Talk:Nasty Boys (comics)

Nasty Boys' real names: Wikipedia misinformation making it into print?

(Cross-posted to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics)

Okay, I've just uncovered something really disturbing. On the Nasty Boys article, the names of the Nasty Boys were originally given as:

• Gorgeous George - none given
• Hairbag - Warren Anderson
• Ramrod - Charles Grovemont
• Ruckus - none given
• Slab - Kris Anderson

Those names match the names I had for them in my own private notes (though I unfortunately neglected to record the comic book and issue number they came from), and I believe those names are correct.

Because the Nasty Boys are not exactly A-list characters, their real names are not well-known and seldom ever referenced in the comics.

Now, on September 23, 2006, User:201.239.238.20 made the following edit [1], changing the names to:

• Gorgeous George - George Blair
• Hairbag - Michael Suggs
• Ramrod - Patrick Mahony
• Ruckus - Clement Wilson
• Slab - Christopher Anderson

Now, User:201.239.238.20 (whose last edit was on December 1, 2006, nearly a year ago) has a history of subtle name vandalism: see, for instance, [2] and [3]. This was discussed on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics/Archive_22#Bogus_names... about a year ago, and he was warned about it on User talk:201.239.238.20, but he apparently never responded. This user has also caused other trouble (mass categorization and mass edits---just check his history---without seeking approval beforehand, and which resulted in controversy; also, it has been suggested [4] that this user is the same user as User:201, a sockpuppet of the permanently banned User:T-man, the Wise Scarecrow).

As for these specific changes to the Nasty Boys' names, I have been unable to find any supporting evidence in any canon comics or on the web except for sources that depended on Wikipedia, and on (here's the really worrisome part):

• the entry for the Nasty Boys in The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe: All New A-Z #7 (2006)

Here's my worry. I think what happened was that this anon user changed the Nasty Boys entry. Then, the writer or writers of this particular entry in The Official Handbook did his research through Wikipedia, and thus put this incorrect non-canon information into print. The existence of this printed Handbook, as well as the continued presense of the information on the Wikipedia article (I just today removed it from the Nasty Boys Wikipedia article, after the information had been on there for a year) has led to this information being copied by other websites and sources of information, resulting in continued and spreading propagation of misinformation.

Now the best case scenario is that the name information added by User:201.239.238.20 is legitimate. Indeed, I hope this is the case, and if anyone can find a canon comic book issue where the Nasty Boys' names are given as such, then that would be great and put my worries to rest. :)

Unfortunately, I fear this is not the case. In that case, ALL of User:201.239.238.20's edits need to be checked one-by-one for subtle vandalism, which is unfortunately extremely time-consuming because he has made literally thousands of edits, doing hundreds of edits in a row on a very rapid basis, almost never using any edit summaries.

Maybe someone who knows how can contact Marvel Comics or The Official Handbook about this and ask for a canon source for the information--and if no source can be found, then a correction should be issued in the next edition of The Handbook.

—Lowellian (reply) 19:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll also note that on the individual articles for the members of the Nasty Boys, Gorgeous George (comics)'s name was changed [5] by User:Nyssane on September 22; Ramrod (comics)'s name was changed [6] by User:201.239.238.20 on September 29, 2006; Ruckus (comics)'s name was changed [7] by User:Nyssane on September 22, 2006; and Slab (comics)'s name was changed [8] by User:Nyssane on September 23, 2006. Note also that if you view the page histories of Gorgeous George (comics) and Slab (comics), User:Nyssane's edits are, in both cases, exactly sandwiched between User:201.239.238.20's edits.

—Lowellian (reply) 20:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

If Mr 238.20's edit was September 2006 and the relevant issue of OHotMU was July 2006 - wouldn't the timeline suggest they were responding to the information they had got from the comic and not vice versa? (Emperor 20:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC))

I certainly hope so; that would make things less worrisome. :)

But how do you know that OHotMU #7 was available in July 2006? I don't remember when I picked it up. My copy has no month listed on the cover, though it does say "First printing 2006" (year only, no month) in the fine print on the credits page. Even if it did have a month listed, in this world of frequent creator and shipping delays, comics often ship months, sometimes even years (think Frank Miller's All Star Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder or Kevin Smith's Spider-Man/Black Cat: The Evil that Men Do) after they were originally solicited.

—Lowellian (reply) 20:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I know the date as it is listed on the entry you link to [9] (and I'm sure I can pull up the Marvell catalogue entry too). Also remember that if that is the cover date then the actual comic would have been released a month or so before that. Given the fact that there would also be all the time required to get the 20+ pages of script together and off to the artist I'd assume it was actually written late 2005 (early 2006 at the latest).

I think we can safely assume that the information in the comic was written and published before the update and that the data comes from within Marvel. (Emperor 21:37, 19 September 2007 (UTC))

I am one of the Handbook writers, Stuart Vandal (and if you want to check this is really me, please feel free to e-mail me via the e-mail address for Handbook queries given on Marvel's site and in the Handbooks). The numbered OHotMU's started coming out, one a month, in January 2006, and as such, I can confirm that #7 came out late in July (we are generally the last weekend). The Handbook itself was handed in to Marvel at least 3 months prior to that. We do not, ever, use online sites for our research - we always go back to the original comics and on occasion the original creators to get our information. 84.9.65.76 10:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

What worries me about this whole discussion is that people queried where the Nasty Boys' real names originated in the article and changed them back, even suggesting that a Marvel title had gotten the wrong names from here, but now that you've confirmed that the names given in the Handbook both came from there and are the correct ones, nobody has bothered to change the entry to put the names in. And not only does that mean the information is incomplete for Georgous George, Ruckus and Slab, it means the information is actually wrong for Hairbag and Ramrod. Why has no one questioned the source of their two (wrong) real names? Where did Warren Anderson and Charles Grovemont originate? Those wrong names are an example of Wikipedia misinformation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.199.209 (talk • contribs) 01:22, 28 November 2007

Fair use rationale for Image:Nastyboys.jpg

Image:Nastyboys.jpg is being used on this article. 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 this Wikipedia article 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)