Talk:Death's Head (G1)
Good call re: "freelance peacekeeping agent"--G.B. Blackrock 03:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Although they are appropriately in the "Apocrypha" section, should Death's Heads 2 and 3 even be here?--G.B. Blackrock 04:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
No, they shouldn't be. I have made an appropriate modification. --Steve-o 05:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Freelance peacekeeping agents Cat
While funny, the "Freelance peacekeeping agents" category only has one article. I would vote for moving DH into "Bounty hunters". JW 15:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sure Death's Head would vote against that. And then kill you. --ItsWalky 16:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, is there some kind of wiki trick we can use to bounce "Freelance Peacekeeping Agents" to "Bounty Hunters"? Aside from a simple redirect? -hx 17:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think the cat being a subcat of Bounty Hunters makes that joke quite nicely.--RosicrucianTalk 17:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- If there's a way to include an article in a category without the category link showing up in the article we could simply make category: freelance peacekeeping agents a redirect. --FortMax 18:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- A part of me does indeed want to keep the joke, but when we start suborning basic wiki functionality to support a very minor joke, I have to wonder if it's worth it. JW 18:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, is there some kind of wiki trick we can use to bounce "Freelance Peacekeeping Agents" to "Bounty Hunters"? Aside from a simple redirect? -hx 17:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Death's Head 3.0
The implication in Death's Head 3.0 is that it's showing the origin of the original Death's Head (and I think Furman confirmed as much when talking about the book at the Bristol Comic Expo a few years back). Should that not reflected either in the bio or the trivia? Danja 12:33, 23 August 2009 (EDT)
- I thought he confirmed that they were connected "somehow." The nature of the conenction isn't clear, especially since we know Death's Head's origin. -Derik 13:10, 23 August 2009 (EDT)
- I think, and this is going on hazy memories of a few years ago, the implication was that DH 3.0 would gradually upgrade himself into the Death's Head we know, hence the addition of the tusks at the end. Furman said he wanted DH to be using his trademark speech pattern at the end, but was overruled by Marvel, yes? Danja 04:04, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
- Indeed.
- Incidentally, I'm curious about the use of (G1) as the parenthetical. I suppose it's mostly out of some idea of consistency, but the character is owned and in active use by Marvel (Death's Head proper will be showing up in Marvel's new SWORD series, and DH2 had a cameo in the last issue of Captain Britain). - SanityOrMadness 14:21, 23 August 2009 (EDT)
- Yes, but he showed up in a Generation One continuity, meaning in Transformers, he's a G1. Also, I would say any info not pertaining to his Transformers run should be left out or just in a short trivia point USer:Eire 19.31 Aug 23 09(UTC)
- It begs the question... if Spider-man had appeared in the Armada comic (same logic as Avengers/Transformers) would we have split him between Spider-man (G1) and Spider-man (Armada)?
- Considering that Spider-Man contains both G1 and Crossovers info, I don't think so. It appears that we deal with non-TF characters using somewhat different rules. (For what it's worth, if we ever DID have to disambiguate Spider-Man, I would be loathe to use "(G1)"... That seems to be stretching the concept of "franchise of origin" pretty far. Death's Head doesn't bug me as much because his franchise of origin really is G1, earlier-one-pager-for-Marvel's-copyright-purposes be damned. Circuit Breaker, too, was very much made in and for G1, despite the legal ramifications of the Secret Wars thing.) - Jackpot 05:10, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
- Well yes, I'd tend to agree. It was a bit of a spurious question, since it really hinges on how far we want to push our ignorance of non-TF material. -Derik 05:21, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
- IMHO the question outside knowledge is actually irrelevant in this case. Due to the nature of the TF multiverse, the same Spider-Man couldn't be in both universes unless it was stated in the story that he'd dimension-hopped. So we would indeed have to make two separate articles for him. And... well, what disambigs would we use if not (G1) and (Armada)? Using, say, (Marvel Comics) and (Dreamwave) would be even weirder from a "knowing outside stuff" standpoint, IMHO. And I'm having trouble figuring out what other pair of two disambigs would be accurate enough to use. --Jeysie 06:34, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
- Well yes, I'd tend to agree. It was a bit of a spurious question, since it really hinges on how far we want to push our ignorance of non-TF material. -Derik 05:21, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
- Considering that Spider-Man contains both G1 and Crossovers info, I don't think so. It appears that we deal with non-TF characters using somewhat different rules. (For what it's worth, if we ever DID have to disambiguate Spider-Man, I would be loathe to use "(G1)"... That seems to be stretching the concept of "franchise of origin" pretty far. Death's Head doesn't bug me as much because his franchise of origin really is G1, earlier-one-pager-for-Marvel's-copyright-purposes be damned. Circuit Breaker, too, was very much made in and for G1, despite the legal ramifications of the Secret Wars thing.) - Jackpot 05:10, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
- It begs the question... if Spider-man had appeared in the Armada comic (same logic as Avengers/Transformers) would we have split him between Spider-man (G1) and Spider-man (Armada)?
- I think, and this is going on hazy memories of a few years ago, the implication was that DH 3.0 would gradually upgrade himself into the Death's Head we know, hence the addition of the tusks at the end. Furman said he wanted DH to be using his trademark speech pattern at the end, but was overruled by Marvel, yes? Danja 04:04, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
SWORD
So, this week our freelance peacekeeping friend made his triumphant return to comics.
Worth a footnote mention or not?
- There WAS possibly an oblique reference to Transformers in it. That being that Death's Head is once again Transformer-sized...--Nu-Priest 21:37, 12 November 2009 (EST)
Go!
I don't know if you would consider it overkill or not, but shouldn't his quick-link thing be "GO?" instead?67.175.13.87 23:04, 25 November 2009 (EST)
Images with no descriptions or copyright
Whomever uploaded all of the images on this page better come back and fix the descriptions, as they've been broken since March. --FFN 02:28, 23 December 2009 (EST)
Doctor Who connection?
Insert non-formatted text here
