Talk:Sentinel (comics)

Novmeber 25, 2005; Requested Move: Sentinels (comics) → Sentinel (comics)

As Wikipedia suggests that we avoid plural titles, what should this article be named? Sentinel (comics) cannot be used because it is already an article about the comic book title. --Apostrophe 08:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

COMMENT: This is a old comment. I have already moved Sentinel (comics) to Sentinel (comic). --Apostrophe 07:41, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

• RENAME but to Sentinel (X-Men), there are other Sentinels in comics. 132.205.44.134 01:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Oppose; There aren't any Sentinels in comics that are as big as the Marvel Comics ones.--DrBat 02:04, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Comment why does that matter? You'd in turn need to disambiguate Sentinels (comics) then, instead of having an unambiguous title. 132.205.44.134 20:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

A separate disambig page could be made for other the sentinel comics. As it stands, the robots in Marvel are the most well-known.--DrBat 22:41, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

• Support. Move Sentinel (comics) to Sentinel (comic book) to make way for the move. -Sean Curtin 04:47, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Oppose; i oppose how this article has been moved. the point of sentinels is that they are a mass produced army of robots who are designed to hunt down and kill mutants in groups. also sentinels are a range of charcters, archtypes and varrients of sentinels. other comic book charcters articles only focuses on one charcter... for example scott summer is cyclops on his own. also sentinels have allways been refered to as a a group rather then individual. for example their first appearance on the cover of classic uncancy xmen 12 they are refered to on the cover as "among us stalks the sentinels" creating a president for them to be called a group noun and not singular. also the first green lantern alan scot has used the codename sentinel before people could get confused even though his article is named alan scott.--Dr noire 17:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyright

Do we specifically have permission to use the copyrighted image that is on this article's page? We may well do, so I am asking here before marking this as a potential copyright violation. --Yamla 20:57, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

Specific permission is not necessary because our use falls under fair use. Not all unauthorized uses constitute copyright infringement. Under U.S. copyright law, a four-factor balancing test is used to determine whether a particular unauthorized use is considered "fair use", and therefore free from any potential infringement liability, based on the nature of the copyrighted work, the nature of the use, the amount of the original that is copied, and the potential the use has to supplant the commercial value of the original. On Wikipedia, it isn't necessary to go through this analysis for each and every new image that is posted because there are certain categories of image usage that the Wikipedia community has already determined are presumptively safe under fair use. If you look at the description page for Image:Uncanny_X-Men_202.jpg, you'll notice that there is a standard box applied (Template:Comiccover)—this indicates that it is accepted policy on Wikipedia that this particular image use qualifies as fair use. Please note on Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that use of product covers of all kinds—DVDs, CDs, books, etc—are treated as fair use. It is therefore inappropriate to list any image as a copyright violation if there is such a standard template correctly applied; a broader discussion should instead be started to raise questions about the validity of the template, if you have concerns.

As to whether the creation and community approval of the comic book cover fair use template was legally correct, I believe that it is. Though a product cover bears an image that is covered by copyright, our use is purely to refer to that product and to make use of the information contained on it (the visual description of the subject matter of the product). Our use is for academic purposes (though some Wikipedia mirrors may have commercial advertising), and our use is also of a lower resolution copy than the original. Our use of a cover image cannot supplant the commercial value of the product, particularly since covers are generally displayed to the world at large to identify and advertise the product (in other words, no one needs to purchase the product in order to gain the benefit of seeing the cover image). More importantly, covers are not sold independently of their products. If you read through the standard for fair use, you'll see this is a rather solid argument. Postdlf 22:32, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, this completely satisfies me. We clearly do not have a copyright issue here. --Yamla 03:30, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)

Age of the Apocalypse

Where can I find pictures of the Sentinels featured in this alternate future. I can remember they look like T-800 Terminators, but with cannons on their shoulders...--Arado 23:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Captain America & the Avengers

I remember a Sentinel is a Boss for one level of this game, should we add this to the In Other Media section? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ViccoLizcano (talk • contribs) 23:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

Problems with the Genosha attack

OK, problem: four sentinels are seen leaving the Master Mold (standard looking models), and Cassandra Nova says "launched four supersonic death machines...". Two are seen attacking Genosha (a one headed and a three headed model). It is the three headed model which Toad et al turn into the monument to Magneto.

In the Dangerous run of Astonishing X-Men, Danger says "A Wild Sentinel killed sixteen million mutants... and nobody wondered where it went?" before repowering the three headed model.

The appearance of the original four can be passed off as artistic license (what Cyclops and Wolverine see, assuming them to be standard models as they cannot see the details), but the other problems remain:

What happened to the other two which left for Genosha?

What happened to the one headed model after the Genosha attack? If it was still there, why didn't Danger re-power it? (Professor X's "no living being is completely rational" does not cover such an obvious mistake.)

For that matter, why did Danger believe it was the only one to attack the city?

What shut down the three headed (and possibly one-headed) model in the first place? (Polaris or Magneto would be obvious answers, but if Magneto could have stopped them he would have done it before they destroyed the city). --Lollerkeet 05:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free images

This article has way to many fair use images, in violation of both foundation directive and our own Non-free content criteria. If an interested party wants to strip out all but the couple of the most important, that'd be great, otherwise I'm just going to pull all but the first two images tomorrow. Thanks. -M^ask? 14:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sentinels.PNG

Image:Sentinels.PNG 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) 07:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Uxm098.png

Image:Uxm098.png 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) 05:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The Next "X-Men" Movie

Spam. Deleted. Dick Holman.Archolman 14:57, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Remove history section?

So, I found this page at the bottom of the copyedit backlog, and I took a quick pass at the lead section. Then I moved on to the "History" section, and very soon after that I stopped. This section looks like accurate, well-informed content, but it's got some issues and I'm not sure it belongs on WP.

It strikes me as far too long for what it is; this much plot summary, especially first thing after the lead section, makes for a clunky read. Furthermore, Wikipedia's not supposed to include long plot summaries, and in the case of a mainstream comic storyline, most casual readers - people who are just curious what a Sentinel is - won't benefit. Indeed, a lot of the content seems more appropriate for a dedicated Marvel page, and it does appear at marvel.wikia, so I'm thinking we don't need it. Lastly, and most importantly, it's been wearing an "unreferenced" tag for nearly two years.

I propose nixing the section. If somebody wants to provide references, they'd be welcome to restore it, and I'd gladly copy edit, if it still needs it. But if someone does go that route, I'd also recommend scaling the section way back, or, if it can be much improved, maybe spinning it off so it doesn't clutter up this article. Any objections? --Moralis (talk) 09:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I concur. One sentence in particular sticks out at me: "More recently, several Sentinels were disabled when X-Force attacked the X-Mansion to free the 198." There's the dreaded "recently" word, and the sentence just assumes the reader instantly knows what the "198" are without any effort to provide context (and I'm pretty sure Marvel debunked 198 as a hard number for the number of mutants remaining after House of M anyway). WesleyDodds (talk) 12:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Since there doesn't seem to be any objection, I'm going to go ahead and remove the section. I'll go on with the copy edit after that. --Moralis (talk) 02:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Robotics attention needed

• Debolden as per MoS
• Check article
• Assess if within scope

Chaosdruid (talk) 00:57, 13 March 2011 (UTC)