06:21, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Comments by ZKang123
I thought the film was being reviewed. That said, I shall review this article to the best of my ability.

No problems with the lead I can find.

Creation and premiere:
 * "superhero comic books" – would it make a difference to just say "superhero comics"? Just want to make it more general, succinct and referring to the genre.
 * "designing an unlikeable character and making him likeable." – suggest changing the connector "and" to "while"
 * "Lee described the national mood toward Vietnam in which Iron Man was created as" – This chunk is worded rather weirdly. Would suggest "Lee described the national mood toward Vietnam at the time "when..." "
 * "Heck continued as the primary Iron Man artist until 1965, as Kirby had obligations to other Marvel properties." – "Until 1965, Heck continued as the primary Iron Man artist, as Kirby had obligations to other Marvel properties." I find the initial wording a little confusing as it seems the reasoning was due to his tenure until 1965, and not exactly Heck's tenure itself.

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 02:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi ZKang123, just checking if further comments are on their way? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:17, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I will get back to this. A bit busy these days with other things at the moment.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Support from Aoba47

 * I would briefly mention Stark's relationship with Patsy Walker (aka Hellcat) in the "Romantic Interests" section. I believe it is notable enough as they did have an annual publication together (here).
 * Interesting. I would think that was significant, but the sources that cover this area don't mention her.
 * There is this source from Syfy about the relationship, but there does not seem to be too much high-quality coverage about it. It seems that the relationship is not particularly major or noteworthy in the overall scope of Iron Man's story so I will leave it up to you. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * What is the rationale for the infobox image choice? It is an awesome cover, but I could see the external pieces of armor potentially confusing readers who are not as familiar with the character design. I'd imagine that there would be a clearer image of just the armor by itself so why not go for something like that instead? Just to be clear, I am not saying you need to change it. This just came to my mind when I first saw the image.
 * This was the image that was there when I started editing the article. I had the same reservations, and I skimmed through Iron Man cover art while writing the article to see if there were any good alternatives, but nothing stood out to me. I'm sure there's something good out there however.
 * Thank you for the response. That makes sense to me. I do not have a good alternative in mind either. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I do think File:TalesOfSuspense48.jpg has a strong enough justification for inclusion. The red-and-gold armor is already shown in the infobox and the all gold armor is already shown in File:Iron Man's armors.jpg so this image does not add much and could be removed without losing anything.
 * Agree, removed.
 * This part, (As a superhero, his armor suits), is grammatically incorrect. It reads that the armor suits are the superhero.
 * Fixed.
 * Errol Flynn is linked twice in the same paragraph. There are other instances of duplicate links, but I believe they are intentional as those kinds of links are more accepted now. Would that be the case?
 * Flynn definitely should not have been linked twice, and there were a few other accidental ones. I chose to use duplicate links in the character biography since it's a single narrative explanation, but I have no issue removing them if you or any other reviewers object.
 * Thank you for the response. I do not have any objections. I can understand the purpose of links in the biography as I can imagine readers jumping down to that section separately to read through. The links there would help them in that regard. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I am uncertain about this part, (and for much of popular fiction). It is a bold claim to say that telling a story about an alcoholic is "unprecedented" in "popular fiction", particularly when there are no limits put on the type of media or the location. I just do not think this claim is true. I could believe the "unprecedented for a major comic book hero" claim though.
 * I imagine the author meant it in some context, but after looking at it again, it doesn't elaborate enough to where I feel comfortable using it like this. Removed.


 * Thor, Wasp, and Scarlet Witch are each presented without the "the" in front of them in the "Fictional character biography" subsection. I am accustomed to always seeing them with the determiner used, but are they referenced without it?
 * It can go either way I think, but I'll add "the" to Wasp, Scarlet Witch, and Hulk since that's how it is in their respective articles.
 * Understandable. You would know best or at least better than me. I am just used to seeing them with the "the" attached, but it is up to what you think is best. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Would Iron Man's roller blades be worth mentioning in the article? It may not be notable enough or too trivial, but it is a sillier aspect of the character that I do enjoy.
 * I don't believe I encountered it in any of the sources, unfortunately.
 * Understandable. Thank you for the response. It is likely one of those things that would be discussed amongst fans as a silly fun fact over anything else. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The section on Iron Man's reception seems rather short. I can appreciate going for a more summary-style approach for a character who has such a long history and will only continue to have more stories in the future, but it does abruptly jump from his reception on his debut to his MCU revival. I am talking about the "Cultural impact and legacy" just to be clear. What about his reception in the time between all of that?
 * I clarified that part of it is in the 1970s. "General" reception for a character like this is hard to come by beyond "he's a popular superhero".
 * That makes sense. Thank you for checking this point. I understand what you mean as I'd imagine a lot of the discourse falls into the same conversations. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * From my understanding, Iron Man was not a super popular character prior to the MCU, which is why the character was not sold off to other studios as was done with the X-Men and Spider-Man. The lead does mention that the MCU helped to popularize the character, but I think it would be worth mentioning this more explicitly in the article. That would be of course only if I am correct.
 * That's my understanding as well. Currently the lead says and the cultural impact section says . Are there other aspects that you have in mind?
 * Thank you for including the quotes. I saw the part in the lead, but for whatever reason, I had read over the second bit in the article itself without fully processing it. Apologies for that. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Make sure to italicize titles in the citation titles. For instance, The Invincible Iron Man should be in italics for Citation 59 and Iron Man should be in italics for Citation 210. There are quite a few instances of this so I'd make sure to carefully go through the citations to correct it.
 * Done.
 * It is not required for a FAC, but I would still encourage you to archive your web sources just to avoid any future headaches with potential link rot and death.
 * I never got around to figuring out how to do this automatically.
 * There is a bot for it (here), but I have not used it in a while as I had difficulty with it later on. Again, it is not required for a FAC so I would not worry about it too much. I just wanted to leave it more as a note than anything. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I hope these comments are helpful. Once everything has been addressed, I will do a more thorough read-through of the article. Best of luck with the FAC. Aoba47 (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , I've addressed everything so far. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 01:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the responses. I will look through the article again tomorrow if that is okay with you. I hope you have a great rest of your day. Aoba47 (talk) 17:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Apologies in advance for this admittedly super nitpick-y note. I am unsure about the word "iconic" in this part, (he builds his iconic Iron Man armor out of scrap), from the lead. I am not denying that the look is iconic, but at least in the beginning, wouldn't this reference the silver armor (i.e. File:Tales of Suspense 39.jpg) and not the iconic red and gold look?
 * Good point. Removed.
 * Would it be worthwhile to include the civilian names for Black Widow and Hawkeye in the lead? I ask this because War Machine, Rescue, and Ironheart are all presented with their names so it may be nice to have some consistency. It would also signify which of these characters are being discussed, although I believe Natasha Romanova and Clint Barton are the ones that are most commonly associated with these roles.
 * Added.
 * This may be a bit contradictory to my above comment, but is Rescue such a prominent and definitive aspect of Pepper Potts to be named and linked in the lead as opposed to just linking Pepper Potts? Is it done this way to match the other names in the listing?
 * Yeah, she's not known primarily as a "superhero". I've removed her from the lead. Maybe if "Rescue" catches on more in a few years then she can be listed with them.
 * Would it be the Sub-Mariner or is just Sub-Mariner also correct? Apologies for harping on this part.
 * That's how it is in his article, so I've added it.
 * It may be helpful to link inking in this part, (While inking the series), as well as other comic-specific words to help readers who may be less than familiar with them or want to read up on them. I cannot remember if other similar words are used in this article, but if so, they be worth linking.
 * Linked. The only other jobs I see are writer and artist, which probably don't need links.
 * This is more of a clarification question. Marvel has recently started a new Ultimate Universe. Has there been any stories with Iron Man or a new version of the character in this?
 * A quick search doesn't show anything significant. Another thing where maybe it will come up in the next few years.
 * Is there a reason why the Hoskin source does not have page numbers?
 * Yes, it's an encyclopedia-type source that uses entries by character instead of page numbers.

Here are some additional comments. I hope they are helpful. I will look through the article again later today. Thank you for your patience. I just want to make sure I look through the article as thoroughly as possible. Aoba47 (talk) 01:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I believe this should be the end of my review. Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * For this part, (Soviet spy Black Widow and American street criminal Hawkeye), do you mean the more specific Black Widow link for the Natasha version?
 * Fixed.


 * I've replied to all of the above comments. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 02:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC for promotion. I hope this review is helpful. I do have one quick additional comment. I would link Marvel Comics, superhero, and American comic books the first time that they are used in the article to be consistent with how they are linked in the lead. It is not a major point though so it does not hold up my support. Aoba47 (talk) 15:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)


 * TBUA ? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:17, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Support from Igordebraga

 * Support Impressive work. Considering the only comic book character FA is Anarky, is good to see one that is worth a promotion. igordebraga ≠ 18:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , just to clarify, you didn't see any details or any aspect that might need to be changed to best meet the featured article criteria? The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 20:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Reading it extensively, could only find one issue, and it's less about the FA criteria than article consistency: the character biography ends on Infamous Iron Man, but the publication history above mentions the series that followed that. I understand that it's because it was the latest story on the ref (Marvel Encyclopedia), yet it still makes that section incomplete. If a reliable source summing up at least Tony Stark: Iron Man could be found, it would be very helpful. igordebraga ≠ 04:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support from PMC
Putting myself down here. If I don't get to it within a week, feel free to give me the gears. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , It's been a week. :) The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 04:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Aaaah it's the gears. Okay, here we go. My FAC comments are always open to discussion, anything that's a hill I'm going to die on will usually be marked as such, otherwise I'm generally willing to be convinced. Suggested phrasings in particular are only suggestions, feel free to ignore or re-revise them. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * I have very little to gripe about here. This is a 7000-word article and the lead is a nice tight summary of the most salient points.
 * "Iron Man's supporting cast has produced" - not sure of the phrasing here, as a supporting cast doesn't really "produce" things, but I can't think of how to replace it. Something like "Many of Iron Man's supporting cast and reformed villains have become superheroes in their own right, including blah blah blah"?
 * Reworded.
 * You have "as well as" in two successive sentences
 * Reworded.
 * "elevating Iron Man as one of" - "into" rather than "as" I think?
 * Changed.


 * Publication history - up to 1970s
 * "Lee was interested in designing an unlikeable character and making him likeable". I think you could say a bit more here. It's not just that he was unlikeable generally, it's that per the source, Iron Man exists as he does - as a billionaire weapons developer - because Lee wanted to pique the presumably lefty audience. It underpins the entire character.
 * Specified that it was a generally anti-war audience.
 * Some context for Howard Hughes and Errol Flynn please, so the unfamiliar reader doesn't have to stop and wander off to find out who they were and why they would use them as inspiration
 * Described them as a business magnate and an actor, respectively.
 * Since you're comparing Tony Stark's visual design to Flynn here, you could probably get away with a photo of Flynn
 * Added. I tried to find an image other than the main one on Flynn's article, but all of the good ones had questionable copyright licenses.
 * "Heck later said that when designing Tony Stark, he was attempting to create "an Errol Flynn type" this sentence is redundant to the first mention of Flynn, which already mentions Heck
 * Removed.
 * Since "creation and premiere" starts in the 60s, it feels odd to have the next section be titled "1960s". Maybe "Late 1960s" or "Early Avengers"? Idk
 * Renamed to Late 1960s.
 * "Some of Iron Man's villains were given new motivations" - not essential, but any interesting examples in the sourcing?
 * Specified "personal motivations", but the source didn't have more than that.
 * Did Friedrich take over from Conway or write for him during his 4-year tenure? It's not quite clear
 * Reread the source, it looks like I had the details wrong there. Fixed.
 * The two sentences about his alcoholism/Demon in a Bottle feel a bit stilted to me. I might condense and combine them, something like: "Their largest change was making Iron Man an alcoholic, an unprecedented issue for a major comic book hero, addressed in the Demon in a Bottle story arc that ran from #120 to #128."
 * Changed.


 * Publication history - 1980s and 21st century
 * Since you're very picture light in the whole publication history section, you could maybe throw in some pictures of the more famous writers just to break it up visually? Not mandatory.
 * Added one.
 * "having the character again fall into his alcoholism" - "having him relapse" maybe? It's tighter
 * Changed.
 * "O'Neil eventually wrote..." do we know when? The next arc starts in 1987, but it would be nice to know when Tony retired and how long it lasted.
 * Added issue numbers and their publication years
 * "This story blended..." you have "Iron Man" twice in this sentence, you could maybe write around it with "aspects of the character" or similar phrasing but it's not a hill I'll die on
 * Changed
 * "with issue #211" again year might be nice here, so we know how long they lasted before Byrne replaced them
 * I added years for each issue that didn't have context about its release date.
 * "In 1990, Michelinie and Layton stopped writing for Iron Man, and the series was given to John Byrne" - it feels like the middle part is redundant to the bit about Byrne. If the series was given to Byrne, surely the others stopped writing it? I'm willing to be convinced here.
 * Reworded.
 * I might swap the order of the two sentences that start "He did not have" and "During his run". To me it makes sense to say here are the arcs he did, here's the change he made, and here's where he quit
 * Yeah, switched them.
 * "He did not have further interest in the series by 1992" this feels a bit clunky. "By 1992, he had lost interest in the series" maybe?
 * Changed.
 * "The 2014 AXIS event led into the Superior Iron Man series by Tom Taylor, featuring Iron Man with a new reversed personality." in what sense? What caused this change? Did it last?
 * I feel like this is better suited for the character biography section, where I added the details
 * "This series moved away from the developments and deviations" Is there any way you can expand on these? Right now this doesn't give the reader very much. What changes were undone? Why?
 * Added some details
 * This section (and the end of the 1990s section) feels a bit dry, mostly being "and then this guy wrote it. and then they rebooted it. and then this other guy wrote it." It's not necessarily your fault - if that's all the sources say, that's all you have. But if you have anything else you could get in here, I think it would break it up a bit.
 * There isn't much. Iron Man didn't see much exposure in the '90s, and since then they've just kept doing short runs and crossover events.


 * Characterization - Fictional biography
 * This section is quite tightly written, covers the main points at a good clip without getting bogged down in trivia or being too brief. Comments here are basically nitpicks, there's no major concerns.
 * Your link to retroactive continuity is a bit of an easter egg; I might swap the phrase "changed retroactively" from a line or two down to up here
 * Swapped
 * You've dupelinked Obadiah Stane, why not dupelink SHIELD also? Seems useful in this section
 * Linked
 * You link to Armor Wars and Civil War in this section but not Demon in a Bottle or Extremis - any particular reason to link some and not others?
 * Linked
 * "During this time, James Rhodes takes the Iron Man armor." this is ever so slightly ambiguous - takes as in he swipes it from Tony's estate or takes as in "takes up" the mantle
 * Clarified
 * "and he fakes his death" you could probably get away with "and fakes" since I think it's clear who we're talking about
 * Changed.
 * "their real son could be hidden" from?
 * Added "from an alien threat". The full answer is stupidly convoluted.
 * "When several heroes' personalities are temporarily inverted" how or by whom?
 * Added per the AXIS event above


 * Characterization - Personality
 * Organization
 * I'm going to start by apologizing for the amount of commenting I'm about to drop in about this section. The general organization of the paragraphs isn't 100% working for me. Having skimmed the sources, however, I can see what you're working with and it's a lot, and a lot of it is intertwined in a way that feels difficult to separate. This may well wind up just being a situation where there's no perfectly-optimized organization. That being said.
 * I have the biggest problem with para 2. You start out with how Iron Man acts differently depending on which self he's being, then pivot into masculinity, then pivot to his negative traits without really explaining how he represents American masculinity. Then we're into his moral ambiguity and how it helps readers relate to him.
 * This is a bit of a radical change, but hear me out. I suggest splitting para 1 into the "billionaire playboy" stuff and the physical disability stuff. Then move the "acts different depending on which hat" and masculinity content from its current spot to paragraph 1, putting that all under "billionaire playboy" in a way that more clearly explains how he reflects American masculinity. Then with para 2 being now about his injury, the mention of how it threatens his masculinity calls back to what you discussed in para 1. Then you can transition from his health issues into a third paragraph about the rest of his flaws and how they make him interesting.
 * Para 3 is all about his intellect and technology - might the opening sentences of para 1 not fit better here?
 * I'm surprised that there's such minimal discussion of his alcoholism in this section. It's such a big part of his character, it feels like it would be a good place to expand on, but maybe the sourcing isn't there


 * Nitpicking of prose
 * "Iron Man is a businessman and an entrepreneur who constantly seeks to innovate and improve his technology. In this capacity, he is motivated to create and develop technology both for personal benefit and for the benefit of society." You could merge these two sentences for less redundancy
 * "Stan Lee modeled Iron Man after businessman Howard Hughes, and the character shares many traits with Hughes," similarly, second clause is redundant to the first.
 * "making him misanthropic so as not to reveal" I'm not sure this is quite in line with the source. It reads to me like it's saying Tony's reliance on the armor as well as his superhero identity make him isolated from other people. I don't see where he's described as becoming hateful or distrustful of other people.
 * "While he engages in" - you have "engages" twice in this sentence
 * "Stark was a child prodigy, and he graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology at age 15." isn't this more like character bio?
 * I removed this part entirely, just a fun fact that isn't really relevant to the character as a whole.
 * "His form of intelligence is..." this sentence feels a bit knotted up in itself. If you move the MIT sentence, you could combine it with the first sentence and convey your meaning more clearly: "Like many Marvel superheroes, Iron Man has a genius-level intellect, although he distinguishes himself from them by focusing on the practical societal applications of the technology he develops." That does make the following sentence "Iron Man is defined by..." slightly more redundant, but you could trim or combine them too ;)
 * Tacking on to this, ref 105 refers to him as a "philosopher guardian", which is a lovely turn of phrase that neatly summarizes how he acts at his best as Iron Man, and I feel like there's a place for it in the article (perhaps following the bit about how he acts more superheroely as Iron Man)


 * I pulled apart and reorganized the section based on your input and tried to generally make it flow better. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 02:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Themes and motifs
 * "By 1975, Iron Man was an opponent of the Vietnam War.[121] This created a new driving motivation to make up for his past of being too willing to promote violence,[124] and he responded by becoming a philanthropist." I'm not sure the connection here is supported by the sources. Neither Robichaud nor Henebry mentions Vietnam in their separate discussions of Tony's attempts to right his wrongs. Wright kind of does on 243, talking about Stark's vow to avenge the lives lost by warmongers like himself, but he doesn't connect it to philanthropy.
 * Reworded and moved the philanthropy part.
 * "but it was shown as less threatening." I think you need to expand on this for it to be meaningful to the reader.
 * Specified
 * "A second Civil War event in 2016 portrayed Iron Man as an advocate of free will against Captain Marvel's determinism." I recall Civil War I being hugely divisive against Stark which is mentioned in the article; was there a similar reaction to Civil War II against one side or another?
 * To my knowledge, Civil War II wasn't given as much attention and didn't draw any strong reactions beyond "why are the writers doing this"
 * No issues through Technology section
 * "It must be calibrated to the user, and Iron Man has to design the armor specifically for who will be using it, whether it be himself or an ally" - suggest tightening to "Iron Man must calibrate the armor to its specific user, whether it be himself or an ally."
 * Changed.
 * "The armor's primary function was to produce" - past tense - does it not do that anymore?
 * Specified that it was treated. I think it's mentioned somewhere else in the article, but it can be lost among the details.
 * How did Extremis ultimately conclude? Has he still got bioarmor or what? I just realized the resolution is never explicitly mentioned. Maybe here isn't the best spot, but somewhere earlier might be.
 * Added an explanation of why he stopped using Extremis in the armor section
 * That's it for this section, which is overall pretty tight


 * Supporting characters
 * I think you could definitely dupelink all these people in this section for reader ease
 * Done
 * I'm torn here. I understand the need to be clipped because you don't want to be redundant to these characters' individual articles, but some stuff feels like it needs more explanation:
 * Does Pepper still need the arc reactor?
 * I specified that it goes with her Rescue armor
 * Iron Man built her a set of armor in secret, and after finding it she became the superhero Rescue. - why in secret? What was he up to that she had to find it rather than him handing it over?
 * I added some detail
 * Was Rhodey WM before Stark gave him control of Stark Industries and the War Machine armor?
 * Reworded so it's clear he became War Machine afterward
 * "were leadership of" - not sure this works. "were leaders in" maybe?
 * Changed to "held leadership positions in"
 * "Justin Hammer,[71] Shockwave, the Controller, the Mauler, and Stilt-Man." Fragment of a reordered sentence I assume
 * That source specifically supports Justin Hammer, as opposed to the source at the end of the sentence which supports all of them except for Justin Hammer.
 * No, yeah, but the text goes like this: "Stark's application of business as an altruistic pursuit is contrasted with Stane's application as a selfish pursuit. Justin Hammer, Shockwave, the Controller, the Mauler, and Stilt-Man. A focus on terrorism brought villains..." You just have a bunch of names in there randomly, not attached to anything.
 * I would probably mention that Zeke Stane is Obadiah Stane's son
 * Added


 * Cultural impact & other media
 * I'm a bit surprised that for a character with 60+ years of history, there's only 2 paragraphs of impact/legacy
 * This was really tough to find sources for. Most coverage of impact covers Marvel heroes in general instead of specific characters.
 * Usually good practice to mention the year of a film to give context (either in the text or in parentheses after works)
 * Added to the one I saw without one
 * "in the top ten in best Marvel character and best superhero lists." something in here is not right. Maybe try "in lists of best superheroes and best Marvel characters"? Bit simpler anyway
 * Reworded
 * Why did that particular Italian town erect an Iron Man statue?
 * Added
 * No gripes for Other media section

Okay, that's all I have for now. For the most part, the article is really well-written, and there are plenty of places I had little-to-nothing to criticize. My biggest thing is the organization of the Personality section, but as I said above, given the complexity involved, I'm open to discussion. Take your time responding. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * TBUG, how are you doing with responding to PC? It's been two weeks now. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm making progress, including in some areas where I've yet to reply above. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 21:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)


 * , I think that should be everything. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 07:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , thanks for your patience waiting for me to respond. I've reviewed the changes and have basically no outstanding concerns. The personality section in particular reads really smoothly now. The one thing is the Justin Hammer sentence fragment, which I've left a comment under, but it's small and I assume you'll fix it shortly, so I'm a support. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:26, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Oppose by David Fuchs
Recusing to review, comments will be here shortly. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * David ? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Switching to oppose after a review. I think the article's a very good start, but I have issues throughout:
 * The prose just isn't there for me. It's often weirdly structured in ways that make it unclear what the text is trying to say, or is just unnecessarily wordy. Some examples: "Ditko was responsible for only three issues in late 1963, but in this time he had Iron Man's suit redesigned with the red and gold color scheme that became the character's primary image" — "had" shows up constantly in this article for no reason, and here it makes it sound like Ditko got someone else to redesign the suit as opposed to being the primary illustrator and theoretically the one actually doing it? Likewise "Michelinie and Layton replaced many elements that had developed in the series" makes it sound like elements just developed out of the aether and weren't conscious choices. There's a lot of passive voice that doesn't seem necessary, e.g. "and the design was modified by Heck to incorporate gadgets such as jets, drills, and suction cups", or just minor extra fluff like "he seeks out all of the other armors", "Iron Man has himself injected injects himself with the Extremis virus"
 * A lot of this feels like a difference in style preferences, but I've done a few passes of copyediting on the article to remove words. I think a lot of the "had" and similar words help with the flow, but I see where you're coming from. I'm also of the opinion that passive voice isn't as much of an issue as it's sometimes made out to be, but that should be fixed. One minor point, "Iron Man injects himself with the Extremis virus" would be incorrect. He had himself injected, and I reworded so it's clearer.
 * There's some flow issues in the publication history; we get a "creation and premiere" section that goes to 1964, but then we get a heading that says "late 1960s" and doesn't say when The Avengers was started, which adds to the confusion because 1963 ain't the late 1960s, and neither is 1965 by my reckoning. "Growing opposition to the war" and the rest likewise don't have any real temporal signposts. The 1970s section starts with "Over the years, the letters to the editor column in several issues saw extensive political debate" but there's no elaboration. The next sentence is about creative turnover and it doesn't return to the idea of fans debating politics in the issues. A lot of the content in the personality section either is duplicative of content in the publication history, or else feels like it's best put there. Likewise content in the themes and motifs feels like it often should be introduced earlier. ("The armor was gray in its first appearance, but Iron Man gave it gold plating in the subsequent issue"... this is already briefly covered in less detail earlier, but it feels like it belongs there more, and also "Iron Man gave it gold plating" makes no sense.) Ditto the cultural legacy section, the first couple sentences is again just saying the same thing we've heard two times before in brief about the military associations.
 * I've rearranged 1960s info to put it in chronological order. This is definitely something I should have caught before nominating. I've moved up some of the info from personality and themes and integrated it into the publication history. I have regrets about some of that info not being covered in their respective sections, but it works better in regard to organization. I believe that a couple sentences about the military connections are appropriate for the reception section, as that's really the core of his early reception.
 * The fictional character biography lurches from past to present tense; I can understand using past tense for the character background, but going from "This prosthesis is hacked and controlled remotely, causing neurological damage that appears for a time to kill him" (present) to "Rhodes temporarily became Stark's chosen successor as Iron Man." (Past) to "After returning, Stark falls under the control of Immortus, turning him evil. " in three sentences just reads badly.
 * I fixed up the tense in this section, but three changes of tense in three sentences is just another way of saying that there was one sentence with the wrong tense.
 * Why are story arcs italicized in the article when the pages they link to (e.g. "Demon in a Bottle") use quotes?
 * Good catch, fixed.
 * I think the powers/allies/villains stuff is generally too long and should be trimmed. -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 14:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There's no powers section, but I believe that the allies and villains sections are an appropriate length. One review above expressed regret that it was as condensed as it was for length reasons.


 * I've replied to each point above. I'm not going to ask you to get into a WP:FIXLOOP if you still think there are structural issues, but I've incorporated some of your suggestions and tried to justify some others. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 02:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the publication history is much better. I disagree on the length of the fictional, in-universe elements; when the entirety of the cultural impact and legacy can apparently be summed up in two paragraphs, I think it's a little over the top that we need five times the amount of prose to cover supporting characters or villains. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs  talk 21:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I did ask about the short length of the legacy section in my review, and TBUA mentioned he'd wrung all the detail he could out of the extant sourcing. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Comments from Panagiotis Zois
Wonderful work on this article. Given than Anarky is the only comics character article that's FA, it will be great to see this get elevated to the same status. You've done a great job with it; to the point I'm tempted to actually start reading Iron Man titles. My comments will come soon. PanagiotisZois (talk) 00:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Lede
 * According to the first paragraph, Tony was created by the four men mentioned. However, the infobox also includes Ditko. Is that a mistake?
 * Removed.
 * I think it'd be better if regarding his first appearance, it also specifies the date, rather than just 1963; at least include the month. More importantly, the article specifies that although the issue is cover date March 1963, it was actually published in December 1962.
 * Same goes for his first eponymous series.
 * Fixed the year, but I don't think it needs to be more precise than that for something like a comic book.
 * Taking the "Creation and premiere" section into account, a brief summary or the character's background should be included in the first paragraph. That he was created during the Vietnam was an Lee intentionally wanted to make a superhero whose involvement in it readers would find repugnant, yet still cheer for him; maybe adding that Hughes and Flynn served as inspiration.
 * Added a mention of the Vietnam War. Hughes and Flynn seem like relatively minor details for the lead.
 * Regarding "Iron Man was a founding member of a superhero team", I think it'd be better to replace "was" with "became" and "a" with "the".
 * I swapped "was" with "became". But he was a founding member, not the founding member.
 * Concerning the second sentence in paragraph #2, given that it recounts his origin story, it should be in the past tense.
 * Changed.
 * The last two sentences are slightly confusing. I think it'd be better to rewrite them as "Since his creation, the character has been used to explore political themes, with early Iron Man stories being set in the Cold War". It's just that the way it is currently written, it makes it sound like Iron Man was used to explore political themes, but not any more. I guess one could argue that it was only during the 60s that Tony was used to explore "political" themes specifically, and that other non-political themes were then explored with him after a certain point. But thing like "civil unrest" or especially "governmental authority", even "corporate espionage", are all pretty political. Is the implication that initially only political themes relating to just the Cold War were used, and it was only later that Iron Man became about more than just the Cold War?
 * Where it says "later stories explored other themese", should it specify exactly when this other stories started?
 * Rewrote and specified the 1970s.
 * The final section doesn't mention much regarding the character's reception outside of the MCU's influence. Taking the "Cultural impact and legacy" into account, it could briefly refer to the first paragraph of that section, and then go into talking about the MCU; which also shows the impact the MCU version had on the character.
 * I added a mention of that higher up in the lead. I think the lead looks cleaner if the MCU aspect is kept in its own paragraph separately from everything else.

;Creation and premiere
 * Link "anti-war" to anti-war movement.
 * The sections seems to need a bit of a rewrite. In the first paragraph, you provide information that Stan Lee is the one who came up with the concept, and some of the background regarding Iron's Man's creation; great.
 * But then, in the second paragraph, you jump ahead into how the comic where Tony first appeared in, Tales of Suspense, started having the character on each cover. Only to then bring up his first appearance in #39. Is Tony appearing on the cover of each issue something that happened before or after he first showed up in #39?
 * Then, after the second par ends with you talking about how, starting with 1963, Tales of Suspense featured only Iron Man/Captain America stories, you jump back to talking about his creation and how the character was conceived and designed.
 * From my understanding, Iron Man first showed up in Tales of Suspense (TOS) in 1962, then founded the Avengers in 64, and was the star of TOS alongside Captain America. Overall, most of the sentences are well written, but the last two paragraphs need to be somewhat restructured. Having everything from "Larry Lieber developed Iron Man's origin" to "and suction cups" act as the second paragraph, since it's all tied to Iron Man's creation / origin. That his armor was initially gray and then red-gold also relates to that and should be present there. Then you can discuss that Tales of Suspense started as a horror title, before focusing on superheroes, then add that Heck continued as the main artist due to Kirby leaving, and that Lee took over writing duties, that Tony was featured on each cover, and that he and Cap became the main stars of it.


 * , checking in. Did you intend to leave more comments? The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 01:28, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * TBUA ? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello. Yes, now that you've done some work on Tony's creation, I'll look over that section and the later ones. PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Comments will come soon. I'll restart everything, so ignore what I've previously written. PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:05, 24 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Creation
 * First sentence should have a reference at the end, even if it's the same as the one from the next sentence.
 * Same for "introduced as an active player in the Vietnam War."
 * Unless I'm missing something, WP:WHENNOTCITE applies.
 * Link "anti-war" to anti-war movement.
 * Done.
 * For the last sentence, slightly rework it along the lines of "Vietnam during the period in which Iron Man was created", to specify that Lee was talking about the specific time period.
 * Reworded
 * Link Howard Hughes.
 * Linked
 * I'd move the part that Lee "wanted to create a modernized Arthurian knight" after the next sentence. That way, you have two sentences talking about Flynn and Hughes acting as inspirations for Tony's character and physical appearance, and then bring up his armor.
 * Good call, moved it down a sentence.


 * Early years
 * Maybe I'm overthinking things, but the second and third paaragraphs should be switched. That way, you have two paragraphs talking about his appearances in Tales of Suspense, and then get into The Avengers.
 * The chronological order here is a little tricky, but I've switched them.
 * Alright, first paragraph:
 * Link comics anthology.
 * Done.
 * Write Ditko's full name and link it.
 * Then in para 3 write just "Ditko".
 * Also, as Ditko wasn't involved with the character's creation, even if it was his idea to turn the suit from gray to red-gold, his name shouldn't be in the infobox.
 * I removed Ditko from the infobox, and I decided to move the mentions of him to the same place in the section.
 * "Lee briefly delegated the writing [duties]".
 * Also, when exactly did Lee delegate writing duties to others only to then reclaim them? The year should be listed.
 * Added "duties", and I added "initially" because it was upon the release. It doesn't say exactly how long before he reclaimed them.
 * Checking the Marvel Wikia, it seems that Stan Lee co-wrote Iron Man's first appearance with Larry Lieber, and from that point on, he co-wrote the next few stories with other writers, before fully going solo by the end of the year. Interesting to know, as the wording makes it seem he was uninvolved until he reclaimed writing duties. Well, irregardless, the sentence is fine if that's what the source says.
 * I'm curious, Tony's first appearance was in Tales of Suspense #39 in December 1962, where his armor was gray. Did he make any further appearances with that gray armor, or did he get the gold-red one as early as his second appearance? Or was it changed from gray to gold and then from gold to gold-red? Sorry for being anal, and maybe I'm overanalyzing things, but they are slightly confusing.
 * This should be clearer now that I've moved Ditko's info.
 * Much clearer now.
 * When you say that "Heck continued as the primary Iron Man artist until 1965", I'm guessing you're talking about his appearances in Tales of Suspense and not The Avengers, right?
 * Also, if Iron Man didn't receive his own comic until 1968, then the next sentence probably needs some reworking. You write that Ditko "became the artist for Iron Man", written in italics, which would suggest Tony already had his own comic.
 * Correct, and I've removed the italics.
 * "Iron Man's recurring nemesis, the Mandarin, first appeared shortly after in Tales of Suspense #50 (1964)". If the previous sentence mentions that Heck wasn't replaced by Kirby until 1965, then how could the Mandarin's appearance in 1964 be viewed as "shortly after"?
 * This should also be clearer now that I've moved Ditko's info.
 * For paragraph 4, the last two sentences can be merged, especially if they have the same source.
 * Also, "incorporating Marvel's fictional intelligence agency S.H.I.E.L.D." lacks a source.
 * "Lee rewrote some of Iron Man's communist villains with personal motivations independent of their communist allegiances". I'm guessing this mean Lee rewrote some of the villain "to have personal motivations that were independent of their communist allegiances"?
 * Merged the sentences, but it is sourced. You are correct about the motivations.
 * Add comma between "environmentalism rather".
 * I'm not sure if that's grammatically correct.


 * 1970s
 * "assigned Gerry Conway as the writer for Iron Man". Given that Tony had his own title by this point, it should be italicized.
 * Added.
 * "first of several authors". Usually, for comics it would be writer.
 * "reform Iron Man beginning in 1971". Either add a comma after Iron Man, or alter it to "that began in".
 * Switched to "writers". I'm not sure about this comma, but I added it.
 * Does the source state when Mike Friedrich's run occurred?
 * It gives a few examples of issues in 1972 and 1973, but it doesn't give the exact years and seems to be talking more about the 1970s in general.
 * Do the sources state when Mantlo took over; as in, which issue?
 * It does not, and I think the year is sufficient anyway.
 * "series beginning; add a comma.
 * Added.
 * When you mention Layton using certain magazines as references, then you state that "and they stayed informed". I'd reword it to "with him and Michelinie staying"
 * The detail here is that they used the magazines to stay informed, not that they simply stayed informed in general. This change makes it a little wordy, but I added it.
 * "they removed Iron Man's romantic interest". Who was that?
 * Also, you don't need to repeat "removed" twice. Something like "they removed Iron Man's romantic interest (her name) and his robotic Life Model Decoy doubles, and they had Tony move to a different home".
 * Added the name and reworded the sentence.


 * 1980s and 1990s
 * "writers for Iron Man focused on Iron Man as a businessman". Repetition.
 * Fixed.
 * Given that Tony has quite a few relatives with the same last name that show up, and his company is Stark Industries, wouldn't it make more sense, when using his civilian identity, to his his given name instead of his surname? Especially since we're talking about a fictional character and not a real person.
 * I initially did this for this reason, but it didn't read well to me, so I had swapped out "Tony" for "Stark".
 * "beginning in issue" to "beginning with issue".
 * Changed.
 * "which Justin Hammer distributed to several villains". Did Hammer distribute Iron Man's technology during the story arc, or had he already done so and this is what started the arc?
 * It was the beginning of the arc. Is there a wording change that would make this clearer?
 * Hmm... I guess the simple way to solve it is this? Did Hammer distribute it only once at the beginning of the story to various villains, or did he keep doing so during the arc? In the former, past perfect; in the latter, past (perfect) progressive.
 * "and again they" to "and they again"
 * Both are correct, but changed.
 * Minor thing, but I'd suggest "highly regarded" as "highly-regarded".
 * "comic book writers at the time." lack a reference.
 * Changed, and it is referenced.
 * "which was already announced" => "which had already been" or "which had previously been".
 * I agree that this reads better, but David gave me a hard time above for using "had" in this sense.
 * "communism and the Vietnam War" lacks a reference.
 * It does not.
 * "American democracy for its own sake" lacks a reference.
 * It does not.
 * "anti-communist" should be linked. It's linked further down in his biography.
 * Fixed.
 * Regarding the the Tiannamen Square Massacre, add the year it occurred in.
 * Added.
 * Concerning "absence of Cold War politics", it be beneficial to add when it ended.
 * 1990s is already specified at the start of the paragraph. Do you think it should be more specific? It's difficult because there's no one agreed date that the Cold War ended.
 * Thinking about it again, you're right. Leave it as is.
 * "often visited different". Is visited the proper word? Seems like "explored" would make a better fit.
 * I was trying to avoid overuse of "explored", but I agree that it's better than "visited". Changed.
 * Don't worry. You only use it scarcely to begin with.
 * "profit-sharing agreement." lacks a reference
 * Same for "during the "Onslaught" event."
 * They do not.


 * 2000s
 * Shouldn't Ultimates link to The Ultimates (comic book)? Also, unless "The Avengers" refers to the comic book - in which case it should be italicized - then the definite article should be lowercase.
 * Same with the New Avengers.
 * It's referring to the team, not the comic. I've made the articles lowercase.
 * As Avengers Disassembled was an event, it should have quotation marks, not be italicized.
 * Same with "Civil War".
 * I'm going off of their article titles, which are italicized.
 * I'd recommend putting "following the September 11 attacks" at the beginning of the sentence, have a comma, and then the rest.
 * Added.
 * "Adi Granov as the artist" needs a reference
 * It has one.
 * Concerning "In an allegory for the Patriot Act and government surveillance ... opposition to government surveillance", does "conservative" and "liberal" refer to the political ideologies of America? As in, conservatives / Republicans supported the Patriot Act, whereas liberals / Democrats oppossed it? Or is the reference to conservative support and liberal opposition to government in an abstract sense?
 * Those are the terms used by the source.
 * I see. Although I would like an explanation, I obviously can't demand that of you. The present state of the sentence is fine.
 * "this era of Iron Man's character" would probably reflect its intent better if written as "and in this era, Iron Man's character leaned".
 * Reworded.


 * 2010s and 2020s
 * "This volume was written by Kieron Gillen" doesn't need to be a separate sentence from the previous one.
 * Combined.
 * "Axis" should have quotation marks.
 * Added.
 * "featuring Iron Man with a new reversed personality" probably requires and explanation. I know a few details about the event including a spell that inverted heroes' personalities and made them amoral, but new readers going through this won't know all that.
 * This is described in more detail in the character biography. I think this provides the necessary context to describe the publication history.
 * Given adjective order, Ironheart should be described as a "teenaged African-American girl"; but it's somewhat minor, so if you prefer it like this, leave it as such.
 * I agree, changed.
 * "following the "Iron Man 2020" event" lacks a reference.
 * It does not.
 * "deviations [made to Tony]'s character".
 * Also, when it says previous series, is it referring only to its immediate predecessor, Infamous Iron Man, all of the previous Iron Man titles from the 2010s?
 * Added "made to Tony's". The source isn't totally clear and seems to mean a bit of both, so I changed it to "the previous years".

Sorry. Forgot to ping you. These are for the "Publication history" section. Once they're addressed, I'll move on to the next ones, but from a brief look into them, they seem fine. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)


 * A reminder that you need to address the comments by PanagiotisZois and . Gog the Mild (talk) 17:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I already responded to David Fuchs, and I'm actually half way through an edit to address PanagiotisZois's comments right this moment. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 17:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I've replied to your comments. I know you collapsed it, but I also replied to the comments for the lead since there were some good suggestions there. The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 18:05, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The section definitely has a better flow now and is much more understandable; to my dense brain, at least. I'll go over the following sections as soon as I can. PanagiotisZois (talk) 23:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Will add comments for following sections, but I noticed a couple of things in the infobox. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There is not mention anywhere in the body that Tony's full name is "Anthony Edward Stark".
 * No mention that he was born in Long Island.
 * Regarding "Team affiliations", is the order alphabetical? If yes, New Avengers should be placed after Mighty Avengers.

Coord note
Given this nom's age, David's outstanding oppose and still further comments from PanagiotisZois, I think it's time to archive and complete improvements outside the FAC process. , I don't mean to curtail your review, if you have more comments you and TBUA can always continue discussion on the article talk page. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 10:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)