Talk:Iron Man/Archive 1

Too Long?

Is it or isn't it? The banner looks to have been in place for some time and I do not see any discussion about it. Can some one point me in the right direction if it has been archived? GLKeeney 20:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:SIZE, the article size is just fine. I calculate readable prose as being closer to 40kb (not exact as I didn't remove everything that was supposed to be removed when calculating the size). My suggestion is that the banner can come down, the article is not too long.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Done GLKeeney 23:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Vietnam reference

Isn't the reference to Vietnam a retcon, put in place IIRC by John Byrne in the late 1980s? Luis Dantas

It was pretty obvious it was Vietnam in the original story, but to be honest I can't recall without access to my issues at the moment if it was named or just an unnamed South East Asian country. David Michelinie was the one who made it explicit in the 70s, I believe. If someone can confirm it and fix it, that'd be great. --khaosworks 19:15, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

From what little I can gather, it was unnamed. I've fixed it in the main text. --khaosworks 19:25, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ick. A troll of USENET now shows that yes, it was named Vietnam. Reverted. --khaosworks 19:34, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I hear now (from chatting with folks at the local comics shoppe) that it's been (re)changed, and that now Stark was wounded in Afghanistan in the last 1990s, not 'Nam in the last 60s. Can anyone confirm? --Dr Archeville 05:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

According to the local clerk at the nearest comics shop I go to, he said that Stark was injured in Afghanistan in the late 1980s, instead of Vietnam. At this point, Tony would have been just in his early to mid 20s, which would make him approximately 40+ as of today (the oldest man in the Marvel Universe next to Captain America). Also, the Fantastic Four (not yet formed), Spider-Man (probably a toddler at this point), and the Avengers did not exist. That's what he said, hope it helps! --Jonathan.Bruce 06:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Just a side note, as far as normal humans who are in the "superhero" lifestyle, the Punisher is usually portrayed as having aged in real time. He's around 60 now, in other words. Bucky also came back from the dead, and is close to Cap's age.

Armors

I think, of all the Marvel characters, Iron Man has the most number of costumes (or in this case, armors). The funny thing is, Iron Man's Wiki page has not a list of them at least. Wolverine has a list of all the costumes he's had. Why can't Iron Man have his? --Windspinner 09:06, 5 September 2005 (UTC)windspinner

There's a couple of external links to sites which list the various armors. I mean, Tony changes armors like he changes underwear, and I'm uncertain of the encyclopedic value of listing every armor he's ever had. If you feel energetic enough, you might want to create a daughter article just for the armors (as to put it in the main article would probably make it way too long). Personally, I feel that a listing of that nature is way too trivial (and I don't like it in Wolverine either), but hey, knock yourself out. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 09:18, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right, it might seem too trivial. Well, I was just thinking that those armors were part of Iron Man's history, and putting them on this page would make it a more interesting article, but I guess I might have thought wrong as some just-curious-who-Iron-Man-is readers might find it uninteresting and tiresome. Hey, how about we just place here Tony's women? Nah, just kidding. --Windspinner 23:48, 5 September 2005 (UTC)windspinner

I don't think so. IM(NS)HO, it may reflect changes in attitude (in Logan, anyhow), & in IM, there's room for comment on "fadishness" (or "fannishness") of the suits: recall, there were shrieks of protest when artists first del the mask's nose... In the main article, N, but... Trekphiler 17:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps a comprimise could be made as to list important changes in his armor. The first being grey, his upgrade being gold (thus the nickname the Golden Avenger), the nose and flack involved, the Stealth armor, Hulkbuster, the new nano-armor. This display important turning points and highlight function rather than simply form (well, all but the nose). --RedKnight 17:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd not mind working on an "Armors of Iron Man" page. I mean, Captain America's shield and Mjolnir, the Hammer of Thor have their own pages, so why not one for Tony's suits? Dr Archeville 14:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Actors

I don't think anyone official has made reference to Matt Dillon being attached to the Iron Man movie. No actors have been discussed publically, whoever put Matt Dillon is probably just a fan, but I won't go delete it myself if there's something I don't konw.

Latest news releases place Robert Downey, jr in the role of Tony Stark.--RedKnight 17:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's already in the article. CovenantD 01:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite

Maybe it's me, but, every app he's made outside IM? And who decided which stories were "important"? What happened to the assassination of the ambassador? The first alky story? Revealling his ID to Michael O'Brien? Beth telling him she knew? Or Kraken?! This reads like a MU entry, very biased toward the contemporary IM: N mention Whitney Frost (!) or Mandarin (!), nor Yellow Claw, Midas, the Melter... Hey, I was a sometime fan, so I'm N in a pos to write it, but it sure needs some rewrite. IMHO, the article should be an examination of IM's history & his significance as a character within the MU, N a glorified MU entry for potential readers if IM... Trekphiler 17:49, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

To try and address some of the concerns: The assassination of the Carnellian ambassador is actually in the entry, just before we talk about Stane. The Mandarin is also there; Yellow Claw, Midas, the Melter are all minor, and Yellow Claw wasn't really even an Iron Man villain anyway, just a drag-in from the Timely days to address the similarities between him and the Mandarin. I've read Iron Man over the last nearly thirty years or so and while it's obviously just my take on it, the stories mentioned are the major ones that people actually remember and go on about, not small things like Bethany telling Stark she knew the worst-kept secret identity in comics-dom. You'll notice there isn't a mention of Janice Cord either (though there arguable should be).

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying you don't have a point about the content being more about the "modern Iron Man", but recent development generally hold stronger weight in the mind's eye. I do agree that there should be a bit more about Stark's place in the MU as the technologist and businessman (and to a degree that's also mentioned), and probably a bit about the aforementioned worst-kept secret identity, and unless someone else does, I'll think on that over the next few days, but not everything needs to be in, IMO. Thanks for the suggestions, in any case. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

External links

I pruned the following links per my understanding of WP:EL and to avoid the Spam Event Horizon.

• The Many Armors of Iron Man
• DRG4's Iron Man the Animated Series Page
• 1994 Animated Theme
• 1996 Animated Theme
• Iron Man 12
• The Power of Iron Man!

There seem to be several authoritative links without needing to go into aol member pages and geocities pages, and the themes appear to me to be problematic re copyright. - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 17:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Iron Man movie rights have been reverted back to Marvel.

So the "current" information detailing an Iron Man movie is unfortunately out of date. There is no definite plans or release schedule for an Iron Man movie.

• There are currently plans for an Iron Man movie to be released in 2008. I have added a link to the See Also section. Aericanwizard 20:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Mega Morphs

I'm pretty sure that the Mega Morphs comic series isn't canon. 24.62.27.66 01:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

It was mentioned, and flatly denied by Stark, in the Civil War edition of the Daily Bugle (published by Marvel but with articles set within the Marvel Universe). That implies to me that MegaMorphs IS canon, but officially covered up by Stark and his government allies (not to mention the fact that Wolverine would never admit to having been part of it). - Kevingarcia 08:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Publication History

"After the final issue, #99 (March 1968), after which the book became Captain America, Iron Man appeared in the one-shot Iron Man and Sub-Mariner #1 (April 1968), before debuting in his own title with The Invincible Iron Man #1 (May 1968)."

I have researched this statement and it is accurate except for the title of Iron Man's first comic of 1968. Although the cover of the comic lists 'The Invicible Iron Man' the actual publication title is simply 'Iron Man' as displayed in the indicia within the comic. There has actually been no Iron Man series titled The Invicible Iron Man.

I had attempted to correct this on the main page (by simply placing 'The Invisible' within brackets so as to not change the actual text) but this has been changed back since then.

In the interest of accuracy this should be corrected. --RedKnight 23:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm all for just plain Iron Man if the consensus is not to use longer cover title, The Invincible Iron Man. The Unofficial Handbook of Marvel Comics Creators uses the cover title, while the equally authoritative Grand Comics Database uses the indicia title. Six'a one, half dozen'a of the other. Just please not parentheses or brackets that aren't in either!  :-) --Tenebrae 04:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Best place to start?

Whats the best issue to start reading Iron Man?I dont mean just one important issue, I mean one important and good. Thanks for help!

Origin Story?

I'm trying to figure this out.

According to this entry (and other sources I've read) Tony Stark created the original armor in Vietnam (In Tales of Suspense 39). For some reason I was always under the impression that this story took place during the Korean War.

This makes more sense to me, as the US didn't enter Vietnam till 1965, and Tales of Suspense 39 was published in 1963.

Does anyone know for sure if this was mentioned in the comic at all? Or have they just ret-conned the whole thing to Vietnam anyway to make Tony Stark seem younger? --Spectre General 02:40, 10 May 2006

The US did not commit combat troops in Vietnam until 1965, but the US had began sending military advisors to train the South Vietnamese as far back as 1955, and in fact, that's when the Vietnam Veterans Memorial starts recording the start of US military involvement. The original TOS story explicitly - and specifically - states that the country is Vietnam. The war in Korea ended in 1953. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 06:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Well there you go. Thanks alot! --Spectre General 02:40, 10 May 2006

I hear now (from chatting with folks at the local comics shoppe) that it's been (re)changed, and that now Stark was wounded in Afghanistan in the last 1990s, not 'Nam in the last 60s. Can anyone confirm? --Dr Archeville 05:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ultimate Iron Man

The reason for my deletion was that the edits constitute conclusions ("This is his motivation for his many acts of "philanthropy"; "this version of Stark is also written with...") and speculation ("as well as possibly his motivation for becoming a superhero)", both of which are disallowed as [[Wikipedia:No_original_research|original research].

What would work is to quote one of the writers or a character in comics him/herself, e.g., "Joe Smith, who wrote Iron Man in the early 1990s said in (cite interview source here) that such-and-such provided the motivation for Stark's philanthropy and heroics," or "Joe Smith, author of Ultimate Avengers said in (cite interview source here) that he envisioned this alternate-universe version as more of a such-and-such than his mainstream-continuity counterpart". -- Tenebrae 13:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

My point, however, is that this isn't OR. I know the difference - this is stuff directly from the source material. Stark said that the tumor was the reason he became a superhero; this isn't my deduction. Stark acts like more of a thrillseeking playboy than his Earth-616 counterpart, again which is evident in the comic, not my conclusions. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The citation from the comic, where Stark himself states it, is exactly spot-on. That's exactly the way, and thank you for taking the time to look it up and put it in.

The other thing, about the thrill-seeking playboy, really does remain conclusion, though. For example, I would argue that they're both thrill-seeking playboys. Stark's been a race-car driving, etc., he's considered a playboy in the main-continuity media, etc. It's interpretation in either case, and that's why Wiki disallows conclusion and says to stick to the concrete stuff. -- Tenebrae 15:36, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm a fan of Ultimate Iron Man, and have read most of the issues he appears in. I added information to the section (why didn't anybody mention unbearable pain, or his healing factor?) The fact his name is Antonio rather than Anthony is rather important. Or at least noteworthy. Going from Caucasian to Hispanic is a big change. All that information is omni-present in the Ultimate Iron Man mini-series. I also noticed that Ultimate Marvel Team Up #4 says Tony rescued the Vice-President, while the tpb of Ultimate Iron Man says he rescued the President.CovertSomnophore 20:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Nitro Connection

Nitro's bio on Marvel.com has recently, rather conspicuously, been updated to reveal that Tony Stark has access to a frequency that can force Nitro to detonate. Seems somewhat notable. 24.62.27.66 04:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Only if it's later revealed Tony blew up Nitro at Stamford. But Iron Man wouldn't do a thing like that...CovertSomnophore 20:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds skrully to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.175.226.207 (talk) 03:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Changing Fortunes revisions

This section seems to go off-topic and gives only brief summaries or descriptions of what I feel could be separate articles or much larger sections, namely Armor Wars, Armor Wars II, and the death of Tony Stark. I suggest a rewrite of this section and give these three story arcs at least new sections, but new articles would probably be the way to go. I can help contribute to the Armor Wars II and death of Tony story arcs.--Undertow87 17:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The picture

I do not think that the image on the article is a good example of Iron Man. Thats really all I have. I hope I added this comment correctly.

I agree with you above because it does not seem to encapsulate what Iron Man is as a symbol. I have been trying to understand Wikipedias stance on image attachment and in the sense of comics seems lacking in advice. Also, hope correct addition format 82.35.9.154 (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC) unsigned!!!

Generally, what we are looking for is an available fair use low-res but clear image of the character as he appears now, or in his most iconic form. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 23:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Civil War section

This seems to be a lengthy Civil War primer. I'd like to propose we concentrate on Iron Man's part of the events, in short summary, and insert the template

Main article: Civil War (comics)

Thoughts? -- Tenebrae 18:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The section is not only long, but horribly written. It reads like a rambling train of thought, and the tense keeps shifting. I'd try to edit it, but I'm new here, and i got a headache just from reading it. My head will likely explode trying to parse the whole thing.

"Significant stories"

Elsewhere in the Comics Project, this kind of section has been removed as inherently POV. I can say that in my own opinion, as opposed to the opinion of the original editor(s), many of the stories listed here are not significant. They also use blantatnly POV terms ("first and greatest battle"). I'm calling for discussion on this. A smaller list of historically notable issues would be appropriate. --Tenebrae 16:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

How funny. I was just going to start a discussion about it also. I'm for the elimination of it entirely, but would like to know what criteria you would use for "historically notable" and how that would avoid random editors adding their personal favorites. CovenantD 19:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Good questions. It gets me to thinking we might move this discussion over to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/editorial guidelines and make it more global.

My first pass, and feel free to copy-paste this if consensus is to move it there. First appearances, certainly. Issues that introduced major characters. Issues with major costume changes. Issues with major change of locale (e.g., Daredevil temporarily moving to San Francisco, in '70s comics). Issues with confirmably acclaimed/award-winning or otherwise notable creators beginning a run. Death/marriage (not that those two are equated!) of a major character. Some major, enduring change, which would take the perspective of time. Thoughts? --Tenebrae 03:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Issues where Stark first falls to alcoholism? --Dr Archeville 14:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Reference the issues in the pub. and character histories, remove the list. --Jamdav86 19:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge Iron Maniac into Iron Man?

Maybe I'm missing something, but he doesn't seem notable enough to deserve his own article. The WikiProject Comics editorial guidelines on alternate versions state that 'alternate versions of characters should have entries in the main article unless that article grows unmanageably large' and seem to suggest splitting into additional articles as a last resort. --Mrph 00:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Survey

• Merge - --Mrph 00:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and trim. The character is not noteworthy enough for his own article. However, the Iron Man does not need to waste that much space merely merging this material into it. Iron Maniac should be left with very little detail after the merge. Doczilla 01:11, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and trim - per the guidance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Style guidance I think you can just be bold and do it. It's a one-shot alternate version, definitely not in need of its own article. --Newt_ΨΦ 01:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge - --NetK 04:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and trim - I barely think Iron Maniac deserves a mention, and certainly not his own article. --JackofSpades 07:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and trim - Tenebrae 15:02, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep Surpringly, I prefer to keep, at least pending the outcome of the Civil War event. This character actually has appeared a fair number of times, in more than one storyline, so this guy isn't simply a one-shot. That said, the article itself is of poor quality so it might be worth deleting. And I'm not sure the name is official anyway, which concerns me a fair bit. FrozenPurpleCube 03:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and trim. Iron Maniac hasn't ever appeared outside of Marvel Team Up or from any writer other than Robert Kirkman, has he? Ford MF 16:57, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and trim- Even though he does "exist" within the regular MU; he's still an alternate version of Iron Man AND should be treated as such. PaxHouse 00:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Decision

Closed with a decision to merge (and to edit this down severely, as per comments above) --Mrph 17:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Missing, please add

• Publication history from May 1968-present
• Character history - very good, but probably needs at least one issue number every paragraph, serving as a cite

--Jamdav86 19:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

ultimate ironman wealth

I am surpised that no one on the the internet has even talk about how rich he is. i think 350 billion is worth talking about on his bio.

Still a superhero?

Given that Iron Man is the primary supervillian in the Civil War arc, would it still be correct to refer to him as a superhero. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.254.47.19 (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

He's, at worst, the antagonist, and not a supervillain; there's a difference. The U.S. government and the majority of Marvel Universe Americans aren't villains. Naming him a supervillain and not Captain America would be POV. --Psyphics_ΨΦ 19:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Captain America hasn't killed a superhero, Captain America hasn't fought against Freedom, Captain America hasn't sentenced poeple to the Negative Zone, Captain America hasn't armed supervillians and given them a headhunter mandate. Not once has Captain America acted un-American. Iron Man, on the other hand, HAS done these things AND he has stopped fighting super-villians so he can force good people to sign a slip of paper. These are villianous actions on Iron Man's part that have not been repeated on the other side. He's at best a super-beaurocrat at worst a super-villian but his actions haven't approached heroism in a while. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.254.47.19 (talk) 08:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

You're right... captain america hasn't acted un-american... but he is still going against the current administrations decision. Art imitating real life? He is still a superhero... but just not a superhero for the side you support.TehPhil 17:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

And y'know ... if superheroes really existed, would you really want vigilantes — which is what they are, in legal terms — going around taking the law into their own hands? Police, in real life, sometimes shoot and kill innocent people by mistake. Amadou Diallo comes to mind. And juries have sentenced innocent men to death, as advanced DNA testing has proven. To one person, Iron Man is in the wrong. To another, Captain America, who wants no accountability for vigilantes' actions, is in the wrong.

Drivers and duck hunters and nurses ... they all have to have a license. They all need training. It's not unreasonable to expect superpowered individuals to be held accountable just like anyone else. Check out Garth Ennis, both in his Marvel Max Punisher work and in his DC series The Boys if you want an expansion on this idea, from one of comics' greats. --Tenebrae 01:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Super vigilantism has worked well enough for the last 67 years in the Timely/Marvel Universe (68 in the DC universe) and accountability has not been a problem for rogue heroes either. The SRA is just a more general writing of the villian Senator Kelly's Mutant Registration Act. How did enforcing such a law become a heroic thing? How did arming psychopathic villians in the Thunderbolts become a heroic thing? How did imprisoning superheroes in the Negative Zone become a heroic thing? How did cloning Thor against his will and using him as a mind controlled weapon become a heroic thing? The question is whether Iron Man is even remotely heroic anymore? Not whether Captain America is in the right or in the wrong or a superhero, that's for his discussion page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.254.47.19 (talk) 03:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. CovenantD 08:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

We can't disregard 40+ years of superheroism because of one story arc. --Psyphics_ΨΦ 13:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Be that as it may, I wish Captain America had killed him. Or at least knocked him out. Just had to say that somewhere. RobertAustin 02:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

People always use the arguement that superheros take the law into their own hands. Lets see the US government or any other government stop Galactus or Thanos or someone just as strong or stronger. They would be begging the X-men and the Avengers and anyone else even remotely super powered to help.

words cannot express the hate I have for this character.71.107.96.117

Whereas, for some people words cant express the love they have for this character. So, um... what's your point? Anyone who says that Iron Man is now a supervillian clearly has never read any of the characters work, apart from in Civil War. Also, the IM haters should read the "Civil War: Iron Man" graphic novel. It shows that there is no right or wrong way about the SRA. Both sides have perfectly good reasons for what they're doing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkebab (talk • contribs) 09:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

To the ancient Greeks, heroes were excessive, not necessarily good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.179.30.13 (talk) 00:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

End of civil war

Reverted the vandalism, as per the notice on the civil war talk page Cactusrob 20:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Changes to article picture - STOP.

To all whom it may concern - STOP changing the picture and DISCUSS which picture there is a concensus for use in the article. --Charlesknight 00:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

This is the picture I feel should be used. It gives a classic perspective of Iron Man. [1] DCincarnate

and honestly I just think that is a but ugly picture. Its the mask. Also you said that the problem was that is was to 3-d, well i found a pic that i like and that is not 3-D, so i think we should stick with that. And really I was changing the pic back to the oringal one that was there before all this happened, and i found the new one to put a stop to this.Phoenix741 00:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Um, let's hear first what others feel which image should be set up DCincarnate

yea this is really going to sound immature and i apologize, but this is the best way i can put this into words.

You say that now, but you were the one who started all of this by changing it with out talking about it. I say we just stop this and leave it the way it is, i will if you will.Phoenix741 01:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

You say that now, but you were the one who started all of this by changing it with out talking about it.

And YOU were the one who started this by changing the image back and forth, despite I already had changed the picture. You could just well yourself have started this discussion. You also seem to be the only who wanted to switch the image.

I say we just stop this and leave it the way it is, i will if you will

You mean leaving with the picture you just added. Why? I'm not trying to make some "contest" out of this, but seriously. If we want the "right" image, then we should listen to what other Wiki contributors have to say. DCincarnate

Ok i am just going to say this then stop cause truthfully, we are both acting childish and I want it to stop.I changed it back to the ORIGINAL(well the first image i saw with the article). Also when i did change it back you could of put something in the discussion too, and i will openly admit that we both messed up on that. Plus, now that the Image that you added is being threatened of deletion(i say that cause of the whole orphaned image policy), NOW you want to put it to a vote, even though you just randomly changed it at the start of all this and where you could of easily of said something on here like "Hey i think this image is better, what do you all think" and avoided all of this. Now I really wants this to end(thus i found an image that as you put is not to 3dish or whatever you said before this thread was started) so fine I will vote and what even happens happens.

I vote for either the original image(the cool 3d one) or the one that I added.Your image violates the rules set up about SHBs, if you look at WP:CMC/EG and you see the rules about the picture you can see rule 4 which says "If the character has a clearly-defined primary costume (e.g. Superman), a picture of this should be used. Otherwise, the most recent ongoing costume of the character should be used." which blows your whole argument out of the water with the classic perspective argument.Phoenix741 02:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

What I meant, is that the picture gives a classic perpective of Iron Man himself with the whole body shot and pose, not that his armor resembles his original one that he used before.

Plus, now that the Image that you added is being threatened of deletion(i say that cause of the whole orphaned image policy)

And where does this say? Because I haven't heard a squat about it.

What I meant, is that the picture gives a classic perpective of Iron Man himself with the whole body shot and pose, not that his armor resembles his original one that he used before.

Honestly that makes no sense, you should of just said that, it shows iron man with the whole body shot and pose. They way you said it seemed to be classic armor.

And where does this say? Because I haven't heard a squat about it.

It is general policy(and commen sense), if a pic does not link to anywhere, then it will be deleted Phoenix741 17:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd say we use Image:ToS39.jpg. It's iconic and it reinforces that he's a comic book character (which promotional art and photoshopped images do not). Another choice would be Image:Ironman1.jpg, as it's the first issue of Iron Man and has the red and yellow color scheme that we've all come to know. The other suits can be (and are) shown later in the article, no? I recognize that these are already used in the article, but I think the article would be fine with one of them moved to the SHB. --Psyphics_ΨΦ 18:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Honestly I like the idea os using Image:Ironman1.jpg. The only reason i changed it is because i just really don't wana use the image that DC put up. To me it looks nothing like an armor, and the mask looks more like an alien than a metal helment. So yea i think your idea works.Phoenix741 21:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

What about this one? Image:Invincibleiron.png‎. It's pretty good.

It is better than that other one, but Psyphics does have a point of using a comic cover.Phoenix741 14:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded a smaller version of the "3D" picture. It's been here for a long time and I see no reason for a replacement. Wiki-newbie 17:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Citations and issue refs

It looks like this is graded back to 'A' again, but there are still a couple of citation/issue # requests tagged in the main article - is anyone able to provide sources for these? If not, after a fair length of time, should the relevant statements be deleted? --Mrph 17:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

DVD

Got a DVD comming out real shortly, on Jan 23 or 24, 2007. Just seen the ad. Martial Law 00:07, 20 January 2007 (UT

Character Analysis

I'd really like to see a character analysis section on the page. Something similar to what appears on the moon knight page and which used to appear on the superman and batman pages.

Something delving a bit into Stark's psyche and discusses his frailty's. I'd imagine mentioning his depression and alcoholism. Tony's one of the more complex characters in the MU and although he does appear to be the more villainous of the two civil war leaders, he did assemble the illuminati and start the whole civil war with the best intentions. I thought maybe a section dealing with his character might help people reading the article get more of a feel for Tony and maybe make him seem more 'fleshed out'. Although i'm sure this is going to cause all sorts of arguments and and re-edits at least until the civil war ends. What does everyone think?

The traitor

Looks like Frontline #11 revealed Ben and Sally's discoveries - that Stark was the 'traitor' in the organization responsible behind Osborne going nuts. Anyone wanna add it in? Sera404 02:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

It's vital to add that, I agree. I would do it myself, but I don't think I understood it well enough. --NathaliaMueller 21:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps add it into the Post Civil War section, with some note about Ben Urich and Sally Floyd's accusation of Stark having masterminded Osborne's attack on the Atlanteans as well as the Atlantean representative. By Stark's reaction, it was pretty much true (with him breaking down after they left his office). Also probably have to include it into Norman Osborne and Ben Urich pages as well. Does Sally Floyd have her own page yet? If so, there as well. Ahh, all these plot twists... :) Sera404 22:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

That thing on his chest that defies trademark law

Why does Iron Man have a yellow Superman shield on his breastplate these days? I was never a reader of his comic, but I know that every time he showed up in crossovers his armor had a yellow circle there. Now all the ads I see show him with a familiar inverted triangle on his chest. Wait, excuse me, it's an inverted PENTAGON, actually - exactly the shape of Superman's "S" but a bit smaller. That is not a minor artistic detail, not coming out of a company that has more lawyers than artists on its payroll. Why is Marvel doing it, and how is the change explained in-comic? I suspect the former answer involves Iron Man's villainous Maxwell Lord-like role in Civil War, but the latter probably doesn't depend on Tony Stark discovering his long-forgotten Kryptonian heritage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Asat (talk • contribs) 09:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC).

em.. because the artist thought it would be cool when he redesigned the suit? --Fredrick day 10:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The uni-beam has gone through a number of geometrical changes. The earliest I remember was on the Space Armor in the early 80's, it was in the shape of a baseball homeplate. The Silver Centurion armor had an inverted triangle, and I think one version of the Stealth Armor had the same. Its just progression of the suit, the artists are going to change things just to keep it fresh. I don't think its intentionally to mimic the shape of the Superman chest symbol. --Staxeon 02:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

If the shape showed up on, say, a Persian rug or a newly discovered breed of salamander, I wouldn't think it was anything unusual. But that exact shape...dead center on a comic book superhero's chest? It seems unlikely that the artist had never seen a Superman comic in all the years prior to getting a job in the comic industry and being chosen to redesign the appearance of a major character. But even if he hadn't, wouldn't someone at Marvel point out, "hey, that looks a LOT like the shape that's on the chest of our Distinguished Competitor's number one character...and my coffee mug...and the poster for that new movie." Can we look forward to a lantern-shaped uni-beam at some point? Asat 21:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

While I admit it's a little suspect, the pentagon is hardly owned by DC or only used by Supes. Granted, while the shape is hardly my favorite, it's been used before on Iron Man's armor, and as far as I know, no one drew parallels then. Of course, I was not even old enough to attend school at that point, so take it for what it's worth. All in all, though, I don't think it's terribly noteworthy without getting specific citations. ArchangelX777 15:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Alcoholism

Shouldn't there be a little more emphasis on Tony Starks alcoholism? Since this is one of the defining aspects of this character I would have expected to see more information about it, since it was and is one of the major themes surrounding him. Just as Spider Man is made to seem more human as being a regular guy trying to earn a paycheck by day (and even struggling to pay rent, most of the time) and being a crime fighter at night, Iron Man (Tony Stark) is made to seem more human as battling alcoholism, something which is also common in our everyday lives. As a personal fan of Iron Man, I felt somewhat letdown that this was not included.Laugh-O-Gram 19:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler!?

The article currently contains this line in the opening:

For Iron Man's portayal in Civil War, see Adolf Hitler

Uhhhhh, what? That is an absurd parallel, and should really be removed from the article. I am sure that there could be loads of discussion as to why these two characters weren't really similar, but I will boil it down to this: Hitler was out to eradicate (completely destroy) a group of people, while Tony Stark (Iron Man) simply led the cause of having super heroes register themselves with the U.S. government.

Was Tony Stark evil in his execution? Maybe, or maybe not; the point is debatable. But comparing his actions to those of Adolf Hitler is laughable at best.

Needs to be removed.

70.247.162.215 06:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)shrike

A little harsh, but Iron Man was the clear villain of Civil War. Accept it. --BakerBaker 02:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

No, he wasn't. Both sides had perfectly good reasons for doing what they did. See the "Civil War: Iron Man: graphic novel for more proof. And you say it's only a little harsh. Ok... so lets compare a fictional character who is fighting for what he believes, and who thinks what he is doing is for the greater good, to a humanatarian dictator, who's responsible for the mass genocide of over 6 million people. Sorry, but whoever put that there, it's an offensive and bigoted thing to say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkebab (talk • contribs) 10:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Is anyone seeing this? In the article, at the top of the Origin section, it says "adolf" instead of "Anthony Stark". But Anthony Star is what it says when I go to edit it. What gives?98.193.23.189 (talk) 02:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Powers and Abilities

As there is an entire page dedicated to his armor, might this (kind of lenghty) section be trimmed down?

Suit

I know this is a totally random question, but how does Tony Stark go to the toilet in his armor? It's not like he can just unzip it. Does he have to wear diapers like an astronaut, or does he have some kind of pee-collection tank in his suit? I know it's not really relevant, but I was just wondering... 86.142.62.17 04:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Article Rewritten

Rewrote the article to flesh out a lot of stuff that was omitted (storylines, expanding the alcohalim storyline aspects, listing writers who have had major impact working on the character) as well as rewriting the Civil War page to outright state that Iron Man's actions HAVE been seen as villainous by many fans and point out that many writers as well view that Iron Man at the very least was the clear villain of Civil War and at worst, has left the realm of heroism to become the Marvel Universe's newest major villain. I've also fleshed out references to the Crossing as proof that Iron Man's villain status should be mentioned in the opening paragraph as evidence towards Iron Man's status as a villain nowadays. --BakerBaker 02:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Look, he ain't a villian. I'm starting to get a little worried by your constant "Iron Man is a villian". He isn't. Deal with it. It's just a comic book, ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkebab (talk • contribs) 10:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Found an Iron Man character in orphaned link....

I have no idea where to place (Arsenal (Marvel Comics) anywhere that wouldn't throw the article off. I don't suppose you can give this orphaned page a good home, could ya'? :) --Hourick 01:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

It's really not notable at all. I put it up for {{prod}}.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 23:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

This article has been vandalized!

A bunch of junk at the beginning about George w. Bush and hamburgers. 71.108.213.202 04:58, 26 July 2007 (UTC)just this guy, you know?

Article needs to be rewritten from scratch

Seriously, the comic biography section is a freaking joke with MAJOR glaring ommisions, there needs to be blatant mention that Iron Man is has a history of being a supervillain, not just a superhero as well as the MAJOR LEAGUE FACT that Civl War has effectively turned Iron Man into the biggest villain inthe Marvel Universe today with major comic writers portraying Tony as the most dangerous villain on the planet Earth due to the evild deeds he SUCCESSFULLY carried out in Civil War.--BakerBaker 07:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

In your opinion.Optimus Sledge 03:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The intro and PH are OK. The bio is too long and overdetailed for a general reader, which is what Wiki guidelines state we're writing for. --Tenebrae 03:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

BakerBaker's overheated comments argue against his objectivity. And I'd ask him, with respect, to please tone it down; there's no need for all-cap words and a nasty tone. We're all collaborators here. --Tenebrae 03:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm shortening the subhead to remove the name-calling, which is forbidden under Wiki Etiquette guidelines. It's all really unnecessary. --Tenebrae 03:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

lol I must admit, I enjoy Bakers constant "IRON MAN IS A VILLIAN!!! ACCEPT IT PEOPLE!!!" comments. Maybe if he actually took time to read the charactres title then he would see why he he's done what he did. and why his motivations aren't that of a supervillian. Even after Civil War, he's actually became a better person than he was in Civil War. Oh yeah, and also, if he were a super villian, why would he just collaberate with the Mighty Avengers during World War Hulk, then let them all go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkebab (talk • contribs) 10:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Aside from all of Baker's 10 pounds of Crazy in a 5-pound sack, I actually see where he's coming from. If he hadn't folded to registration, he and Cap wouldn't have ended up on opposite sides of the civil liberties issue. If the war wouldn't have been fought, Cap wouldn't have eventually surrended to prevent civilian casualties. If Cap hadn't surrendered, ho wouldn't have been relatively defensless when he was gunned down. I am not saying this reasoning is actually well-thought out or sane, but I can see it. I think that Tony - as the Director of SHIELD - having access to superhero identites is just A Bad Thing. Tony is only a man, and this situation is not going to end well for the Human Tin Can. Not at all. Cap will probably come back, but Tony will still be on the outs with at least half of the superhero populace.
Not that that actually has anything to do with the article. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 21:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

BakerBaker it should be remembered that Iron Man is a fictional character and his portrayal by different writers during the Civil War was (arguably) not consistent.(For the record Civil War suffered from poor editing IMO) If you only read Spider-Man for instance you could come away thinking Tony is essentially the new Doctor Doom, whereas if you read only his own title he is portrayed in a far more sympathetic manner, (shown to be torn over his actions second guessing himself but thinking its the only way etc). Some writers wrote him as a villain some as a tragic hero, and as he's ficitonal both interpretations are equally valid. Sheesh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.221.62 (talk) 04:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The Eagle Awards, the UK's official comicbook awards has Iron Man in the villain category. It is something I have questioned with the other organisers but there you go...78.149.198.131 (talk) 14:25, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Still an interpretation without basis in cited fact on their part. ThuranX (talk) 23:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Animated Series

Um, As I recall, Iron Man in the 1994 Animated Series was indeed as Tony Stark, a victim of a bobby trap which shrapnel pierced his heart. I don't know anything about him receiving shrapnels toward his spine, but that seems more in relation to the storyline written at the time of its production in the comics. In the Armor Wars storyline (the one in the cartoon), he announced that Iron Man was "fired" and that he wasn't "working" for Stark Enterprises anymore. Without the armor, it was apparent his heart was starting to fail. Also, I'm sure that patch on his chest wasn't just for decoration. And in the Secret Wars storyline (in the 1994 Spider-Man animated series), Iron Man said to Spider-Man, if it wasn't for his suit, he wouldn't be alive for several years, and was breathing heavily. If you've got proof in the animated cartoon, Tony Stark received damage to spine, rather than his heart before he was Iron Man, bring it forth and if you haven't, please comment nonetheless. Uglyguy2006 19:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge

User:Rtkat3 has been unilaterally dividing up articles without any discussion whatsoever on the articles' talk pages or on the WikiComics Noticeboard. He has been asked on his talk page to discuss splits and mergers there, and he so far refuses to do so. This split needs to be reversed so that a proper discussion can begin. --Tenebrae 18:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with a merge. Iron Man, while becoming a bigger character since Civil War, is not as popular or well-known as Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man. Each of those characters have had multiple appearances in other media, too many appearances to neatly fit into their respective articles. Iron Man has not done that yet, and as such, his appearances should, for now, be merged. Depending on the movie goes, and the rumors of another Iron Man cartoon go, it may become necessary later to split the article, but for now, they should be merged. Anakinjmt 19:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I also did it to prevent the page from getting too long just like they did for Wolverine, Doctor Doom, Magneto, Spider-Man, and Hulk to name a few. Rtkat3 4:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

If it's a question of length, then a way should be found to shorten the article. Iron Man's appearances in other media is not notable enough yet. Anakinjmt 21:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

• merge - though this page suffers from size problems, prior to excising of the entire section, and examination into the true problems (character bio and powers) should have been the focus. In addition, the extract an article as it was done, is a violation of wiki copyright policies. Finally, the method of culling with out leaving a summary in the place of the section, decreases the visual quality of the article. Merge and workgroup it.-66.109.248.114 (talk) 02:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Article would be too long. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 22:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Discussion closed with no consensus. - 66.109.248.114 (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC).

Top Ten most intelligent fictional characters

According to BusinessWeek, Iron Man is listed as one of the top ten most intelligent fictional characters in American comics. Smartest Superheroes Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 09:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Tense

Is there some reason why the character's entire history is written in the present tense? It's supremely annoying. Signed -- No one of note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.56.172 (talk) 07:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Because that is the Manual of Style for the writing of fictional character biographies. Anakinjmt (talk) 20:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Creation / Origin (Real World)

I heard, what I suspect might be an urban legend, that Iron Man was initially created because someone bet that he could create an alcoholic arms-dealer with no superpowers and still make him a superhero.

If there is any evidence to support this claim it would be nice if it were included, however if there is no or even contradictory evidence it should be included only if the myth is known widely enough.

77.180.133.233 (talk) 14:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

It is discussed in the archives here: http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/category/comic-book-urban-legends-revealed/ somewhere, but I don't quite remember. I don't think you can use it as a source, but it should point you in the right direction. joshschr (Talk | contribs) 15:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite:

I pulled a comparison of the A level of the article and the current version, see [2]. As you can see, the article has grown quite a bit. I think it's time for a serious paring down of the article, to refocus on the real-world content. Some of my first impressions while reading it and comparing the two versions follow:

• List of Powers needs reduction:Genius, Technopathy, H2H, suit. Done on 14:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC). Separated his two instances of powers into a powers section, cut the armor, removed fancruft and PEACOCK from the skills.

• Pub hist. 2nd para to first Para – production notes for creation of character should go with debut of the character.

• The ‘anti-communism’ Para needs citation, as does most of following para. Not ‘according to’, but ‘businessweek ranked’. As an outside group with little authority to make declarative statements, the article is more an RS examination of them, but they can’t make ironclad statements like that.

• Publication history seems scant. Needs more on other IM titles and dates. Iron Man V4 opens with Warren Ellis.

• The Character history contains too much hypothetical stuff about the communist aspect, and is at times written fannishly and In-Universe-like. “The cover for Iron Man is that he is Stark's bodyguard and corporate mascot.” and “No one suspects Stark of being Iron Man as he cultivates an image as a rich playboy and industrialist.” As two early examples in the section.

• The character history section also gets too in-depth into various stories. Armor Wars 1 and 2 are long in the past, and so far unsupported. Demon in a Bottle, on the other hand, does have some sources, and I will try to find them.

• The para on ‘The Inevitable’ isn’t written well. ‘openly addresses the fact’ seems like editorializing on the direction of stories. Use of hyphens isn’t particularly encyclopedic writing either, esp. in context.

• Civil War is too verbose as well.

• The powers section has bloated to include way too much about the armor. We have a separate article about it, let that handle the content regarding the armor, much of which, (too much?) is In-Universe stuff. Done on 14:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC). Separated his two instances of powers into a powers section, cut the armor, removed fancruft and PEACOCK from the skills.

I'd like to see the article really refocus onto the real-world content, and simply give an overview of the character. I'm going to try some of the smaller changes over the next couple days, but I'll hold off on the bigger stuff till I see some other editors' thoughts. ThuranX (talk) 04:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

As a further note, there are about 10 pages of Character history, and less than one of publication history. ThuranX (talk) 05:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I've started some cleanup of the CH, but would like to really slice and dice in there, takign the 'origin' down to the concepts that matter. I feel the revisions of origin geography are better suited to the PH, not CH. Here's how I'd like to rework the first two paragraphs, to get to the stuff a non-comics reader needs to know:

Anthony 'Tony' Stark is a boy genius, entering MIT at the age of 15, and graduating at the top of his class. After his parents' accidental deaths in a car crash, he inherits his father's company.

While observing the effects of his experimental technologies on the American war effort, Stark is injured by a booby trap and captured by the enemy, who order him to design weapons for them. However, Starks injuries are dire, as shrapnel is in his chest, threatening to pierce his heart. His fellow prisoner, Yin Sen helps Stark use the workshop to secretly design and construct a suit of powered armor that saves Stark's life by keeping his heart beating. Stark uses the armor to escape, although Yin Sen dies during the attempt. Stark takes revenge on his kidnappers, then gets back to American forces, where he meets a wounded American Air Force helicopter pilot, James "Rhodey" Rhodes.

Thoughts, please? If I don't hear anything in the next couple days, I'll go ahead with this change, and probably many more. ThuranX (talk) 13:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

We need citation for in which issues/stories the origin got updated to newer wars. ThuranX (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll look for some. I'm going to start cutting down the biography, and hopefully pumping up the publication. We also need to source the powers. Aside from that, the only shuffling I would like to do is move the pop culture section to its own section, where we would add other cultural impact and reception to the character. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 22:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good, see my comments at Hulk. Also, I'd really like to focus on his war-related materials, as I think that the military industrialist and the alcoholism are the two things which genuinely set this character apart from others. I'm sure there's other stuff out there, but these two points are the most distinguishing features to me. ThuranX (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Hokay. But I think that in this case we can stick his alcoholism, et al, in the publication history (or biography, seeing if its more relevant); I don't think there's enough for a long characterization section. But I'll see if sources bear that out. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 22:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I think both can be covered in Pub Hist and a standard Character Bio... The War stuff could be done in such a way that it covers the origin in whichever conflict is most recent, and the anti-communism/terrorism bent in one, with the Demon in a bottle stuff and awards in another part. Ruthlessly pare down the character bio, which doesn't need three sections about the stories of the last two years, and we should be about there. Maybe after, we can look at folding the hopelessly fannish armor article back here, and so on. ThuranX (talk) 08:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice start on slicing down the plot. ThuranX (talk) 05:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. But I'm not sure when the events listed before 1990s take place, so I can't divide them up... Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 11:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll look later. ThuranX (talk) 12:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Relationship with the Black Sabbath song

Does anyone know if the song was loosely inspired by the comic character? And also, should the fact that the second season theme for the animated TV series featured the words "I am Iron Man!" be mentioned alongside its use in the movie trailer? Serendi^podous 12:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I was going to ask the same thing.The Lyrics show that he was once a superhero but nobody wanted him.SO he killed them.

UNANIMOUS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.161.32.166 (talk) 21:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

We have no citations demonstrating a connection. ThuranX (talk) 21:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

According to various interviews given by Geezer Butler, bass player of Black Sabbath and lyricist for the song, he was familiar with the comic book character, although he avoided making specific references to him in the song, but I guess you can say that there was an indirect inspiration.

--Skyelarke (talk) 01:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Associated articles

If anyone is interested in helping but doesn't want to get into the thick of it on this article, pleas look into the related articles and let us know what needs doing. A list is started below. Please sign each suggestion to facilitate review. ThuranX (talk) 08:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

1. Start a topic on moving Iron Monger to Obadiah Stane, to reflect the Ultimates version, as well as the context of the upcoming film, and since the article as Monger premises that there were numerous important characters called Iron Monger, there weren't. ThuranX (talk) 08:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

1. Find real world content for the suits. ThuranX (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Invincible Iron Man - Possibly vol. 5

I dropped the vol. 5 bit from the upcoming Invincible Iron Man series, because it's not definitively going to be considered volume 5, as far as I know. It's going to be released concurrently with Iron Man: Director of SHIELD. I'm not sure how they could have a new volume of Iron Man, with the old one still running. Alternatively, if Iron Man: Director of SHIELD is the permanent title for the series now, (and it appears it is) we could state that volume 4 ran from 1-14 and then Iron Man: Director of SHIELD started at issue 15 and is still ongoing. EvilCouch (talk) 06:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I changed vol. 4 to end at #14 and split Iron Man: Director of SHIELD off into its own line. Digging around a bit in the catalog, it appears that Marvel's not calling the book Iron Man: Director of SHIELD until issue 29, which is at what point there'd be confusion between the two titles, as vol. 5 begins that month. I'm not sure whether the unofficial start of #15 or the official start of #29 is more appropriate. Anyone have any suggestions? EvilCouch (talk) 06:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

And I have removed all Vol. 5 material pursuant to publication, per CRYSTAL. As for vol. 4, Until such time as they state it's no longer part of Vol 4, it is, and we only need note a title change. ThuranX (talk) 12:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I can live with that. EvilCouch (talk) 09:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Blake

I read a comic about 35 years ago which called Tony "Blake" instead of "Stark". What was that about? 76.186.118.246 (talk) 18:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd say... a faulty memory? You may be thinking of Donald Blake, alter ego of Thor. ThuranX (talk) 01:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

If it was an old Avengers comic, it could have been an editorial error. Both Thor (Donald Blake) and Iron Man were members.Rickremember (talk) 05:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Confused

I read on the War Machine article that Stark died during a battle. If that is so, how is he alive in these recent comics? --CommanderWiki35 (talk) 23:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Um no he hasn't Gang14 (talk) 03:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Then could someone please fix that article?--CommanderWiki35 (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

He was only mostly dead. If it's the story I'm thinking of, he got a computer virus and was announced dead so he could reboot without anyone interfering. In any case, there was no death and resurrection story that I know of. joshschr (Talk | contribs) 22:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Well the part that I read said he died during a battle with Kang and then sometime later got resssurected.--CommanderWiki35 (talk) 21:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

AH! I exposed my ignorance! He died during The Crossing, but came back as a teenager. It's covered in the Iron Man article. A teenage Tony replaces a mind-controlled adult, then Franklin Richards somehow turned him back. Very logical, comic book wise. If you want to link the statement of Tony's death in the War Machine article, pointing to the "Late 1980s and 1990s" in the fictional biography part ought to clear things up. I don't know how to do it, or I'd do it myself. 13:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Origin?

I don't understand how tony stark graduated summa cum laude from MIT since they have never awarded latin honors. someone please explain Chewierchimp (talk) 11:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

It's that way in the comic. It's really that simple. Stan Lee didn't do research.ThuranX (talk) 12:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "origins 45" :
  • {{cite book |title=Son of Origins |last= Lee|first=Stan |authorlink=Stan Lee |coauthors= |year= 1975|publisher=[[Simon and Schuster]] |location=New York |isbn=0-671-22170-1 |pages=45 }}
  • <ref name="Nation">{{cite book|title=Comic Book Nation|last=Wright|first=Bradford|authorlink= |year=2001|publisher=John Hopkins University Press|location=Baltimore MD|isbn=0-8018-6514-X|pages=336}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 12:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Resolved. ThuranX (talk) 15:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Advanced Degrees

This website shows a comic book page where Tony Stark says, "There I am, class valedictorian. Double majors in physics and engineering were easy." It is assumed this page is from Iron Man: The Legend. If this is the case, then it does not state that he has advanced degrees in physics and engineering. Avengers: The Ultimate Guide reveals he entered the MIT undergraduate electrical engineering program at 15 and graduated at the top of his class. --68.227.32.148 (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Key word there is 'Assumed'. Nothing in there contradicts the other sources, sorry. ThuranX (talk) 22:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

What was typed above does not indicate that other sources are contradicted, only that Iron Man: The Legend may not describe the character as possessing advanced degrees. --68.227.32.148 (talk) 06:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

making this more xonfusing. So what are you saying you want to do about it in the article? ThuranX (talk) 07:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

It is not really necessary to change anything in the article. The information was posted mostly to have a reference for Stark's education from official sources. --68.227.32.148 (talk) 21:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

fan sites aren't "official sources". ThuranX (talk) 21:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The comic book page and Avengers: The Ultimate Guide are both official sources. --68.227.32.148 (talk) 00:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Use a different picture

The main picture used for this article depicts Tony Stark in his Extremis armor. I think his classic red and gold armor would be more suitable. Nerdpool (talk) 01:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Iron man's armor changes so regularly that picking one 'classic' is difficult, at best. Is the pointed helm of the early 70's it? the triangular chest piece? With or without hip discs? Red and gold or red and silver? Hard to say, so a recent one isn't that big a deal, and the art quality is high, making it more appealing to readers. ThuranX (talk) 21:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

No movie images?

Should there not be any images to show what the movie looked like. One of the movie posters perhaps, such as http://popularmoviedownloads.com/images/downloadironmanfullmovie3.jpg ? Casdious (talk) 17:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, that is interesting. I would think a picture would be appropriate, though not the movie poster. I know just the picture though. I'll upload it after I get off work tonight. Anakinjmt (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll look out for it Casdious (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Not a bad idea. The article could use a movie shot or two. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

One is sufficient for fair use, at most. The film is a separate article, and there's little reason to overload that section, since it mostly tosses readers to other, significant articles. ThuranX (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a common thing to do for film sections. It's not done all the time (like for Eddie Brock) but it does happen. Anakinjmt (talk) 12:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Adding WP:ROBO tag

...after talking with User:Hiding. If we can help, let us know. (P.S. Not watchlisting for now) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 17:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

article

the beginning of this article is retarded , change it now ! 89.210.119.53 (talk) 11:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

What specific complaints do you have about it? Templarion (talk) 16:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

IRONMAN

Stanley llllllllllllestablishes ' Ironman' an updated superhero that 'politically challenges a system of in accountability ' ( quote Starke - Iron Man ) as it applies to the current perception of 'Home land Security' this notion is constantly referenced and re refenced in many scenes within the film that shows deployment of US manufactured weaponry that falls in to the hands of radical faction groups that in turn is used as a means of aggression -in this example extreme fundamentalists under the current government policies

regards www.stanleymartinlieber.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by MARVELOUSLEE (talk • contribs) 04:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Uh, english please? Give us a premise for a change int he article, and why. That bit of dogma above doesn't actually say anything. And the URL given doesn't work.ThuranX (talk) 17:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Flight speed

The flight speed should be listed as Mach 8, not Mach 3. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.51.92.3 (talk) 02:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Atheism

It should be stated that Stark is a confirmed atheist; he said so himself in the Post-Civil War black-colored files, in the Moon Knight section when describing the character's enigmatic history and supposed connection with Egyptian moon deities. Though I currently lack the precise source, perhaps one of you might not? MiszaBot I (talk) 05:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge

It has been suggested Iron Man's armor be merged into this article. What do people think? Hiding T 13:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that's not a so much good idea, since the Iron Man article is already long and complex enough.--Olrys (talk) 23:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm completely against that. The armor article is informative and useful as a resource, such as if you wish to research the Iron Man evolution in the comics in a way that's more in-depth. Too many "merged" articles get chopped down into inane soundbites like "This armor is good and wasn't afraid of anything" and it wouldn't do the subject justice to have some blurb be the only reference material. More so it's a vitally relevant part of Iron Man's history, at least as relevant as any individual character pages, so I simply see no reason why it should be merged. 18-Till-I-Die (talk) 16:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Please do not merge Iron Man Armor into Iron Man article. Both have useful and encyclopedia purposes. The article would be unruly in size as well. MrMacMan ^Talk 22:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

It's time to trim this article

This article not only severely violates WikiProject Comics' stricture against excessive, blow-by-blow, overly detailed synopses, but it violates Wikipedia's guidelines for writing about fiction. The article has carried multiple tags for some time now, and yet an editor a few minutes ago and several more paragraphs of minutely detailed recent events. I don't need to re-argue the Project's longstanding consensus about succinct synopses, nor the Wikipedia guideline against fictography. Anyone who disagrees with the consensus is free to argue at the Project's talk page for a change. In the meantime, we follow the agreed-upon policy — that's why what we're doing is called a collaboration. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Thematic origins section

• [3] Is there anyone at Marvel that confirms this information? It is all original research someone published in an essay on the site The Journal of Popular Culture. You can read interviews a plenty where Stan Lee and others write how they came about the various characters, and you can also read the first issues of them even, and see that this crackpot historian is just spewing out insane theories that make no sense at all. Since having an essay published on that essay website doesn't make you notable, and is no way a reliable source, I'm going to remove it. Dream Focus 01:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

We're supposed to place things in a real-world perspective, and cited original research from historians, authors, academics and journalists is not only allowed, but absolutely necessary.

That said, the section you mention all uses the very same source, and I suspect whoever put that section in there might not necessarily be free of conflict of interest. That section needs two or three others discussing the character within the context of the times. That shouldn't be hard to find, and I'll nose around in the next few days.

I'm curious: Why do you call the author a "crackpot historian" (I suspect you meant to put "historian" in quote marks to mean so-called historian, and not italics, which emphasizes him as a historian)? Do you know that author? Are you a rival author? Has he written in some disreputable venue? The Journal of Popular Culture is not a "site" but a respected academic print magazine used by universities. This really needs to be discussed. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Because if you read the opening part of that section, you'd know what nonsense it is. The Fantastic Four were mentioned there, and I've read Stan Lee's interviews on how he created them, and watched him on an interview on the History Channel or perhaps it was A&E(same parent company). I've also read the early issues, they flying around to different planets in the negative zone a lot, having a fantastic adventures, nothing to do with cold war politics. Dream Focus 02:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• They publish the best college essays people send them, without any fact checking at all to verify the content obviously. You can win $500 dollars by submitting content to them. [4] I don't see as how some college kids essay trying to link comic books with Cold War politics is a reliable source. You just need to quote Stan Lee as is done earlier in the article, and that's fine, it setting the story straight. Dream Focus 02:09, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

According to historian Robert Genter, Stark is emasculated by his loss of autonomy as an inventor — a blow to his manhood symbolized by his chest wound — and "Iron Man centers on Stark's inability to reconcile with this wound to his masculinity."[12] Stan Lee used the playboy side of Stark to restore the character's sense of masculinity. Stark conquers women — either romantically or physically, and with female supervillains frequently both — and, writes Genter, "follows the lead of other cultural and literary figures such as Ian Fleming, Mickey Spillane, and Norman Mailer who made unregulated sexuality a form of authenticity."[12]

• Lets focus on this paragraph please. Stan Lee is quoted in the earlier part of the article saying it was based on the playboy Howard Huges, multi-billionaire inventor, chasing after ladies, etc. He didn't chase after women because he felt emasculated because of the chest injury. And that injury did not symbolize a blow to his manhood. The "I have a chest injury which makes me feel like less of a man, so I have to bed down as many women as possible" theory is just plain ridiculous. Dream Focus 02:18, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Again, I don't know where to begin. The articles I've seen from JPC are written by college professors, and while it has a contest open to graduate students it's essentially the work of academics and is a peer-reviewed journal that apparently is distributed to some 1,400 university and research libraries.

But that's a minor point. The larger one is that literary criticism and textual and subtextual analysis are elements of a longstanding field of study and are unquestionably valid. The creator of a work is not the only interpreter of a work. Indeed, many times the subconscious elements of a creator's mind, combined with what's floating in the Zeitgeist, combine to create something much more than the creator him/herself even anticipated or can explain. With all due respect, this is all just very basic semiotics. Please don't take this as my being pedantic — it's a genuine field of study. I know someone with a Columbia University master's degree in literary history, theory and criticism. You and I can't say that an entire academic field is invalid, or that a scholarly observer's comments are worthless, just because Stan Lee said such-and-such. His interpretation isn't the only interpretation.--Tenebrae (talk) 04:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

And I do want to say I agree completely with User:Dream Focus' tag at Thematic origins. That section needs much more than a single voice. --Tenebrae (talk) 05:25, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

However, User:Dream Focus is incorrect in calling Robert Genter "this college kid." When he wrote that essay he was a a visiting professor in the department of history at Fordham University, and is currently a history professor at Nassau Community College. --Tenebrae (talk) 05:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Info box Publication history problem

i am removing publication history from info box because that portion of info box is already included in Iron Man (Comic Book) page. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoxee1214 (talk • contribs) 14:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Infobox issue

- J Greb (talk) 16:34, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Iron Man (Spider) 2.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Iron Man (Spider) 2.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 12 June 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion 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 provide a fair use rationale 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 Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Iron Man (Spider) 2.JPG) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Spider interior.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Spider interior.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 20 June 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion 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 provide a fair use rationale 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 Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Spider interior.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Plot overwordage and recentism

The FCB for the 12 years 2000-2012 runs 2,419. The FCB for the 36 years 1963-1999 — three times that number of years, and the formative years at that — runs 1,189.

This article has been tagged for multiple issues since 2010. Clearly, this is one of them. We don't give long, detailed, blow-by-blow plot synopses for every story arc, particularly when some of them have their own articles. I'm going to address these multiple-tag issues, and trim the FCB severely. I know other veteran WikiProject Coimcs editors recognize the same issues and have supported this elsewhere in the Project. I'm giving a head's up for a day or two before I start chainsawing, to see who else might want to come and help. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Roboticist

Please add Category:Fictional roboticists. --72.67.93.68 (talk) 22:54, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Iron Man/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Despite a short lead, this article is comprehensive, well written and out-of-universe, although a lot of prose notes on issues could be converted to citations. Wiki-newbie 19:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 19:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 15:02, 1 May 2016 (UTC)