Talk:Hulk (comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Hulk (comics) was one of the Language and literature 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.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
August 24, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed
January 17, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
February 27, 2008 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article


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

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2015[edit]

180.191.111.84 (talk) 09:06, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

id like to edit hulk because i read all the issue of the comics from the internet and comics

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 12:58, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Grey or gray?[edit]

The article uses both and we should probably pick one. I thought "gray" was the usual USian spelling, but "grey" is currently used more often in the article (9 to 6 when I checked). I don't have an issue handy; which spelling was used in the comics? 64.235.97.146 (talk) 15:41, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I have removed all instances of "gray". "Grey" is now consistent in the article. A Google search seems to lean towards "Grey Hulk" and not "Gray Hulk", and all instances of "gray" in the article were referring to the colour and not the character so in those instances it doesn't matter. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

ID/id[edit]

Towards the end of the “Fictional character biography” section, there is a sentence that mentions Kluh “sneering that the Hulk they knew was nothing more than a ‘sad piece of “Doc Green’s” ID.’” I suspect that “ID” is a misreading of id, caused by comics’ customary use of all capitals.—Quick and Dirty User Account (talk) 09:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

He should have regenerative healing factor as one of his abilities.[edit]

This quote is taken from the official marvel page at http://marvel.com/characters/25/hulk :

The Hulk has shown a high resistance to physical damage nearly regardless of the cause, and has also shown resistance to extreme temperatures, mind control, nuclear explosions, poisons, and all diseases. In addition to the regeneration of limbs, vital organs, and damaged or destroyed areas of tissue at an amazing rate.

A little bit of googling will also show that he has healed many times in movies, and has also shown to fully regenerate his entire body back from being burnt almost to a skeleton:

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/9/99449/4623150-hulk_regenerates_flesh_in_seconds.jpg

This is heavily backed up by http://www.incrediblehulkonline.com/powersabilities.html which shows all of hulks abilities, it also shows that he has a similar ability to Darwin, which allows to him to breathe underwater, essentially growing gills by adapting to his environment, Reactive evolution, which could be added to his list of abilities, but for real, his regenerative healing factor needs to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.208.120 (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

In addition, he has a certain degree of invulnerability due to his accelerated regenerative healing factor Stalingold11 (talk) 03:50, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Exclusion of television series.[edit]

I'm sorry but trying to exclude the TV series from the lead because "it's not the same character" is beyond ridiculous. It's one of the most well known adaptations of the character and arguably what made him iconic.*Trekker (talk) 09:07, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

You're wrong! Media adaptions are supposed to stick to the source material. What's ridiculous is creating something else and putting another things name on it trying to pass it off like they're one and the same when they're not!.Zjec (talk) 02:14, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you were a troll. I feel stupid now.*Trekker (talk) 09:18, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you were a troll/spam artist, thank you so much for your showing me your true nature.Zjec (talk) 02:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I know I shouldn't bother with it but I just want to point out that you've probably hurt your own case even more by using sock puppets. There really is nothing to gain by that kind of stuff.*Trekker (talk) 07:44, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I have blocked the pair of you for violating the three revert rule (by my counts you've both breached 10RR in under an hour) and personal attacks. Stop insulting each other and try and reach a compromise. My personal preference is for this version as it is conciser and gives a sufficient summary for the casual reader; as it is, the lead is a little on the large side, even for an article with 44K of prose. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:24, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Both of you were wrong to edit war and *Treker shouldn't have assumed bad faith by calling Zjec a "troll". That being said, *Treker was right to revert the initial edit. We don't remove material simply because you don't it's close enough to the source material. That's considered POV editing, unless you genuinely believed that the show and comic are unrelated, in which case there are reliable sources that contradict that. DarkKnight2149 16:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, this is a pretty ridiculous argument. Of course the television series should be included. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
No it shouldn't! if it doesn't follow the source material, then it shouldn't be associated with the true version. It's supposed to be about Bruce Banner, the original and constant one everyone else is familiar with, not some cheap knock-off that didn't follow through with the original concept.Zjec (talk) 04:11, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Again, read WP:NPOV. We aren't about to remove valid material simply because you resent the show for not completely sticking to the comic. Like it or not, the television series is an officially liscensed adaptation. DarkKnight2149 18:05, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
No if it doesn't follow the source material, it's not relevant. It's supposed to be about Bruce Banner, the original version and constant one people are familiar with, nothing more than that.Zjec (talk) 08:35, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
And, once again, we're going to need a better reason to remove it than "I don't like it because it's not like the source material." It is an officially liscensed adaptation, and a relatively famous one at that. DarkKnight2149 03:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
  • I have to agree with Ritchie333 that the lede could be shorter. That said, there otherwise appears to be a consensus that popular officially licensed adaptions should be mentioned, which I don't think necessarily has to conflict with the need for a shorter lede. The article on Lou Ferrigno likewise says that he's primarily known for playing the Hulk. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps we can reword the lead to make it shorter, though I should point out that's not the reasoning that Zjec gave for the removal. That aside, I would be willing to shorten it myself, unless another user would wants to do it instead. DarkKnight2149 17:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
The length is fine, the article is too short on non-plot content, but the amount of lead content is suitable for something that yideally will one day be a Featured Article. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:12, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Bringing the article to FA length could also work; it's the proportions that are a bit skewed. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:45, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Typo in Fictional Character Biography section[edit]

in the fictional character biography section there is a sentence that reads "At the close of the storyline, Doc Green discovered that he was beginning to disappear as the result of the Extremis serum losing wearing off." "losing wearing" is obviously a typo. 129.42.208.182 (talk) 21:15, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2016 (UTC)