Talk:Trouble (comics)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

C-Class rated for Comics Project

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Trouble (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/20050308165335/http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/breakdowns/52.html to http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/breakdowns/52.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050901081015/http://thexaxis.com/misc/trouble1.htm to http://www.thexaxis.com/misc/trouble1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141111222113/http://www.spiderfan.org/fans/topten/00404.html to http://www.spiderfan.org/fans/topten/00404.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 03:04, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Reception

Reception section seems to be clunky. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.91.13.115 (talk) 14:27, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Sources re: Ultimate Spider-man

Right now the article claims twice that the series was meant to be the Ultimate Spider-man and once that readers who believed it to be in non-Ultimates continuity were mistaken. No sources are provided to back up this assertion.

The closest it gets to citing sources for it is this part from the Reception section:

The reveal that series' main characters, May, Ben, Mary and Richard, are meant to be Peter Parker's Aunt May and Uncle Ben, and his parents Richard and Mary Parker, and thus, the revelation that the Ultimate Marvel incarnation of Aunt May is actually Peter Parker's biological mother was seen as highly controversial among Spider-Man fans, with many criticisms of the series mistakenly implying the series to be set in Marvel's primary continuity,^[2][3][4]

Of the references provided: [2] goes to a piece about it getting a trade paperback release & mentions it as being intended as the primary continuity origin. Useful as showing that people interpreted it as being in the primary continuity, but not for proving it wasn't intended as such. [3] is a 1965 Spider-man issue. [4] is a 1997 issue. These last two are completely irrelevant here & I am assuming are left over from a previous version of this section where they made sense as references.

In the external links, there's an archived article from the press conference launching it. It makes only one reference to Ultimate Spider-man, which is concerned with orders for the first issue, not continuity. Comments about whether or not the story is intended to be Peter Parker's origin are met with equivocating from Millar & Jemas. No comments are made about it involving the Ultimate universe, and at least one statement of Millar's suggests (though does not state) that he viewed it as the primary continuity:

When asked whether or not he viewed this as the origin of Peter Parker and related continuity issues, Millar said: "I think the idea at the moment is that we believe this is what going on, and if people like the story, they can think that too," Millar said. "Marvel's quite interesting in that people were saying 'Aunt May grew up in the twenties!' But I think that Marvel has been quite cleverly vague about that for 40 years. Peter Parker doesn't become Spider-Man in the early '60s, he became Spider-Man ten or twelve years ago. In 50 years' time, he'll just have become Spider-Man ten or twelve years ago. So in that sense, this story is set and then ends nine months before Peter Parker enters the world."

TL;DR: the article needs sources if it's going to assert that it Marvel editorial intended for Ultimate Spider-man continuity; none of the links currently present even so much as imply that. (Suggesting that it was primary continuity also isn't well supported, but with what's currently there it's better than Ultimates continuity.) --g026r (talk) 21:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)