Talk:Jennifer Kale

Velez

It is important to note that Velez cited the Howard the Duck series in his run, claiming that Doctor Strange and Jennifer Kale accidentally brought Howard the Duck into Earth-616 and therefore made her repsonsible to get him home. This citation is an absolutely false one. He also totally screwed up Johnny Blaze's continuity through blatant careless mistakes. This is important if you're going to address ideas about a character he did not create, when he demonstrably was unfamiliar with his source material --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 06:30, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a thirdy-party source for this, or is this your own observation? -- Skarl 11:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

In other words, you are asking me to prove that this didn't happen in the course of the Howard the Duck series. How do I cite that this didn't happen? The series is back in print in both a black and white Essential edition and full-color omnibus edition, and I challenge anyone to find such a scene in it. As far as Velez's problems with Blaze's continuity, this is cited in a letter by James Herling in Ghost Rider #89. Paragraph 3 points out Velez's erroneous assertion that Wendigo was involved in the Siege of Darkness, notes that the kids disappeared in Ghost Rider #50 (Siege of Darkness ended in #45), and Blaze got his kids back in Blaze #12, yet Velez demonstrates a lack of awareness for continuity by sending Blaze and Jennifer Kale searching for the kids in Canada in a plot thread that goes absolutely nowhere. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 19:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Facts:

• Jennifer Kale first appeared in Fear #11. Andy mocks her for playing Doctor Strange, but Doctor Strange is not around, and Andy is simply invoking Strange's celebrity status. (December 1972)
• Howard the Duck first appeared in Fear #19 (December 1973)
• Howard the Duck first met Doctor Strange in Marvel Treasury Edition #12, which is set in-between Howard the Duck #s 7 (December 1976) and 8 (January 1977) (the wrap-up with the Defenders is on the splash page of #8)
• Jennifer Kale appeared in no issues of Howard the Duck other than issues #22-24 (March-May 1978), and Doctor Strange did not appear in any of these issues.
• Doctor Strange and Jennifer Kale first met in Man-Thing vol. 2 #4 (May 1980)

These facts simply do not allow for Velez to have written this in Ghost Rider #81, pp. 20-21:

Howard: Or have you forgotten that you're the reason I'm in this hairless apeland in the first place! If you and Doc Strange hadn't opened up that dimensional wormhole* I'd still be in my decent, beautiful little world... where a duck can walk with his bill up high... with honor and respect and--

*It happened a long time ago in the Howard the Duck series--James

One would have to show that Doctor Strange made another appearance in the Howard the Duck series than the splash page of #8 to refute my statements. So either do that or rescind your claims. We are dealing with published materials, so WP:OR does not apply. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 19:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a claim. I have an observation: you're using primary sources as a basis for your own insight, which is in the realm of original research – that, plus adding unsourced info relating to a living person, doesn't exactly make for a hopeful argument in favour of adding this content.

That said, if you're going to start reverting to your preferred version again, please don't add in the non-free image. It adds nothing to the section whether it contains your commentary on Velez or not. I'm less concerned by pointing out (or not pointing out) "errors" in the in-universe stuff than I am about the misuse of non-free media – in case you haven't noticed, that's what my edits were addressing. -- Skarl 20:18, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

We don't use primary sources to make claims about BLPs - your observations are worthless, provide secondary sources or a) have the material removed and b) be blocked. That's the start, middle and end of it. You could be entirely right but that's irrelevant to us - we work with verification not truth. --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

How is this BLP??? This is a fictional character!!! Verification is looking at the book and seeing that Velez claims something is there that isn't there. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Velez is a living person. BLP covers any info about living persons, no matter where the info is. And verifiability is easy to sum up: "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources". Where is your reliable, third-party source? -- Skarl 09:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, you have been editing here for over two years so how basic policy has passed you by is beyond me. Your views on what's correct or incorrect are original research - we don't actually care if you are right or not because, as mentioned above, we are about verification not truth. Verification is provided by reliable third party sources. You've been asked a number of times to provide them, so provide them. And before we get the obvious reply - responsibility for providing sources lies with those wishing to add it, not those who remove unsourced information. --Cameron Scott (talk) 11:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, here is a third party that says the events Velez described as appearing in the pages of Howard the Duck never appeared there, but I also realize that blogs are an automatic fail under WP:RS: http://www.majorspoilers.com/archives/50442.htm/#more-50442 --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Alternate versions

Are there enough Alternate Versions of Kale to make this feasible? An Ultimate version, Exiles, What if? etc. I ask because I remember in a What If? late in the 2nd run, a Mephisto-corrupted Danny Ketch picked up a hitchhiker named Jennifer Kale and buried her in a shallow grave on the next page. WookMuff (talk) 09:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:87 marvel zombies 4 4.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:87 marvel zombies 4 4.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Sexuality?

Is there a purpose to this section? Why does it this its own section? It should be incorporated into the rest of the article. 173.209.103.10 (talk) 04:39, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Image

This article really needs an full image of her, not just those heads. -- Beardo (talk) 21:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC)