Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Discuss chronologies for characters in the main "Marvel Universe"

Moderators: Col_Fury, michel, Arthur, Somebody, StrayLamb

Locked
LordZorn
Hero
Hero
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Denver CO

Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by LordZorn »

Guys, especially Russ:

Since the "Confederacy of Dunces" arc is included in Daredevil's canon( between DD2 65 (12-16)-FB and DD2 46 (16-21)); Spidey's canon (between DLINE 2 and SM: BBRAO-FB) and Wolvie's canon( between UX 420 and W2 187), how come the only issue of the arc in the Hulk's canon is Pun 6 34??? As far as I know, there are no breaks in continuity between the time the Punisher "purchases" the body of an unconscious Banner in PUN 6 33 and the rampage of a constipation-enraged Hulk that allows the Punisher to escape capture by the above-mentioned heroes in PUN 6 37. Please rectify this omission if you can.
LordZorn
Hero
Hero
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Denver CO

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by LordZorn »

Guys:

A small correction to the above(and to the Project)...Upon further reflection, I remember that PUN6 33 is the windup of a "Punisher out West" arc, and so has nothing to do with any of the four gentlemen involved in the Confederacy of Dunces arc, ie., Hulk, Daredevil, Spidey, or Wolverine. The listings for the latter three, given in my first post, should be deleted, but Hulk should still be listed for PUN6 35-37. TIA
JephYork
Comic Pro
Comic Pro
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by JephYork »

So what you're saying is, you didn't check the books before making either of these posts.

-Jeph!
LordZorn
Hero
Hero
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Denver CO

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by LordZorn »

What I am *saying*, Mr. York, is that due to a physical disability(among other obstacles), it is ***very difficult*** for me to check issues in my collection(which are mostly in long boxes under my computer desk. In addition, my research indicated that Russ had (mistakenly) listed Spidey, Wolvie, and Daredevil as having also been in PUN 6 33, giving me momentary pause as to which books were involved. Admittedly, sir, I do much of my "work" from memory, which is, alas, fallible...but which is, alas, what I have to work with most of the time. I have, I think, seen others here reply to their own posts on occasion in order to elaborate on/amend their primary posts. I may be wrong, but I think Russ appreciates any such efforts at self-correction, as they may save him time and effort in the long run. If he does not, I am sure he will tell me so. It was -not- my intent to inconvenience anyone by posting as I did. I think we all have a drive for perfection here and do our best to live up to that ideal.

I've noticed that you seem to have an issue or two with me. I am very selective about those I correspond with privately through E-mail, PMs, and the like. I further do not wish to dishonour the ideal of heroic cooperation and good fellowship embodied by the characters whose lives we attempt to chronicle, nor do I wish to spoil Russ' Project with petty quarreling. I -will- say a couple things however:

I have always made an attempt to keep my posts concise and on-topic. Those few times I have disputed something another member has said have been civil( if somewhat vehement and wordy). Pursuant to your (apparent) complaint a while ago. I have endeavoured to refrain from the appearance of imperiousness, adding TIA at the end of most posts now. Perhaps you have an aversion to my posting style for personal reasons. If so, that is most unfortunate, especially given the fact that A)there are fewer posts by others, making my posts more obvious; and B) the fact that, due to my nephew's acquiring his own computer(thus freeing it up for my use) I tend to post here more often with my aura of importunate desperation.

I hope that the above satisfies your problem, as it will not be repeated.
JephYork
Comic Pro
Comic Pro
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by JephYork »

I have absolutely no idea what you're going on about. Quite frankly I don't even know what "imperiousness" means.

(EDIT: or "importunate.")

Russ recently posted a new rule in a sticky-note right up at the top of this board. It says, in part:
When alerting us to a potential error, please include a statement telling us, among the books mentioned in your post, which ones you have, and which ones you don't have. ... Please don't be offended by what we've said here. We don't have any partcular person or post in mind. If you think we're calling you out, you're mistaken. We're talking to everyone.
This rule makes people much more likely to *actually check the books* before posting corrections. And when people *actually check the books*, they're more likely to catch errors that they accidentally make when going from memory -- which, as you say, is quite falliable.

When you tell Russ that the MCP is in error, you'd better not just be going by memory. PUN6 #33 was NOT the wrap-up of the "Punisher out west" arc -- it WAS, in fact, the first part of "Confederacy of Dunces." Even if you don't have access to the book itself, there are multiple ways to check this -- dozens and dozens of websites collate information about comics like their titles, plot synopsis, and a scan of the cover. A three-second search on comics.org tells me that PUN6 #33 is titled "Confederacy of Dunces, part 1".

Basically, you amended your first, correct post with *incorrect* information that you pulled from your memory. That's the reverse of the way we like to work around here. And if you think I have a personal problem with you because I called you on sloppy research, then I think you've grossly misinterpreted what's going on in this thread.

When you tell Russ, point-blank, that certain characters don't appear in PUN6 #33, and that he should delete their appearances from the Project -- CHECK PUN6 #33 FIRST.

Or phrase your post as a query ("I seem to recall that...is this true?"), rather than phrasing it as a statement of seeming fact.

Either way -- please follow the posted rules when suggesting changes to the MCP. Thanks.

-Jeph!
JephYork
Comic Pro
Comic Pro
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by JephYork »

By the way, I own PUN6 #33. I checked PUN6 #33. Daredevil, Spider-Man and Wolverine all appear. Prominently.

Their MCP chronologies are not in error.

-Jeph!
LordZorn
Hero
Hero
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Denver CO

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by LordZorn »

Well, thank you, sir, for clarifying things a bit. I admit that I am not as familiar as you are with the "collation sites" you mention. I do recall rather panickedly buying up the "Punisher out West" issue in the hopes of getting all the relevant Hulk issues. As for your other point, I did read Russ' sticky and "tripped up" on a bit of ambiguity therein: It is not that I *don't have* the issues, I don't have/keep them in front of me. But your point is well-taken, I suppose. The rest of my post is, as you say, valid. I will keep in mind your counsel to phrase things more obliquely, unless I am staring directly at the issue in question(not a very likely scenario, for the reasons given).

As for the other matter you mention, I will only say, it might be a good idea to purchase a dictionary...
JephYork
Comic Pro
Comic Pro
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by JephYork »

It might also be a good idea for you to use smaller words. ;)

Some reliable sites that I use for quick info are:

comics.org
comicbookdb.com
the Unofficial Handbook of Marvel Comics Creators

Check 'em out!

-Jeph!
LordZorn
Hero
Hero
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Denver CO

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by LordZorn »

Thank you, sir... I shall keep those sites in mind. As to the other matter, I think you will be disappointed in your request. I am, by nature, verbose, especially online, where I use my gift for circumlocution and grandiloquence as a check on my otherwise Hulk-like temper. It also frankly surprises me that someone familiar with all the epic hyperbole/pseudo-science/superheroic and villainous rants is unfamiliar with those and other words. Just because I'm in the mood, I will tell you that "imperious" means "commanding, especially in a bossy, haughty, or perfuctory way...think of Namor's cry " Imperius Rex(King of the Empire, more or less). Also, dr. Doom and other villains are imperious quite often."Importunate" means "asking or begging urgently or insistently". I think that word, particularly fits me on here, don't you???<G>
JephYork
Comic Pro
Comic Pro
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by JephYork »

You can talk however you like. Just be aware that your intended audience (a) may not understand you, (b) may lose your point halfway through a long rambling paragraph, (c) may lose interest halfway through a long rambling paragraph.

Good communication tailors the method of delivering its message to the audience. It doesn't ask the audience to strain to comprehend the message.

Bad communication alienates the audience to such a degree that they disregard the message. And often the messenger.

To steer this thread back on-topic, your original post claims that the Hulk appears in PUN6 #33-37, and that those missing appearances should be added to the MCP. Have you checked those issues?

<G>

-Jeph!
LordZorn
Hero
Hero
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Denver CO

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by LordZorn »

Not recently, sir, but I tried to convey in the original post my knowledge of the arc by giving details from it. BTW, if I begin posting Page/Panel references (as I will begin to do when/if I ever start my Grand Hulk audit), that's how you will know when I am looking directly at the books in question... I will mess around with some of the sites you gave me and see what I come up with. But since the arc is one of my favourites, I am 95-100% clear on all the other information involved. I am weeak in numbers but strong in historical data, especially as regards the Hulk.
JephYork
Comic Pro
Comic Pro
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by JephYork »

Okay, thanks for confirming that you didn't check the books before telling us to make changes to the MCP. I'll take future posts from you with a grain of salt.

I checked PUN6 #33-37 for you. The Hulk is behind the scenes in #33 (the Punisher hears rumors of an underworld auction; it's later revealed that they're auctioning a captive Banner). The Hulk then appears on-panel in #34-37.

-Jeph!
LordZorn
Hero
Hero
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Denver CO

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by LordZorn »

...which is essentially what I said in my initial post, sir. As it seems we have come full-circle, I ***sincerely*** hope that the rules/your skepticism will still allow me to post if I use appropriately oblique language. If not, I will lurk until such time as circumstances permit my ***full*** participation in this forum. In any event, thank you for your candor...and may you live in interesting times, Mister York<GGG>.
JephYork
Comic Pro
Comic Pro
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:10 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Hulk in Pun 6 33-37

Post by JephYork »

I don't care if you happened to get it "essentially right" this time. Don't ever state something as a fact unless you've checked the books and verified it. That's an insanely basic premise of this message board, and frankly it's just plain common sense.

As for your contention that your initial post was "essentially right" ... you claimed that the Punisher acquired Banner in #33. Wrong -- it was #34. And you didn't state *specifically* which issues the Hulk appeared in -- you just said that he appeared in "the arc", and left it to us to infer that you probably meant every issue. Which, again, would have been wrong, since he doesn't show up on-panel in #33.

If Russ had believed you, taken you at your word and made your suggested changes, the MCP would now have a mistake in it.

What you consider "essentially right", isn't. "Close enough" doesn't work here. Accuracy and precision is necessary if we're to input correct facts into this website.

From now on, if you think you remember something, but for whatever reason you can't check the book, don't state it as a fact. Don't even say "I think this is a fact." I want you to ASK. "Hey guys, I seem to recall the Hulk showing up in PUN6 #33-37, is that true? Can someone check?" (Or whatever your essay-length equivalent would be.)

Don't state something as a fact unless you've actually checked and verified it. And then you might want to actually *let us know* that you've checked your data -- because right now, I'm sorry, but I don't consider you a trustworthy source of information.

-Jeph!
Locked