Talk:Punisher/Archive 6

MAX

Should the MAX imprint section be split off to Alternate versions of the Punisher? The above discussion (and The Punisher: Frank Castle) is pretty clear that this isn't the main Marvel Universe character. (Emperor (talk) 04:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC))

We just need a cite or three that it is out of continuity. Lots42 (talk) 12:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

With Marvel MAX I think it is safe to assume it isn't in continuity unless someone says it is - that is what would need proving. (Emperor (talk) 14:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC))

With respect, I don't think it's safe to assume that. That is all. Lots42 (talk) 02:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It needs to be proved that its in continuity.

1.Almost no Marvel Characters appear. 2.Nick Fury is a COMPLETLY DIFFERENT CHARACTER. 3.Certain characters are dead in on series alive in another e.g. Jigsaw. 4.His body count is stated as 2000 in max but there is a 616 even where he takes out 2000 in one sitting. Its no more canon then War Machine Max. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.178.227 (talk) 22:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

In Punisher #5 which was released today, writer Rick Remender finally put this debate to rest in the letters section. He explicitly stated that MAX is not in 616 continuity. Here is the whole quote, "Let me make this very clear and concrete: PUNISHER MAX IS NOT REGULAR MARVEL CONTINUITY. Seriously, It is a different, and quite filthy, universe. In MAX town Frank is an older man, there aren't any magic crystals lying around and people use cocaine for sugar." FearEmbodied (talk) 23:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Many things that happened in MAX universe are considered canon in 616, like the Firebase Valley Forge incident from Born. But many things from 616 never have, or will, happen in MAX. Are the other MAX titles like, Cage, Aliases, Black Widow, etc. apart of the Fury/ Punisher one? Seems like they would be but then again MArvel may have just used the MAX imprint for more freedom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomFactGuy (talk • contribs) 03:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Target: Anti-Venom

In Anti-Venom's spin-off comic series, Punisher decides to bring Eddie Brock to "justice". (Although... Why now? Eddie's been a cannibalistic alien hybrid with a sense of justice just as warped as Castle's for years. Shouldn't he be going after Gargan, who's a cannibalistic alien hybrid with no sense of justice? I guess it's more of a plot twist thing; now that Eddie's trying to reverse the damage he'd done as Venom, Castle comes along and says. "Hey, you're that Eddie Brock guy... you used to kill criminals just like I do, and eat their brains, so I'm going to kill you." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.70.71 (talk) 01:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Eddie did not eat humans except when driven mad and/or starved of phelenamyne.

Gargan is a cannibal because he eats limbs for no reason. Venom was a composite third being that NEEDED the chemicals found in both brains and chocolate. Because VENOM HAD to sometimes eat brains doesnt make EDDIE BROCK a cannibal.

The symbiote is not human eating humans does not make it a cannibal. Eddie never was one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.134.129 (talk) 23:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the symbiote is not human. It's eating humans as either a part of pure bloodlust (which is why it does so with Gargan) or a need for brain-juice (depends what writer's depiction of Eddie-Venom you look at) OR adrenal glands doesn't qualify as cannibalism. Eddie, as Venom, did engage in eating his victims (whether he wanted to or not also depends on the writer's depiction), but since he was Venom, and therefor not wholey human, I'd agree with you. But as for the brain-juices, Venom's threatened to eat Spider-Man's spleen, amoung other body parts aside from his brain. 198.230.122.177 (talk) 05:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

All of this is interesting but it is really relevant to Wikipedia and this talk page? Lots42 (talk) 00:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Move?

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move. See jafeluv's concern and fences and windows explication. --RegentsPark (talk) 01:04, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Punisher → The Punisher — Proper title for primary topic. Relisted to allow for further investigation of Jafeluv's concerns. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC) Fortdj33 (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

• Support I agree. Check out all the comics covers, etc. He's never called just "Punisher" - "The" is part of his title. Wikkitywack (talk) 22:53, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
• Here we go with the "The" argument. I Support this myself (that is the name of the character) but just remember this is a Wikipedia where Joker (comics) is the article title while The Joker is a redirect. Rejectwater (talk) 13:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
• Support Technically it is "The Punisher" 99.243.117.17 (talk) 02:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
• Comment: We generally only include the definite article in the article title if the article is generally capitalized in running text (see WP:THE). Here, the article mainly uses "the Punisher", not "The Punisher". If this reflects general usage in English, the article should stay where it is. Jafeluv (talk) 11:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
• Support - The use of "the Punisher" with a lowercase "t" is not general usage. Check out the following sources: [1], [2], [3]. Neelix (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. Marvel's official Punisher site and catalogue uses "the Punisher" (no capital "t") when his name appears within a sentence: "After the murder of his family by the mob, Frank Castle became the vigilante known as the Punisher. Using controversial methods to fight crime, the Punisher’s tactics often bring him into conflict with groups on both sides of the law."[4][5] Fences&Windows 19:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mass murderer? or primal warrior

With violent tenacity, someone(s) keeps trying to get the Punisher listed in the "serial killer" or "mass murderer" category (with connotations of Jeffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, etc.) when such a categorization is psychologically idiotic. Modern day "demo-liberal" postmodernist Westerners, accustomed to a softening, bureaucratic, techno-oriented lifestyle, apparently have lost all sense of what warriorhood means. Lexi Alexander's interviewed American soldier above clearly didn't think the Punisher was a serial killer, but a noble warrior. Castle clearly has a conscience (the root motive of his helping others by violence), but a conscience untroubled by modern liberalist progressivist hysteria; like an ancient knight, Castle senses the theological dualism between Good and Evil and has no socialistic heart-burn over the rights of aggressors. It makes as much sense to label Castle a serial killer or mass murderer as it does Achilles or Lancelot. Study the medieval romances involving Lancelot, Arthur, etc., and they are filled with "just" private warfare, rolling heads, strewn brains, gushing bowels, etc. The violent knighthood of the Middle Ages, and its psychology of personal vengeance and custom of "just" private battle, is where Castle finds his home. Castle's character is a forceful re-emergence of more ancient concepts of warriorhood, and it is the height of liberal-modernist-progressivist arrogance to simplistically mis-diagnose this more primordial species of warriorhood as "serial killer sociopathy".

The above is not said to justify each and every morally ambiguous action of Castle but to indicate the right psychological approach to be taken in dealing with an "atavistic" character like the Punisher. Applying our liberal-humanism-derived concepts of justice and criminology is simply irrelevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.131.147 (talk) 11:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

This is the right approach as far as we are considered "creator X says in a reliable source that he's a mass murderer", "the publishers say in their own material, he's a mass murderer" - that's the start and end of it. You raise many interesting points (leaving aside the political bias and slams you put in there) but the bottom line is that wikipedia is not about truth, it's about verification. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

"...Heroic outlaw traditions and the values embedded in them may have provided a kind of cultural script that advocated a moral system alternative to, and higher than, official law (compare this to Seal 1996, 17-18, 182-3 and 190)...."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2386/is_2_111/ai_69202442/pg_18 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.183.203 (talk) 14:58, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

seealso:

http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521856809 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.172.110 (talk) 07:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

When someone starts throwing labels such as "demo-liberal postmodernist Westerners, accustomed to a softening, bureaucratic, techno-oriented lifestyle", then we're no longer talking about editing the encyclopedia article of a fictional character, but pursuing a political agenda. Cameron Scott is correct in that mass murderer is the term that the characters' creators/owners use, and while a section on the character's psychology could, for example, quote essayists or social scientists regarding other aspects, the creators/owners' characterization must be the primary foundation. And please sign your posts; it's trolling not to.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

"Superheroes don't carry guns." - The Tick —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devon Vice (talk • contribs) 01:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Physical Attributes of Punisher

Why was my recent description of Punisher removed? Every other comic character has a section of physical attributes. I think we need one for Frank Castle also, specifically calling out his physique and the way his iconic costume highlights his physique. Because Punisher does not have any innate abilities, discussions of his physique are appropriate as this is what makes him a hero (or anti-hero). (Devon Vice (talk) 01:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC))

His physique is not the same from artist to artist. It'd be different if we were talking about say, the Scarecrow, who uses his thinness as a tactical advantage. But the Punisher is just a fit guy. Lots42 (talk) 08:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Possible page protection.

There appears to be a minor edit war going on between two IPs about the Punisher's affiliations. Could the page be protected or semi-protected to stop this.IrishStephen (talk) 01:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Interwiki

There is an article in Norwegiant, "The Punisher". Interwiki is needed.

The page is protected, so I can not install interwiki to http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Punisher.

--85.166.141.247 (talk) 10:26, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

done. --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:50, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Frank David Castiglione name

Francis "Frank" David Castiglione is his birth name but when did he changed it to Frank Castle and more importantly why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbritp (talk • contribs) 00:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason The Punisher changed is name is to be able to go do a second turn in Vietnam. So he enrolled with the false name of Frank Castle. Between is second and third turn in Vietnam he legally changed is name to Frank Castle and went again in Vietnam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.235.57.3 (talk) 10:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

anyone know where this gets mentioned? 211.30.215.176 (talk) 12:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Unless the comic says "Francis David" in the canon, we can't use it. Many first-generation Italian-Americans have been named Francesco, not Francis, at birth. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

If it is cannon, it still shouldn't wind up in the lead or the infobox. It something that could be explained under "Characterization". - J Greb (talk) 18:20, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Alliances

I want add to the Punisher article the list of the team he had joins (Green Berets, Marines, Secret Avengers of Civil War, Heroes for Hire, Thunderbolts), but I can't. When I add this categories at the page they are erase by another editor. So I add it again, and he erase my changes again. And I don't know why he do that.--Antoinejd (talk) 00:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Antoinejd

Category Fictional mass murderers

I removed the recent addition of Category:Fictional mass murderers, as did two other editors, when one editor tried to add it three times already. Does anyone consider the Punisher to be a mass murderer? I see him as an assassin, crime fighter, the comic book saying a one man war on crime, he not going out killing innocent people, only the bad guys who deserve it. Dream Focus 20:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Based on the definitions... (see Mass murder and murder) The character fits both Fictional mass murderers and Fictional serial killers. It really doesn't matter if he is targeting drug lords or children, his "hits" would still be "unlawful killings" and intentional. - J Greb (talk) 01:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The Punisher wouldn't fit the defition of a serial killer because he does not have cooling off periods between killings, but he's clearly a mass murderer legally, whether you think he's justified in committing such acts or not. It's worth mentioning the character is generally considered to be acting in an unacceptable manner by both superheroes and the police/government. Ash Loomis (talk) 06:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thunderbolts

Punisher appears in the current Thunderbolts title as a member of the team; to me, it logically seems appropriate to mention this in the infobox. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 17:53, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm unclear on why it was removed at all. Do the editors who were removing it doubt that he is now a member of the Thunderbolts?--NukeofEarl (talk) 15:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Technically as it was unsourced it could be removed, but it's very easily verified - I know nothing of the character (can't even remember how it ended up on my watchlist) - but a 30 second Google search brought back plenty of hits to verify his membership in the Thunderbolts, so I added one in my reversion. Chaheel Riens (talk) 13:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Citation needed on Heidegger quote

I did some internet searches and I'm turning up nothing for the supposed Heidegger quote. This may be an accurate summary or paraphrasing by Ennis of part of Heidegger's writing or philosophy, but it should be noted as either a cited quote or as Ennis's summary of Heidegger. Without context, Ennis's statement alone, with the use of quotation marks, gives the impression that this is an actual quote. I am unable to locate this quote on the internet from any source other than Ennis. Even if it's not actually Heidegger's words it's not like it has to be removed, it's still relevant as Ennis's opinion. But I would like to see a citation for the Heidegger quote or a note that Ennis is not actually quoting Heidegger. It's a good quote and I'd like to be able to attribute it to Heidegger if it really is by him. I can't really quote it elsewhere as "Chris Ennis paraphrasing Heidegger". Someone should get to the bottom of this, or I'll add a note that the quote is unverified and rather dubious. In the meantime, I've added a tag to the quote. 98.14.84.221 (talk) 21:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Wheadon criticism

Is joss wheadons criticism really relevant? I get that he is popular and has criticized the punisher multiple times but do we really need to not the personally complaints of writers on characters they dont like from things like interviews? If anything shouldn't any real criticism come from major reviews or articles. And I find its inclusion a bit odd in general looking at supermans page there is no mention of negative criticism or opinions despite the fact many creators had mocked him over the years. Is there supposed to be a positive and negative on each? Or is wheadon just mentioned because of his popularity? 71.222.10.146 (talk) 03:16, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

• Unfortunately Wheadons and his troll fans somehow think that his opinions are so relevant that there above professional critics like major reviews or articles. I mean if his remakes are allowed here, then so should anyone else's.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.82.7.126 (talk) 06:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't really care if his interviews are removed or not. I added them because I stumbled onto them and thought they could be used to expand the section, which so far consists solely of four lists, one uncited and one that isn't exactly about the character per se, but one of the comic runs in general. -- Lord Crayak (talk) 22:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

• That's the reason why there someone's bias hypocritical opinion from an interview?108.208.137.250 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:51, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Late reply, I know, but like I said, I was just trying to expand a stub using something that I came across and thought was viable in terms of notability, regardless of whether or not its tone was positive or negative. I think you can bring any problems you have with the comments up and lobby to try and have them excised over on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Comics (as no one else seems interested in discussing that topic here, myself included, as like I said earlier I'm fine either way when it comes to them staying or going). Your're also free to add critiques from "worthier" reviewers and commentators that you find to counterpoint the quotes or add a more balanced stance to the section if it seems skewed. -- Lord Crayak (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Punisher

Was the punisher based on the character from Don Pendleton novels "the executioner"? Pablodejes (talk) 22:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Mass murderer

"murdering a number of people, typically simultaneously or over a relatively short period of time and in close geographic proximity"

Defenetly seems like something that the character has done. There are scenes where he probably guns down about twenty people or more and the goes on to kill more soon afterwords.*Treker (talk) 16:16, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Infobox image

The infobox image has been changed to the cover of Original Sin #4 (August 2014) by Gabriele Dell'Otto to better reflect the character's appearance. The new image shows the character's costume in frontal view. The previous image only showed his upper torso, in which he is wearing a t-shirt, as opposed to his actual costume. DrRC (talk) 19:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

If we're going to go with a full body image maybe we should find one which is a little brighter. Both this and the previous version is rather dark and has a lot of shading.★Trekker (talk) 19:59, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

If you have any suggestions, please let it be known. I'll see if I can find one that's brighter. DrRC (talk) 20:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

The current image should also probably benefit from being cropped at the top. Lots of space above his head which is just kinda empty. I'll also look for a brighter full body image.★Trekker (talk) 20:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I went ahead and cropped it. That space was above his head was there so the gun could fit into the image. DrRC (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I think Mitch Gerads design for the character from the 2014 series gives a pretty good look at the character, personality.★Trekker (talk) 20:18, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't mind Gerad's work on volume 9, but that image doesn't seem like a good fit. It has too much of a "blue print" look to it, and the character is posing unnaturally. I think these two images from 2011's Punisher: In the Blood portray the character well: Nic Klein's image and Michele Bertilorenzi's image. They can be cropped as needed. Although I still believe the current image from Original Sin #4 by Gabriele Dell'Otto is adequate. DrRC (talk) 20:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Maybe we should alert the comic project of the discussion to get more input?★Trekker (talk) 20:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Sure, let's do that. DrRC (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Punisher. 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/20090519203358/http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=120373 to http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=120373

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) 18:54, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Punisher. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://marvel.com/comic_books/issue/33862/punisher_in_the_blood_2010_1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090209021855/http://www.popthought.com/display_column.asp?DAID=466 to http://www.popthought.com/display_column.asp?DAID=466

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) 22:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Frank Castle which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Frank Castle page redirects here so that the ongoing but archived/blocked "move discussion" is blocking everything ...

As for me, I feel concerned about renaming the Frank Castle page since I see no encyclopedist or neutral or generic argument to make readers think one "Frank Castle" (real rugby player, or fictional marvel hero, or any other real or fictional character) deserves his page without "_(explanation)" more than any other one. I do not have time to search for what is the current generic wikipedia policy for naming pages, if there is any, but even "first come first served" would not seem "encyclopedist". I take time though to propose a naming policy such as the base name being systematically a disambiguation page (without need for "_(disambiguation)" in its title) whenever there are more than one "target" (real or fictional) to this name, and that all core pages are titled with the suitable "_(explanation)" suffix.

In the present case, the "Frank Castle" page would hence be a disambiguation page linking instead of redirecting to the Punisher page.

Hope this helps —Phil 12:14, 15 January 2018 (utc)

No, this character is clearly the most notable subject by this name, making it a disambiguation is pointless, 99% anyone searches for the name it's going to be meaning this character.★Trekker (talk) 12:38, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Agree with ★Trekker - besides, there's a hat for Frank Castle (rugby league) to alert the tiny percentage of readers who are after the rugby player. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:42, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Superhero?

From the superhero article:

A superhero (sometimes rendered super-hero or super hero) is a type of stock character possessing "extraordinary or superhuman powers"[citation needed] and dedicated to protecting the public. Since the debut of the prototypical superhero Superman in 1938, stories of superheroes—ranging from brief episodic adventures to continuing years-long sagas—have dominated American comic books and crossed over into other media. The word itself dates to at least 1917.[1] A female superhero is sometimes called a superheroine (also rendered super-heroine or super heroine). "SUPER HEROES" is a trademark co-owned by DC Comics and Marvel Comics.[2] Superheroes are authentically American, spawning from The Great Depression era.

By most definitions, characters do not strictly require actual superhuman powers to be deemed superheroes,[3] although terms such as costumed crime fighters are sometimes used to refer to those such as Batman and Green Arrow without such powers who share other common superhero traits. Such characters were generally referred to as "mystery men" in the so-called Golden Age of Comic Books to distinguish them from characters with super-powers.

Normally, superheroes use their powers to counter day-to-day crime while also combating threats against humanity by supervillains, their criminal counterparts. Often, one of these supervillians will be the superhero's archenemy. As well, some longrunning superheroes, such as Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man, each have a rogues gallery of enemies. As well, superheroes sometimes will combat such irregular threats as aliens, magical entities, American war enemies such as Hitler and Nazis, and godlike or demonic creatures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ash Loomis (talk • contribs)

None of this has anything to do with the Punisher, who lacks many other of the accouterments of superheroes, such as a costume, and whose actions as a mass murderer in no way fit the definition of superhero. --Tenebrae (talk) 05:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

• User Ash Loomis has already been told this in the Edit summary, but he/she is not listing at all, Ash Loomis is just doing whatever the hell they want. The page needs to be protected or Ash Loomis needs to blocked for doing this.68.75.18.34 (talk) 05:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about this - Punisher does have an effective uniform of his T-shirt logo, which has remained with him throughought the series. Also as far as his behaviour is concerned, Lobo committed genocide on his own planet, yet is still in the Super hero category. Wolverine himself has no compunction about killing, and readily slaughters anybody who gets in his way, as do many other characters in the Super hero category - Deadpool, whose sole purpose in life is to kill people is another example. I'm aware of the normal wp:otherstuff, but in this case when we're discussing an ambiguous (sp) category, other examples of the genre are the only way to establish the way to go.

Just because one superhero fights another doesn't automatically change their criteria, so Punisher fighting Spiderman just means two superheroes fighting each other. Finally though, I feel I should point out (as nobody else has done so) that Ash has reached 3RR, so needs to back off and return to the discussion table.Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Superheroes fight each other all the time, so that's irrelevant. Marvel calls the Punisher a superhero frequently, so he's a superhero. Doczilla _STOMP! 20:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd have to respectfully disagree with Doc on this one. It may be good marketing for Marvel to refer to the Punisher as a superhero rather than as a homicidal vigilante — and for DC to say the same about a genocidal sociopath — but that doesn't make it any more true than with cigarette companies in old days saying cigarettes were good for you. A company can say anything it wishes to about its products — but disinterested, objective definitions still apply. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for the third revert, it was just to promote discussion since no one seemed to want to talk about it on here. Anyway, I'd like to begin by saying that Wikipedia is about verification, not personal opinion. So if Marvel or another reliable source labels the Punisher a superhero, it doesn't matter if he fits your definition of what a superhero should be. Next, being an anti-hero does not cancel out being a superhero. In early apperances Batman (the character the Punisher is closest to, this article even calls him Marvel's answer to Batman and cites him as a superhero without powers) was morally ambiguous, carried a gun and killed criminals. The superheroes in Watchmen include Rorschach, who employs torture and occasional murder in his war on crime, the Comedian who is a rapist and uses his position as a superhero merely to satisfy his general sadism, and Ozymandias who is a mass murderer. No one has a problem with calling Super (2010 American film) a superhero film, despite the mental instability and mass murders of its anti-heroes. One could argue Frank Castle's strict moral code and desire to protect the public and innocents brings him closer in line with the traditional superhero, ala Superman, than most of these characters who are accepted as superheroes.

The Punisher has extraordinary abilities in a Batman or Green Arrow sense, the only real differance between him and them is in his willingness to kill, which as previously shown, is prevelant in many characters who stray even further from the traditional superhero than the Punisher does. Castle also has a fairly common superhero origin, his loved ones are killed so he decides to don a costume, a code-name, and employ his special abilities in a war on crime, and to protect the innocent. And yes, the Punisher does wear a costume, and I don't just mean the skull t-shirt. Pre-MAX, he had a more "supeheroey" uniform with the white gloves and boots, teeth belt, etc. Even Ennis' Marvel Knights run began with the character dressed in more of a traditional superhero uniform. And the more familiar skull t-shirt and trench coat are hardly unique to the Punisher, as most superhero characters in recent times, especially in Marvel, are retaining less and less traditional superhero elements in their uniforms, with many characters wearing little more than a dark uniform (such as the X-Men films) or a mask and trenchcoat (such as Midnighter in The Authority.) The Punisher even wore a more traditional Captain America-influenced uniform during the Civil War event complete with a mask. FrankenCastle even saw the Punisher with superpowers. I mean, if Kenny from South Park can be listed as a superhero because of a few apperances as Mysterion, surely the FrankenCastle arc counts? There's also his brief stint as as avengering angel who could pull any weapon out of his trenchcoat before Ennis effectively rebooted the character. And even if you ignore those apperances, and just focus on how the Punisher is generally portrayed in the mainstream Marvel universe, or even MAX, he clearly has far more in common with iconic, traditional superheroes like Daredevil, Batman or Spider-Man than characters like Hellboy, The Mask or Ash Williams, who no one has any problem labelling as superheroes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ash Loomis (talk • contribs) 02:49, 21 September 2012.

There are so many assumptions here, I don't know where to begin. I'll limit my comments to one aspect: The Punisher does not have Batman- or Green Arrow-like extraordinary abilities, which from the beginning of their character conceptions were of levels beyond recognizable human reality. The Punisher is a good shot, but not depicted as someone who, like Green Arrow, essentially never misses. The Punisher also doesn't go swinging from building to building and performing other such unrealistic, superhuman derring-do as Batman does — things clearly beyond realistic human ability. These are just examples. As for Rorschach (the Wikipedia article for which lists him as an antihero), he's certainly not depicted as a superhero anywhere except possibly in flashbacks; he's portrayed as a sociopathic vigilante.

We can quibble over details about fictional people and this arbitrary, made-up concept of "superhero". I'm more concerned about why one person has such an obsession to label the Punisher a superhero. If nothing else, comics and other forms of literature have a variety of types of characters; that's what helps make literature rich and interesting. The Punisher is clearly not conceived of as a superhero in any traditional sense; I'm sure character creator Gerry Conway would be the first to agree. The Punisher, modeled on paperback-book vigilantes in the wake of the film Death Wish, is an antihero in any rational sense of the term. To accept the specious argument that he is a superhero is to essentially erase the very concept of "antihero," to say it doesn't exist. I don't think that's within our power. --Tenebrae (talk) 08:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

The two categories are not exclusive. A character can be both anti-hero and superhero, depending on perception and plotline. I'm with Ash Loomis on this one - the Punisher fits the superhero category. His abilities may be considerably less extreme than Batman's, but they are certainly on a par with any of the Robin characters, who is also described and classed as a superhero. All of Punisher's traits can be found in many other characters classed as superheroes - the fact that you don't agree with the morals behind his activities does not automatically deny him superhero status, and comparing him to outdated cigarette advertising is skirting dangerously close to fallacy and false analogy. Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree — Robin, like Batman, non-realistically swings by bat-ropes from building to building. That's far outside the realm of ordinary human ability. And why not? It's funny-book make-believe.

Fallacy? False analogy? Forgive me for saying this sounds like something a first-year college student would say, completing missing the larger point, which is: Companies can say anything they wish to in order to burnish their products. That doesn't mean everything they say about their products is automatically true or gospel. --Tenebrae (talk) 09:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Rorschach is referred to as a superhero multiple times in the book, he is also in the superheroes category. Yes, he’s portrayed as an unhinged vigilante (though not a sociopath, he clearly demonstrates empathy for others, albeit in his own twisted way.) It’s true the Punisher has his origins in 1970s vigilante films like Dirty Harry or Death Wish, but Batman has his origins in detective fiction like Murders in the Rue Morgue or the Sherlock Holmes series. There are many additional superhero elements grafted onto Batman however which Sherlock Holmes and C Auguste Dupin lack. It is the same case with the Punisher, and I already explained what many of those elements were. I could write at length about why the Punisher’s abilities are extraordinary and how no normal human being in the real world could do what he does, but it’s pretty obvious to most people whether or not they’d ultimately categorize the Punisher as a superhero, and I don’t think it needs defence. I mean, even in the MAX run where he’s in his sixties he’s still soaking up bullets like nothing, and even walking around a nuclear wasteland on fire without flinching in The End oneshot. Do I really need to explain myself here? Are multiple character types in comics good? Certainly, and there are a number of characters in superhero universes such as Dream, Howard the Duck, or John Constantine who do not fit the definition of a superhero and who I am therefore not trying to add to the superhero category. But I don’t see what that has to do with whether or not this particular character fits that criteria, so I don’t see why you bring it up. Also, just putting out there, but there’s really no reason to be so rude and cocky. It doesn’t make you look more credible to call people first-year college students, nor is it a respectful way to disagree. He used the word false analogy because it applies. Old cigarette ads have nothing to do with Marvel labelling the Punisher a superhero. Marvel doesn’t have some conspiracy to trick people into buying Punisher comics by fooling them into thinking he’s a superhero. I doubt the Punisher would sell any better if Marvel didn’t list him as a superhero, it’s not as if comics about ultra-violent vigilantes that lack superhero elements don’t sell. I think they label him as a superhero because as I’ve demonstrated and you haven’t even attempted to refute, he meets the criteria. There’s nothing wrong with using language to make your point understood dude. It sounds to me more like you’re trying to impose your own moral idea of what makes a superhero onto the article, and that’s fine for you to have as an individual, but it doesn’t belong on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is about what can be cited and verified, not what you or I personally think. Everyone so far but you and that one guy without an account agrees the Punisher fits the definition of a superhero, and he is listed as such by his publisher, so I’m hardly just one guy with an “obsession” as you put it. I think the category applies and I’m providing an argument towards why I think it applies, if the ultimate consensus is that the Punisher is not a superhero, I’ll gladly step down, but so far it doesn’t look that way. Ash Loomis

I'm concerned that for us to decide the Punisher isn't a superhero even though the source material calls him a superhero borders on OR. It's not up to us. Doczilla _STOMP! 20:50, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, the consensus seems to that he belongs in the category, does anyone have a problem with me readding it at this point?

Even if that suggestion weren't coming from an anonymous person not signing his post, yes, longtime WPC editors including Doczilla, immediately above, and myself have a problem with that. The editor below, who posted his comments before I did here, encapsulates things perfectly. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:39, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Other than being violent and unpleasent, why doesn't the Punisher doesn't qualify as a superhero? It's already been shown that being violent and immoral does not disqualify one from superhero qualification, and if it does, surely we'd have to remove films like Super or the Toxic Avenger from the superhero films category or characters such as Rorschach or Lobo from the superhero categories. Care to explain why the Punisher and these characters do not qualify as superheroes, other than their violent nature?

Lobo, who committed planet-wide genocide, is not a superhero, and nothing in his article even argues that he is a superhero. The categories list him as both as a superhero and a supervillain — mutually exclusive categories — which makes no sense. For some reason I can't seem to remove either; there appears to be hard-coding involved. So rather than use Lobo as an example of a superhero, we should be removing that category from Lobo, --Tenebrae (talk) 03:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't say they're mutually exclusive as a character can change, Lobo's acted as both a superhero and a supervillian at different points in his appearences. I'd also bring up Ozymandias as an example, who for most of his career acted as a superhero, but by the end of Watchmen acts as a supervillian, so as a result, like Lobo, appears in both categories. I'd also like to say I wouldn't change the opening paragraph because the Punisher is clearly an anti-hero before a superhero so it accurately describes him, but he's played the role of a superhero enough and has enough superhero tropes (a costume, an archnemesis in Jigsaw, etc) to merit superhero categorization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ash Loomis (talk • contribs) 15:02, 7 October 2012

No one else is arguing for the superhero category, and multiple editors have reverted the addition. There is no consensus by editors here, after much discussion, to add that category. And since neither the Punisher nor Lobo articles cite any reliable sources even discussing the possibility of their being superheroes (and in Lobo's case, a supervillain who occasionally does something pro-social for his own benefit), it is in any event a POV assertion that it's a category. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Eh? Everyone to discuss here other than you and that anonymous user has put forward arguments for the superhero category, including Doczilla, who was the one to bring up Marvel listing him as a superhero. He didn't say the category didn't belong, he said it's not up to us because Marvel lists the character as a superhero. Also, these multiple users all seem to have a very similar attitude and manner; I’d wager good money they’re one user. In any case, in terms of citations, hasn’t it already been established Marvel lists the Punisher as a superhero? What more reliable source could there be? Prior to now citing a reliable source wasn't important to you, you said sources like the character's publisher in fact do not matter. Your tune seems to be changing with each response, first it’s that the Punisher is too cruel and violent to be a superhero, then it’s that he lacks extraordinary abilities, now it’s that we lack a reliable source and that I'm supposedly the only one arguing for category, despite each of these positions being previously dealt with by myself or other users. You just seem to ignore whatever we write and then go for something else instead of trying to argue back. Well, out of respect for you, Wikipedia, and other editors, I’ll step down from adding the Punisher to the category myself. I will instead let another user do so if they see fit. But I will say that you seem to be the one imposing your own POV on the article and seem to be reading what you want to out of this discussion. Ash Loomis (talk) 06:46, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I think I did misread Doczilla, since it was an awkwardly written sentence. You're right. I'm not sure, however, where Marvel says he's a superhero; it's not at his character page on the official site: http://marvel.com/characters/bio/1009515/punisher.

You're being gracious — I do apreciate that — so I'll leave alone points where I feel my stance might have been misrepresented. For accuracy's sake, I would point out that Control9000, a registered user since 2010, also goes along with this stance, so it's not simply anonymous users. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:26, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

• We're actually arguing over if the Punisher is a Superhero or not… how the hell has it come to this?????? Even though it says at the top of the page The Punisher is a vigilante who employs murder, kidnapping, extortion, coercion, threats of violence, and torture in his war on crime. The Punisher himself doesn’t even see himself as a good guy or a Superhero on any level. Half the characters in the Marvel world sees him as a villain. Wow... 3 people here agree with Ash Loomis on this and he thinks he's right... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.75.24.2 (talk) 07:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
• He has had super powers/abilities before. Remember when he got chopped to pieces by Dakan, and then put back together as Frankenstein monster for awhile[6]? I stopped reading it then since that was just too stupid. He is currently in a series called Space Punisher where he seems to have above human abilities. He also had been killed and brought back by angels once, and kept getting shot in every issue to show off how he magically healed with his new angel powers. I think he magically pulled out weapons from under his coat as well. So he was a superhero there, reporting to nuns, and doing God's work for a bit. Dream Focus 22:44, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Hoo. Wow. That's not your father's Punisher. Well, if he's got magical powers and is fighting bad guys out of altruistic rather than sociopathic tendencies, then by all means, that sounds pretty much a superhero. While "seems to have above-human abilities" re: Space Punisher sounds like speculation, if the other stuff Dream Focus mentions is for real, then that's a whole 'nother thing. Can't speak for the other editors, but ar as I'm concerned, go for it. One caveat: Make sure to make this clear in the article body, so that it's not just a category without explanation.--Tenebrae (talk) 23:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

What do reliable sources call him? Anti-hero, or superhero, or just hero? I undid someone adding a category calling him a super-villain, since he only kills bad guys, and is doing this to help people. Dream Focus 17:59, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

• Why are his films now being called superhero films? Just because it's a comic book movie doesn't automatically make it a superhero film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.208.136.167 (talk) 10:06, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I think I know a way to solve this dispute, which has gone on for quite some time now. The most important thing to remember about the Punisher when thinking about 'heroes fighting heroes' is that he not only kills other superheros, he intentionally targeted them in some issues. That means his war is not only on crime, which would suggest being both an anti-hero and a superhero, he is also at war with every other superhero in the Marvel Universe; I think the main thing I'm trying to say here is he is not a hero or villain or anti-hero, he is all of the above depending on which issue you are reading. There's no way to zero in on one of them in order to classify him because he is all of them at one point or another. That reference, by the way, is a website dedicated to comics, just saying.

OdysseusTroy (talk) 21:30, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Charlottesville Punisher emblem.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC)