Talk:Shocker (comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Clean-up

This page was in drastic need of being cleaned up. I restructured it, added some history, and removed some of the blatantly uncited/speculative passages (while I'm a great fan of the character, exactly where does the proof that he has a large fan base come from?).

Anyhow, I think it reads a lot better now, though if anyone has any suggestions?

[edit] Fan fiction

As much as I like the fanfic mentioned in the bio, it doesn't seem especially relevant - not to mention, referencing a fanfic seems like a very, very, very dangerous precedent. (If one is mentioned in a Shocker entry, why not more in Spider-man? Harry Potter? Who decides which fanfics get to be mentioned, and is it NPOV to say that one is well-written?) So I'm removing that last sentence. Tinderblast 21:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


Being the one who created the fic's separate entry, I'm not going to do more than debate this topic here (changing the entry back would be pretty childish and trollish on my part,) but I do find your points genuinely invalid.
On the point of relevancy: the sentence immediately before makes note of the fact that Shocker is considered underrated by fans and has a large fanbase; I will assume you believe this to be true, since you didn't delete it. Large chunks of the article before that, especially at the beginning, point out Shocker as a second-rate villain who doesn't get much screen time. All of this added up suggests that it's perfectly logical to have that reference to TSL. It's saying "Look, fans of this thing that's popular but not used all that often in canon, here's something you can look at that has to do with what interests you."
On the point of it setting a dangerous precedent: How? Thing is, Spider-Man and Harry Potter already have a metric ton (if not more) of fanfiction written about them. You don't need to read their Wiki pages to know that Spider-Man and Harry Potter have lots of fan material; if you check ff.net, there are eight other stories in the Spidey category with more than 100, 000 words. The Harry Potter section has fifty-seven PAGES of material over that length.
Unless there's some hidden and very devoted base of Shocker authors out there, TSL is the only special thing the character has in terms of fanwork and the fan community. It's a nod to the point made in the sentence you left intact. It goes back to what I said in the first place about a large fanbase having a link to something that for other characters is a dime a dozen (long epic fanfics) but for this one, is something special. You wouldn't have fanfiction mentioned about more mainstream characters because there's simply too much of it; it would take up too much space before you even get to the topic of who decides quality.
I would say the logical solution is for pages with more mainstream characters to point to fanfiction archives where anyone interested in fanfiction can frolic in the sea of material (or perhaps even have separate pages with lists of well known fanfiction,) and pages for little characters should point to whatever happens to be out there (in this case, TSL) so the reader can immediatly be pointed to what they want.
As for quality control, I don't buy for one minute that this is any kind of problem. Saying it's a problem is the politically correct route of not offending anyone. Who are we worried about offending here, though? The droves of egotistical wannabe authors who not only can't write a straight sentence but put no effort into improving?
It's pretty obvious what makes good fanfiction and what doesn't when you use a little common sense; good characterization, spelling, grammar, punctuation, plot. Same as with a published work. TSL isn't perfect, and I even said that flat out on its page, but no one would look at it objectively and not tell you its leaps and bounds above 90% of fanfiction on the Internet. Even if they don't like it, you can't objectively deny that the quality of the actual writing is well, well above average.
I don't see any reason why there should be worry over offending people at what does and what doesn't get chosen. Any whiny brat trying to get their flagrant Mary Sue on Spider-Man's page would have it deleted by people with common sense about what makes a good story in five seconds flat. Again, the importance here is that this is a rarity for the character in question, and being a rarity, it has far more importance than the exact same thing would for Spider-Man. This should cover the "Well-written" idea strictly speaking about NPOV (again, "well-written" is not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of whether or not the author has a good enough grasp of syntax, grammar etc. to write well) although the sentence as a whole would probably have been better served actually stating why TSL is unique and why it's important in this context while a similar thing for a mainstream character wouldn't be important at all. --SSJ.Alhazred 23:57, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Thing is though that there would be absolutely no other valid reason not to link to fanfics on more obscure characters (and from there on, the bigger characters), whether they are bad or good. If you allow one fanfic mention, you allow them all. Really, even though Shocker: Legit is leaps and bounds over most fanfic, why not put up a link to another fanfic about the Shocker? There's no defendable basis not too. Kusonaga 21:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
That's pretty much it exactly - eventually, one would have to make a judgment call somewhere. It wouldn't necessarily be on the Shocker's page, but we really need to try and keep the standards of inclusion of material as universal as possible.
Kudos to the people who fleshed out this article, providing canonical explanation as to why Shocker is a popular character (and, one presumes, why the author of The Shocker: Legit chose to write their fic in the first place). Tinderblast 00:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Why is their a "Herman Shultz" page and a "Shocker" Page? I request a merge. 68.166.70.23 04:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Caption and Ultimate

Since the Shocker's picture show him blasting someone, should it not be mentioned who this someone is?

And I humbly request someone more familar with Ultimate Spiderman to work on the Ultimate section. Didn't the Shocker affect Ultimate Punisher? I -dimly- recall the Shocker's first case being news to a rapist, who wanted to use it to get out of jail and go after an almost-victim. The Punisher then kills the rapist. If this really happened, I think it includes mention.

Lots42 03:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you asking about the main picture at the top of the page for who he is blasting? Freak104 16:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hand-gesture referenced?

I read somewhere that the "shocker" hand-gesture was referenced in the comics at some point. If anybody has it, could you please post the relevant panel?

Also, shouldn't there be something about how the Shocker was originally going to be called "the Vibrator" (because he has powers of vibration, not electricity, which is Electro's thing), until some editor realized...well, you know. Which is why he has a "V" on his belt to this day. No idea where I heard this from, unfortunately.

While I wouldn't put it past Stan Lee to not realize the double entendre he'd accidentally put in, it can't go into the article unless you can find a source. Notthegoatseguy 21:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General Parvo

I knew it! I watched an episode of Spiderman: The Animated Series with Shocker in it, and I recognized his voice. He's the same guy who voiced General Parvo on Road Rovers.Ben 10 15:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Shockerthe.png

Image:Shockerthe.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 20:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)