Talk:Hulk (comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Hulk (comics) was one of the Art and architecture good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
WikiProject Comics / Marvel (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.
 B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Fictional characters (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
This talk page is automatically archived by User:MiszaBot I. Any sections older than 120 days are automatically archived to Talk:Hulk (comics)/Archive 5. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
Archive
Archives

Contents

[edit] Science behind Powers

I have to agree with whomever removed the section under powers and abilites from that section. Though I don't agree with their comment they left, nor do I agree with removing it from the article. But it should not be listed under powers and abilities. Possibly adding a seperate section for "Science behind the hero." --  Grimbear13 ►Talk  19:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

This has been discussed before. Removing it disconnects it from proper context, and leaves other trying to delete it entirely, we've seen that before. Any section of a good article should focus on the real world, out-of-story-universe context, criticism and information, presented in a reasonably balanced form, which the inclusion of the analysis meets. Separating them into separate sections essentially creates a fanboy powers list, and a decontextualized lump of unbalanced criticism of the character. For more, check the archives. ThuranX (talk) 15:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Concur with ThuranX. Brief, cited mentions within a larger context. Let's keep in mind, it's commenting on made-up science no one expects to be real, so it's essentially speculation for fan consumption and of dubious use to general public.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

[edit] The Riot Squad

I've been looking for Wikipedia pages on members of The The Riot Squad: {[Hot Shot (comics)|Hot Shot]], Jailbait, Ogress, Soul Man, Omnibus and even Rock and Redeemer and haven't been able to find any, though I'm afraid this might be based on disambiguation issues. Though the Riot Squad may not be major characters by any stretch of the imagination, I'm surprised they don't at least have a brief blurb. Here's an informal source that helped me find info: http://www.incrediblehulkonline.com/riotsquad.html. Are they too obscure to deserve a Wikipedia page? I certainly don't think so considering how many obscure characters show up on Wikipedia.F. Simon Grant (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Other Collections

Other Hulk collected volumes include Broken Worlds, Giant-Size, and I believe there was a collection of the "Leader Gamma-Bombs Middletown" story, published many years ago. 38.111.35.2 (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of Incarnation section

As the Incarnation section was one of the problems in this article long ago, prone to fanism and massive 'in-universe' citation only, and the relevant material was converted to out-of-universe stuff in the history and other sections, being described as how the writers reworked the character, I am removing the incarnations section. It is, simply, fan-based, fan-oriented material which is not encyclopedic, and is redundant to material otherwise included in more properly contextualized ways elsewhere. I believe it moves this page further and further away from regaining Good Article Status. ThuranX (talk) 16:52, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing Sentence

"The character has since been depicted in various other media, most notably by Bill Bixby as Dr. David Banner and Lou Ferrigno as the Hulk in the live action television series, five made-for-television movies, and an animated series; through the use of CGI in Hulk (2003) and The Incredible Hulk (2008), as well as in three animated series and various video games." This sentence doesn't really make sense, but I don't know how to improve it. ~ 24.130.127.92 (talk) 20:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

Shouldn't you maybe try to find a drawing of the Hulk where the perspective isn't massively off? His arms shouldn't look that long from that perspective. Bad, bad art. 174.89.31.50 (talk) 16:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You won't find a drawing of Hulk where the perspective isn't massively off. He doesn't have remotely human proportions. His arms are bigger than his legs, his head is smaller than his hands.Cromulant (talk) 21:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

That's no excuse for bad art. His proportions may be inhuman but they have to be consistent. 86.31.10.18 (talk) 10:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, that's not a bad point. We're so used to seeing him that we automatically read the foreshortening. But to a non-comics fan coming to this encyclopedia, there's no way he or she would know what he normally looks like, and may think that the character does have hands bigger than his head — it's comics; that wouldn't be unusual for a character. It's a nice, dramatic picture, no question, but it terms of serving a narrow encyclopedic purpose, it really probably isn't the best one we could choose to accomplish that. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export