Naming conventions

[Starman]

Now, if you look up Captain America #327 in the Search here at the MCP, it says that USAgent appears. Well, no, Super-Patriot is in that comic. (of course, we've already split up USAgent's chronology into his three identities, but the Search hasn't been updated to reflect that yet) We update USAgent to reflect his identities, then update the Search. Then (in the future after all of this happens), look up Captain America #327 in the Search, and it says that Super-Patriot appears. OK, cool, that reflects what character appears in the comic.

It was actually this I had in mind when I wrote my suggestion.

[Col_Fury]

In that case, when you look up Captain America #327 in the Search, it would say that

WALKER, CAPT. JOHN/SUPER-PATRIOT/CAPTAIN AMERICA VI/USAGENT

appears in that comic. We're still left with the same problem. He's not all three identities in Cap #327, he's just Super-Patriot.

[Starman]

In that case, when you look up Captain America #327 in the Search, it would say that

WALKER, CAPT. JOHN/SUPER-PATRIOT/CAPTAIN AMERICA VI/USAGENT

appears in that comic. We're still left with the same problem. He's not all three identities in Cap #327, he's just Super-Patriot.

Uh no, you list every code name, but for the characters full list you look at his real name. Every appearance of Peter Parker goes on Parker, Peter, regardless of which identity he used in the issue, and if he appeared as Spider-Man it goes into that list also. Of course that would mean Walker, Capt. John would appear as both Walker, Capt. John and Super-Patriot in that issue, which would make some issue lists very long, so maybe I didn't think this through enough, but at least people would find him in that issue regardless if they searched on Walker or Super-Patriot.

[Russ Chappell]

In that case, when you look up Captain America #327 in the Search, it would say that.

...at least people would find him in that issue regardless if they searched on Walker or Super-Patriot.

I may not be getting enough sleep, but I'm not really following this. In our example, no one searched on Walker or Super-Patriot. We searched on "CA 327." If you search on "Walker", you don't get a list of books, you get a list of characters with "Walker" in their name or code name.

[Col_Fury]

I think what he's saying is that we list Johnnie Walker's complete chronology under

WALKER, CAPT. JOHN
SUPER-PATRIOT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER
CAPTAIN AMERICA VI/CAPT. JOHN WALKER
and
USAGENT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER

But what would happen when someone searches for Cap #327 is all four identities would come up. Again, he's just Super-Patriot in that issue. AND, we'd be listing the same complete chronology four times in four different places. If we do that for every character, we'd inflate the data size of the MCP to insane proportions.

I could be wrong though, and I don't like putting words into other people's mouths.

On the other hand, he might be suggesting we list his full chronology under WALKER, CAPT. JOHN, and then just have links pointing to John Walker under SUPER-PATRIOT, CAPTAIN AMERICA VI and USAGENT. But again, when you use the Search to look up Cap #327, it says that John Walker appears. Again, we're left with the same problem; Super-Patriot is in that comic.

[Starman]

I think what he's saying is that we list Johnnie Walker's complete chronology under

WALKER, CAPT. JOHN
SUPER-PATRIOT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER
CAPTAIN AMERICA VI/CAPT. JOHN WALKER
and
USAGENT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER

But what would happen when someone searches for Cap #327 is all four identities would come up. Again, he's just Super-Patriot in that issue. AND, we'd be listing the same complete chronology four times in four different places. If we do that for every character, we'd inflate the data size of the MCP to insane proportions.

I could be wrong though, and I don't like putting words into other people's mouths.

Wow, I'm am horribly lousy explaining things, I do now realize. You only list the full complete chronology under John Walker, as that is who he is under the mask. He's John Walker, not his costume, unless he has a symbiote costume, like Venom, then it becomes more complicated, but we do not have to go into that, right? If he's using the identity Super-Patriot, we add to that listing also. That way if you only want a listing of when he was Super-Patriot, you can get that under the listing of Super-Patriot, and if you want a listing of all times John Walker has been appearing regardless of identity you can get that under his full name. Is it clearer now, or should I just give up, shut up, and start feeling like a fool?

On the other hand, he might be suggesting we list his full chronology under WALKER, CAPT. JOHN, and then just have links pointing to John Walker under SUPER-PATRIOT, CAPTAIN AMERICA VI and USAGENT. But again, when you use the Search to look up Cap #327, it says that John Walker appears. Again, we're left with the same problem; Super-Patriot is in that comic.

As both John Walker and Super-Patriot is in that comic, (right?), we list it under John Walker and Super-Patriot. As Captain America VI and USAgent is not in that comic,
(right?), we don't list them.

EDIT: To clarify. If Peter Parker appears in a comic, but only as Peter Parker, not as Spider-Man, he only gets a listing as Peter Parker. If he's appearing as Spider-Man, he get a listing under both Spider-Man and Peter Parker.

[Col_Fury]

It sounds like you're suggesting we continue to do things the way we're already doing things.

Here's how we are currently listing John Walker's various identities:

On the "S" page:

SUPER-PATRIOT II/CAPT. JOHN WALKER
CA 345-FB
CA 380/2 (4)-FB
CA 333 (8:3)-FB
CA 380/2 (5)-FB
USA2 1-FB
CA 372/2-FB
CA 333 (8:4)-FB
CA 381/2 (1:2 - 2:4)-FB
CA 333 (8:5)-FB
CA 381/2 (2:5 - 3:2)-FB
CA 333 (8:6)-FB
CA 381/2 (3:3)-FB
CA 333 (8:7)-FB
CA 281/2 (3:4)-FB
{CA 323 (1 - 10)}
CA 381/2 (4:1 - 4:2)-FB
CA 323 (11 - 22)
CA 327
CA 332
See Captain America VI

On the "C" page:

CAPTAIN AMERICA VI/CAPT. JOHN WALKER
From Super-Patriot
CA 333
CA 334
CA 335
CA 336-FB
CA 338
CA 339
CA 341/2
PPTSS 137
PPTSS 138
CA 343
CA 344
CA 345
CA 346
CA 347
CA 348
CA 349
CA 350
CA 382/2 (4:6)-FB
CA 351
CA 351-FB
CA 382/2 (5:3)-FB
See USAgent

On the "U" page:

USAGENT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER/"JACK DANIELS"
From Captain America VI
[BSCARS 3-FB]
CA 354
… (all the rest of his appearances)

When you go to the Search page and look up CA 327, it (will eventually) say that SUPER-PATRIOT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER appears there. When you look up CA 338, it (will eventually) say that CAPTAIN AMERICA VI/CAPT. JOHN WALKER appears there. When you look up CA 354, it says that USAGENT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER appears there.

[Starman]

It sounds like you're suggesting we continue to do things the way we're already doing things.
[...]
When you go to the Search page and look up CA 327, it (will eventually) say that SUPER-PATRIOT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER appears there. When you look up CA 338, it (will eventually) say that CAPTAIN AMERICA VI/CAPT. JOHN WALKER appears there. When you look up CA 354, it says that USAGENT/CAPT. JOHN WALKER appears there.

No, I'd also like to see a listing where you can see a full list of all of John Walker's appearances.

And I want to make everyone ask themselves a question:
If a character, like for example Peter Parker, is only in a civilian identity in an issue, should it really count as an appearance of his costumed identity, Spider-Man, also then?

[Col_Fury]

No, I'd also like to see a listing where you can see a full list of all of John Walker's appearances.

I'm thinking no, for two reasons.

When you look up CA 327 on the search page, it would say that both John Walker and Super-Patriot/John Walker appears.

Duplicating John Walker's chronology twice in two (or four, or whatever) different listings (and therefore every other character with a code name) would inflate the MCP's data size to crazy levels. That's not really an option.

If a character, like for example Peter Parker, is only in a civilian identity in an issue, should it really count as an appearance of his costumed identity, Spider-Man, also then?

As a cameo after he's already become Spider-Man? Yes.

On the other hand, I think we should split off (for example) Jim Rhodes' pre-Iron Man chronology to a RHODES, JAMES listing that ends with a "See Iron Man IV" link, because he was originally introduced as Jim Rhodes, and was "just" Jim Rhodes for years before he became Iron Man (we already have his Iron Man and War Machine appearances split into two listings).

Currently, if you look up IM 146 in the Search, it says that IRON MAN IV/JAMES RHODES appears. Well, no, Jim's not Iron Man yet in that comic.

[Michael]

On the other hand, I think we should split off (for example) Jim Rhodes' pre-Iron Man chronology to a RHODES, JAMES listing that ends with a "See Iron Man IV" link, because he was originally introduced as Jim Rhodes, and was "just" Jim Rhodes for years before he became Iron Man (we already have his Iron Man and War Machine appearances split into two listings).

Currently, if you look up IM 146 in the Search, it says that IRON MAN IV/JAMES RHODES appears. Well, no, Jim's not Iron Man yet in that comic.

I agree that it doesn't make any sense to simply describe Jim Rhodes as Iron Man IV or Madelyne Pryor as the Goblyn Queen for their early appearances since they had dozens of appearances over several years where they had no costumed identity. But what about Sharon Venutra, for example, who had only seven appearances over eight months before becoming Ms. Marvel? Or Brigid O'Reilly, who had eight appearances over about two years before becoming Mayhem?

[Col_Fury]

But what about Sharon Venutra, for example, who had only seven appearances over eight months before becoming Ms. Marvel? Or Brigid O'Reilly, who had eight appearances over about two years before becoming Mayhem?

First, let me "think out loud" about my thought process on why I think we should split Alice Nugent's "Alice" appearances from her "Dr. Spectrum" appearances.

Here's how we have her now:

DOCTOR SPECTRUM V/DR. ALICE NUGENT
IM 194
IM 195-BTS
A3 19-FB
A3 20
TB2 15
TB2 16
TB 102-FB
TB 102
TB 105
TB 106

And here's how I think we should have her:

DOCTOR SPECTRUM IV/DR. ALICE NUGENT
From Dr. Alice Nugent
TB2 16
TB 102-FB
TB 102
TB 105
TB 106

NUGENT, DR. ALICE
IM 194
IM 195-BTS
A3 19-FB
A3 20
TB2 15
See Dr. Spectrum IV

She made appearances across three different series with three different creative teams as Alice before being turned into the new Dr. Spectrum by that third creative team. This was a pre-existing character that was re-purposed.

More thinking out loud:

Sharon Ventura, on the other hand, appeared in the Thing series, all written by Mike Carlin (and a cameo in SWII 7), before taking the Ms. Marvel name (Thing #35, right?). And for the first few issues we didn't even know her name was Sharon, if I remember right, she was just "the beautiful woman on the billboard" (or somesuch). Mike Carlin introduced her, Mike Carlin named her and Mike Carlin made her Ms. Marvel, all in the Thing series. It seems safe to assume that Carlin had plans for Sharon to end up like this, so I'm leaning toward leaving all of her appearances under Ms. Marvel II, but that one appearance in SWII 7 is throwing me a little bit.

Mayhem, though, appeared in two volumes of Cloak & Dagger, both written by Bill Mantlo as O'Reilly and as Mayhem. Mantlo introduced her, Mantlo named her and Mantlo made her Mayhem. It seems safe to assume that Mantlo had plans for O'Reilly to end up like this, so I'm leaning toward leaving all of her appearances under Mayhem, and there's no pesky SWII 7 appearance to think about.

Am I making sense?

[Paul Bourcier]

I do think you're making sense, Col_Fury. There is certainly an argument for drawing the distinction between "re-purposed characters" and those who made a very limited number of appearances before adopting a code name. The question is: how do we define the line we're drawing here to achieve some measure of consistency? Number of comic appearances prior to code name? Number of comic titles prior to code name? Number of creative teams prior to code name? Other? Some combination of the above?

[lettsmonster]

After 50 plus years of Marvel continuity, naming conventions is a very difficult subject.

Hank Pym, I think, is by far the worst case scenario. We could debate about how to handle him for weeks.

But I want to talk about a different individual. So far, we have discussed characters who went from non costume to costume. Two examples are Barbara Morse and Carol Danvers. At the time they were introduced, they were basically supporting cast for Ka-zar and Captain Marvel, respectively. Apparently, not even today worthy of their own chronology pre-costume. But what about someone that reverts from costume to non-costume? John Blaze springs immediately to mind.

If I were a Marvel comics newcomer, just starting to collect back issues, what if I walked into to a comic store and Blaze 9 from April 1995 caught my eye digging through the store bins. What if I loved this character after reading this issue and wanted to find more about him? What if I had discovered the Marvel Chronology Project and knew it was THE source for Marvel characters? I still wouldn't be able to find any John Blaze under B. As a newbie, Ghost Rider XXXIV would mean nothing to me.

My ideal, as close to possible, is to pick up an issue of Marvel comics from 1965 or 1972 or 1989 or 1995 or 2003 or 2012 and be able to find that character, in the issue I pick up, under that name, in the Marvel Chronology Project. I realize things aren't as simple as this, but this is how I use the Project. I read comics from random and varying dates across the whole 50 years (70 years counting the Golden Age), and I use the Project on a weekly basis to follow the characters I like.

Thanks for listening!

[Col_Fury]

My ideal, as close to possible, is to pick up an issue of Marvel comics from 1965 or 1972 or 1989 or 1995 or 2003 or 2012 and be able to find that character, in the issue I pick up, under that name, in the Marvel Chronology Project.

This is what I'm talking about.

John Blaze springs immediately to mind.

Or similarly, more recently, Mac Gargan. He "retired" from being Scorpion when he bonded to the Venom Symbiote, and has now made more appearances this way than when he was Scorpion. Of course, he's since resumed being Scorpion…

But yeah, Johnny Blaze. He wasn't a Ghost Rider and was going by "just" Johnny Blaze from Defenders #145 (1985) until the Ghost Rider Hammer Lane mini (2001). That's over 15 years! Yikes. And he even had a mini series and an ongoing series under the "Blaze" name during that time.

Good point, lettsmonster!

[Jason Doty]

Paul wrote

The question is: how do we define the line we're drawing here to achieve some measure of consistency?

I say we just follow the comics. If we are introduced to the character in costume, we use that until it changes. If we are introduced to them as a civilian, we start there. How ever they appear in their first published appearance is the jumping off point. Always the same rule, so it is always consistent.