Talk:Weapon Plus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Comics 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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and provide comments here.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Project: Homegrown and the Black Budget

This could use a little more info about the UK version - if memory serves, at least one of the UK super soldiers (Gog) can be dated back to the Falklands War (1982), quite some time after Vietnam. Although I think most of the others are older...? --Mrph 19:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weapon Plus and the Camp Cathcart experiments

The Camp Cathcart experiments on the African American troops had to happen after the experiment which turned Steve Rogers into Captain America, and thus can't be Weapon Zero. First, the Camp Cathcart experiments didn't start until several months after Pearl Harbor, as explicitly shown in The Truth. [b]Several[/b] other titles, including notably Giant Size Invaders #2, which has been published by Marvel subsequent to The Truth, show Steve Rogers not only powered, but active, well prior to Pearl Harbor. Marvel's own ruling on this, published in the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe, makes it explicit that Rogers came before Bradley. The comment made on the history page about someone reading a Captain America comic in The Truth supports this; yes, another soldier dismisses it as propaganda, but he's wrong - a false recounting written before Rogers was empowered couldn't have anticipated the identity of the person chosen months later, and we know from other titles that Steve Rogers is not an alias. 84.9.85.228 17:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

When originally planned as a stand-alone, out of continuity story, The Truth could imply that the Camp Cathcart experiments pre-dated the experiments on Steve Rogers. Even then, it didn't explicitly state this - the appearance of the Captain America comic within the actual story makes it ambiguous, because although it is claimed to be a falsehood by one of the participants, he has no way of knowing for sure, and it's highly unlikely they could have retroactively found a "Steve Rogers" whose background matched so well the one shown in the comic. But, again, as a stand-alone, out of continuity title, you might just get away with that. But once The Truth was moved in to fit with the rest of Marvel canon, it became outright impossible for the Camp Cathcart experiments to come before Steve Rogers. The Cathcart experiments all explicitly take place in 1942, by which time Captain America was already active in the Invaders, and trying to change that would affect the timelines of dozens of characters. The recent Giant Sized Invaders #2, published after The Truth, again confirms the Invaders were active in 1941, meaning Marvel still considers Steve Rogers active in 1941. For The Truth to fit, the experiments have to be trying to recreate the formula lost with the death of Professor Erskine (the original scientist codenamed Reinstein, as opposed to his replacement seen in The Truth). Marvel's Handbook entry for Isaiah Bradley's grandchild, Patriot, backs this up, explicitly stating Cathcart was after Rogers became Captain America. 84.12.182.64 02:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The page was reverted because the Marvel Universe entry was incorrect, the most recent Marvel Universes have been wrong enough times that the best source of information for reliable information entered was the original mini-series. --Basique 20:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

That's a rather arrogant attitude for you to presume that you know better than Marvel does. The original mini-series does NOT categorically state that the Camp Cathcart experiments took place before the experiments on Steve Rogers. They state the Cathcart experiments take place in 1942. One, extremely cynical, character, writes off the Captain America comic which covers the origin of Rogers and which was published prior to their experiments as propaganda. However, that character is making a presumption. You can't take the mini-series in isolation from the rest of the Marvel universe if you also want it to apply to that universe. We know from other titles that Rogers' origins are not a propaganda exercise, AND that Rogers was active well before 1942. By 1942 he had been working alongside several other heroes in the Invaders. This means the cynical sergeant in The Truth who thinks the comic is propaganda is unequivocably wrong. It doesn't make the crimes against the soldiers at Camp Cathcart or their suffering any the less, but it does mean that it didn't happen before Steve Rogers became Captain America, and it does mean that Isaiah Bradley cannot be Weapon 0, retroactively or otherwise. 84.12.26.111 23:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not arrogance in reference to the Marvel Universe guides, they have been horribly edited. But I do see you point about Captain America based solely on the timeline of his debut. --Basique 01:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The World

It seems that The World deserves a separate article where its structure and the social life within the hemisphere can be explored in a more detailed manner, perhaps pointing to its resemblance to the similar habitat portrayed in the famous sci-fi movie Logan's Run (1976). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Univer (talkcontribs) 12:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] DC?

Morrison's We3 has been listed on this page as a "possible" part of the Weapon Plus Program, without citation as to the source of the rumor. Shouldn't the fact that this book was published by DC be enough to shoot that down? Hewinsj 04:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I believe the purpose of that We3 statement wasn't to show We3 as a possible Weapon Plus project, but rather it was meant to note that Grant Morrison established the concept for Marvel during his New X-Men run, and then wrote a similar book based around said concept for DC. I personally found the note rather informative as I had never noticed that link before, even though I had read both of the series mentioned above. --156.34.86.50 12:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible to write that out more clearly? Something like "Morrison introduced this element of the Weapon Plus Project during his time writing New X-men and later carried the theme into other projects, such as the DC published We3"? I may have just been confused, because I read the original note to mean that WE3 was potentially a part of Marvel's cannon, even though it was printed by a different publisher. Hewinsj 23:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah yes, that should work. Definitely. --156.34.95.214 04:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I re-added it to be a little more clear that We3 isn't an X-men story. Any good? Hewinsj 14:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
That should work fine, I re-worded a bit of it, but nothing major. Good work. --156.34.69.169 05:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] stepford cuckoos

someone should add a pic of the stepford cuckoos--Cerebra 09:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Wolverine (comics).PNG

Image:Wolverine (comics).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) 03:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Captain america4.jpg

Image:Captain america4.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) 04:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)