Talk:Masters of Evil

Fair use rationale for Image:Avengers-6.jpg

Image:Avengers-6.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) 06:10, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Avengers-6.jpg

Image:Avengers-6.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) 20:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Reverting Asgardian

As User:Asgardian has done often in the past, he again insists on add "vol. 1" and odd abbreviations of months in direct contravention of Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Style guidance.

He has been put on one-year probation for edit-warring (See here.) I have notified him of his recent such non-MOS changes to this article and to Galactus, and I can only state here in this open forum that I pray he does not start edit-warring again. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Over-reaction. Also avoid emotive and POV terms such as "pray". There are no martyrs here. You also reverted your own text -- minor technical changes aside - to make a point. Not a good start.

Asgardian (talk) 04:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

You still refuse to answer a simple question: Why do you believe that WPC MOS doesn't apply to you? --Tenebrae (talk) 04:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Still no response a day later. All Asgardian has done here is attack me with labels and accusations — a smokescreen to try to cloud the fact that he refuses to answer why he believes WikiProject Comics editorial guidelines do not apply to him. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Chronology problems

Here's what the first paragraph of publication history says now: "The original Masters of Evil, consisting of existing Marvel Comics supervillains, was gathered by former Nazi scientist Baron Heinrich Zemo in The Avengers #6 (July 1964). He led the team until his accidental death when in battle with Captain America in issue #15 (Sept. 1963)." 1964 come before 1963? I don't know enough of the history to fix this, but I know it has to be wrong. Monkey Bounce (talk) 06:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

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) 17:05, 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 16:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Couple problems

First, the PH is written like fictional character biographies. Publication history contains, in prose text, issue numbers and dates, real-world background details from the writers/artists involved, etc. These are just make-believe fictional histories. Secondly, the cover chosen calls the team depicted as the original, yet there's no Executioner or Enchantress, and there is the Melter, all three at odds with the text for "Masters of Evil I." This piece needs a lot of work, too much for one person; I'm making a call for collaborators to bring this C-rated article up to snuff. -- Tenebrae (talk) 02:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, that's just eerie. I was just thinking the same thing when I just edited the article. Better image and more precise prose. I'm starting to think the whole "FCB" thing is more trouble than it is worth and there should just be a "Commentary" section instead. Go ahead, take a first pass. Asgardian (talk) 02:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

"Commentary" by its nature is POV, unless we're quoting creators and authoritative critics. And while you may believe "the whole 'FCB' thing is more trouble than it is worth," the bulk of the WikiProject Comics editors are following the Project MOS. --Tenebrae (talk) 03:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

• No, that wasn't cause to try and imply anything. Had you asked, I would have directed you to certain articles where the focus is more about significance. And by the by, other than a hard PH it is all POV. Asgardian (talk) 05:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. NPOV factual material is cited regularly in numerous articles' "Fictional character biography" sections and many other places. -- Tenebrae (talk) 07:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, the information can be solid. How it gets to the article page is the point of contention in most cases (we all know about that one). That said, take a swing at the article. By the by, if you have time you may like to tackle Red Hulk. The PH has too much biographical information at present. It could be construed as being confrontational if I take a crack as Nightscream watches it closely. Could do with that journalistic interpretation, as at present very popular with the fans. Asgardian (talk) 07:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Again, not sure what that last sentence means, but sure, I'll be glad to take a look, though not tonight -- it's getting very late here. And I'll try and take a swing at Masters of Evil tomorrow. Ironically, the one thing I really care about most is creators' biographies — but there's so much spillover I find myself in the character stuff.

I'm glad we're talking; you may not believe it offhand, but perhaps you would if you thought about it: I have honestly and genuinely tried to be an ally and a colleague with you. You know that we've gone to each other for help on articles in the past, for instance. I truly wish things hadn't escalated to an Arb situation, and I wish you would believe me when I say that for what it's worth, I want you to be a part of the Project even though others are seriously talking about a ban. I swear to you that I am not being patronizing, as you long-ago maintained, and that I've been trying to come up with a workable solution. It's late and I'm probably a little punchy, but the sentiments are real. Please try and work with what people are suggesting and maybe drop the chip on your shoulder, and things will probably work out. I better call it a night. -- Tenebrae (talk) 08:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)