Talk:Fear Itself (comics)

Synopsis

There is very little information on this page about what the series is actually about... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.138.143 (talk) 05:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Then write a synopsis. :-) Nightscream (talk) 06:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Tie-Ins

I think we should just cover the core issues in the plot and omit the tie-ins as that is the most notable part of the series. Covering every issue will make the section too long.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 22:26, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I personally do not have any objection to covering events from the other series, so long as they're properly summarized. So long as they're summarized, it shouldn't be too long. Nightscream (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Adding tie-ins

I find it interesting that a few weeks ago I added some titles that were revealed on Marvel.com as being apart of the storyline & then got blasted for adding them without giving a reference, which is like, ok fine, but now those same issues are now on there. So now they are acceptable?

The Current Plot

The current plot section is completely useless. Needs to be scrapped and rewritten. Lots42 (talk) 04:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you elaborate on your problems with it? Nightscream (talk) 05:04, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Everything needs to go and someone more familar with the story needs to boil it down to the essential paragraphs. Lots42 (talk) 12:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

However, I've taken another look and things have improved somewhat. So that happened. Lots42 (talk) 13:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I had been wanting to restore the division between the core story and tie-ins, however to my knowledge, no one who has contributed to it is unfamiliar with the story; I don't think anyone has added l plot material from books they haven't read. I agree we need to restrict it to just the essentials, though I think "everything needs to go" is a bit drastic. I'm open to further improvements, though. :-) Nightscream (talk 15:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree. It improved when I wasn't looking. I no longer believe everything needs to go. Lots42 (talk) 11:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

This article is unreadable for someone who hasn't followed the story. The characters who have been renamed should be indicated when mentioned further down the article. For example: Instead of saying "Nerkodd is confronted by Namor", it would say "Nerkodd(Attuma) is confronted by Namor." I tried doing this but it was erased. I figured I'd explain my reasoning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.201.181.40 (talk) 14:32, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

The renamings are mentioned in the core miniseries section. They don't have to be noted every time thereafter. Nightscream (talk) 18:14, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not going to argue with you, but when I first came here to read the article, I had to keep scrolling back to the top to find out who I was reading about. It's very annoying if you're just coming here with no prior knowledge of the story.

Main Characters in the Infobox

Please stop adding characters to the Main characters section Infobox. "Main characters" means just that: Characters that are the central focus of the storyline. Wolverine and Spider-Man barely appear in the core miniseries, and if one counts their appearances in the tie-in books as qualifying for "main" character status, then that would mean that most characters in the Marvel Universe are main characters in "Fear Itself", which makes the concept of "main" meaningless. "Main" does not mean "All". Nightscream (talk) 20:04, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Editing Fear Itself

With respect to the moderator of this page. The fact that you have locked this page from editing, on a public available website that encourages collaboration seems a tad unfair. Constantly you have removed material from this page that months later turn out to be correct. I do not know why you have done this as this page is for all to view and add to yet you have sought to control the information on it. Presently the site needs to make mention of Shattered Heroes as an aftermath to Fear Itself. You need to stop being obstructive and allow people to add to the site and in some was help to edit it, because at the moment there are errors that need to be corrected. Tangaroa007 (talk) 07:21, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

First of all, there is no "moderator" of this article, or of any other article. Regarding editorial content, all editors, including admins, have the same amount of authority. Inclusion and presentation of material is predicated on adherence to the site's policies and guidelines, principles of good writing, etc., and not authority.

Second, protecting pages is perfectly "fair", as it is one of the established powers of administrators, and it is sometimes necessary to counteract vandalism, edit wars, or other types of policy violations or problematic editors. In this case, another editor refused to restrict the content of the synopses to summarized essentials, exhibited poor writing, and repeatedly introduced incorrect information, and refused to acknowledge attempts at discussion regarding this. That admins are empowered to protect pages when such problems arise was established not by me, but by the Wikipedia community, and before I ever started editing here. If it's not "fair", then why do you suppose the community established that practice? If you disagree with that practice, then you should protest it on pages relevant to it, and not here. For now, the miniseries has run its course, and I've summarized both its synopsis and those of the tie-in books, so I've unprotected the article. Hopefully, future edits by others will not prove that to be a bad idea.

Lastly, as for your accusation that I have "constantly removed material from this page that months later turn out to be correct", I have not been made aware of ever having done this, let alone "constantly". Could you elaborate on this with some examples? Nightscream (talk) 09:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

UPDATE: Looking over the Shattered Heroes checklist near the bottom of the article, I notice that it's unsourced. I tried looking for a source via Google, Newsarama and Comic Book Resources, and couldn't find any. I then looked more closely at the sources I placed for that series at the bottom of the Publication History section, and saw that it indicated Shattered Heroes to be a series of one-shots, and not the multiple issues of ongoing series indicated by that checklist. When I looked further, I saw that that list had been added by you, Tangaroa. Given this, as well as the fact that you failed to respond to my question regarding your false accusation about my editing habits, I'd say your complaints have little merit to them. Please trying learning the site's content policies, in particular WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:IRS, as well as those governing editorial conflicts, such as WP:AGF and WP:NPA. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:58, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Fear Itself editing response

Excuse me. What is your problem?

Check out http://au.comics.ign.com/articles/118/1189406p1.html Check out http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=33940

Also if you bother to check the Marvel solicitations they talk about shattered Heroes being the Aftermath of Fear Itself and so far in numerous cases it is going for three months on a number of titles. I would suggest you get your facts straight sir. I am sick of you lording this particular page over people, none of the information I have ever attempted to add to it is incorrect. I always triple check my info, and unlike you I actually know someone in the industry who feeds me information. Your deletion of my edit is petty and pathetic. And I knew you would immediately remove anything I add because you seem to think you know better than everyone else. Wikipedia is collaborative, you need to remember that. Now put the information back on because it is relevant and it does tie in to Fear itself as broad aftermath series of one shots and titles much like dark Reign was after Secret Invasion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tangaroa007 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

3rd response

In regards to my comment that you have changed things I have added. On a number of occasions I found out about tie ins and added them to the list, but you kept removing them. You did this 4 times. Now in regards to Fear itself having finished, I am afraid you are wrong because The Fearless is branded Fear Itself. Given that The Fearless is included in Shattered Heroes listings across the web I must conclude that indeed Fear Itself is not quite done with. To indicate to readers that Shattered Heroes has nothing to do with Fear Itself is wrong and must be corrected (and besides it is just a list what the hell is the harm there?). And let me add that never have I removed anything from Wikipedia that I did not agree with, that you do is tremendously arrogant (even if you have good intentions). I understand rewriting additions, but to remove something as innocuous as a small list of comics is really questionable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tangaroa007 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

extensive reception section

Why is the reception section so long and detailed? Now that the series is over, do we really need a breakdown of what multiple reviewers thought of individual issues, including tie-ins? Most comic articles limit sections like this to something much more brief. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Fear Itself (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110617023811/http://www.brokenfrontier.com/reviews/p/detail/alpha-flight-1 to http://www.brokenfrontier.com/reviews/p/detail/alpha-flight-1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fear Itself (comics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110817085931/http://www.comicsbulletin.com/reviews/130246757624824.htm to http://www.comicsbulletin.com/reviews/130246757624824.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110711024228/http://www.comicsbulletin.com/reviews/131015714781214.htm to http://www.comicsbulletin.com/reviews/131015714781214.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110702013211/http://www.comicsbulletin.com/reviews/130913648973551.htm to http://www.comicsbulletin.com/reviews/130913648973551.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:45, 30 December 2016 (UTC)