WikiProject iconFilm Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconComics: Marvel / Spider-Man Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Related work groups:
/ 
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by Marvel Comics work group.
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by Spider-Man work group.

The new template, what do u thing of it??[edit]

i've just finished rebuilding the whole thing, plus what was there before i've also added comic series and the video games.. do you have any comments on the new formatting?? btw. if i don't get any replies then that's okay.. nobody checks this pages except me anywayz :D --Amr Hassan 06:53, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Video games[edit]

I dont think it's wise to include the video games on it, their are far to many....

Streets of the City, Doc Ock Horror, Green Goblin's Escape, Venom's Vindication and Rogues Gallery

Micro Games of America Spider Man Handheld LCD Game

Their is a whole article on just the Spider-Man (games), even if you select the "main ones" (what ever that means) and group the Spider-Man 2 ones together it will still be three times longer than the TV series. - User:UnlimitedAccess

But I didn't add all those titles to the template! I only put the main article's internal link..u thought that i was going to add'em later or something ??--Amr Hassan 02:02, 4 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes I did in fact! I thought you were going to put them all in!!! Or die trying :P - UnlimitedAccess

Comics[edit]

Also as a secondary note, I think its for similar reasons hard to include a Comic Series section. Well firstly what were you trying to accomplish with that section.

As you would be well aware it would be impossibly long to include in that little box a complete list of Spider-Man comics, so we need a criteria to what should and shouldnt be in the template, and as it stands it just seems like an arbitary incomplete list of Spider-Man titles.

I see their is three routes you could take;

1 - Only include the current titles

This is one possible way, but would have to be continually maintained, however is not very useful as an Encylopedia to search for old titles. I wouldnt recommend this way.

2 - Contain a list of all the different Spider-Man continuinty(s)

This is another route you could take, and does seem very useful and would not be VERY NPOV. It is almost what you have currently as well. This way you could include, the Regular Marvel Universe Spider-Man, the Marvel 2099 one, the Ultimate Marvel one, Spider-Man: India, and the Japanese Spider-Man Manga one and possibly the 1990's Animated Series comic book continunity ones. However if you were going down that route you would have to remove the Marvel Knights Spider-Man and Spider-Man's Tangled Web because they are all in regular Marvel Universe continunity.

3 - Only include the core Spider-Man titles that maintain continuinty

This is probably the most useful way, because the most importantant ones that all pushed the narratiive forward and list none of the obscure ones. This is possibly manageable..

I would argue over the years the core titles have been;

Then of course you could list the ulternate universe ones, but its already bloated.

No worries! Thanks for being open to suggestions! No Spider-Man Unlimited was also a comic book that ran through regular continuinty. It has three volumes but not many issues, it got cancelled quickly but was one of the core titles for about 2 years. - UnlimitedAccess
Spider-man Unlimited has come back as a bimonthly (sextannual?) title; I believe issue #11 just came out. Should I add it? I don't have RL time to create a separate page for it right now and I don't know whether you guys want the template to contain only links.

Propose new version[edit]

I find the current one leaves a few topics out, and I don't like how "video games" is squished down at the bottom, and how the movies are sort of floating in the middle. Also I think it's more useful to have the current titles (+AmFan), but that can be easily changed. So I started tweaking it and this is what I came up with:
// moved to Template:Spider-Man/temp // -HKMARKS 01:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is used in quite a few pages so I wasn't sure about just changing it. Let me know --HKMARKS 19:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You chould probably copy this over to the talk on WP:COMICS to get a consensus. :) --Jamdav86 20:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I also think it's about time this template is updated, i've created a temp subpage Template:Spider-Man/temp from the current version for temporary editing.. let's see what can be done :D.. --PASSIVE (Talk|E-Mail) 01:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
cool. I don't really like the "pure" red and dark blue -- it's kind of hard on the eyes. I did change the pale blue currently used to a more... um... "manly" light blue, though (for #1). And shrunk the words a little (proportionally, of course) -HKMARKS 01:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I put up the new version -HKMARKS 04:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Amazing Spider-Man: The Series[edit]

someone added The Amazing Spider-Man: The Series article, the article didn't put any sources and i couldn't find anything about it on the web, so is this even a real show. Or is it just some vanadls.147.31.184.207 17:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Black Cat is not a Villain[edit]

In Felicia and Peter's first encounter, she was only freeing her dying father from prison, not trying to take over the world or killing innocent children on the streets.

Just because this put them at odds for their first three adventures does not a villain make.

I think her consistent team-ups with Peter and other heroes put Black Cat solidly in the supporting section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.230.132.56 (talk) 00:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Low rate villians[edit]

Villains like the Grizzly, Kangroo and Spot are not noteworthy, they don't belong here. This should only include his major villians. 69.29.254.57 (talk) 01:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I went ahead and removed them. 69.29.254.57 (talk) 03:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

villians[edit]

Can we please stop with the overload of villians. We should stick to the majors only. 69.29.254.57 (talk) 20:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Protected[edit]

This template has been protected due to contentious additions/reversions. Please discuss additions here on the talk page. - jc37 01:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Films[edit]

What about the three movies, Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, and Spider-Man 3? How come they're not included? Comp25 (talk) 13:28, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Same reason the shows and video games aren't — all are in ((Spider-Man in popular media)). - J Greb (talk) 22:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brand New Day villians[edit]

I noticed Menace and Mr. Negative on there, which are villians that appeared after Brand New Day, making them very new, they could turn out to be dangerous and major villians of Spider-Man but for right now I do think they are too new and I think we should focus on the classic villians that have been adopted in Spider-Man media. I think Morlun should be the latest villian for now. What do you think? Captain Virtue (talk) 14:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Morlun should not be on there at all. The message says The following villains have appeared throughout the 45 years of spider-man's history, appeared in multiple mediums, and/or received media attention. Morlun has had only a few appearences and he has not been adapted to alternate Spiderman comics (e.g Ultimate Spider-man) nor has he been used in other mediums. Bobisbob2 (talk) 01:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The Enforcers[edit]

Permission to use the Enforcers on the villians section. They have been used throughout 45 years of history, appeared in the Spectacular Spider-man tv series (media attention) and has been in alternate comics such as Ultimate Spider-Man. Another villian that has the same treatment is Silvermane. The Sinister Six should probably be somewhere in the template somewhere too.Captain Virtue (talk) 20:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Haven't they already been on the list? Anyway the Enforcers and Silvermane quailfy but we don't need the Sinsister Six. The members are already there. Bobisbob2 (talk) 13:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Morbius, the Living Vampire[edit]

Morbius isn't a villain. If anything, he should be considered a supporting character. He may have been a short-term enemy before, but now he is a hero. In fact, he's one of the members of the supernatural-themed team known as the Midnight Suns.

Toxin[edit]

Toxin should be added as a supporting character. NecklupA10 (talk) 00:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, He's had only a few appearences and no adaptations. Bobisbob2 (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit request from 24.180.173.157, 21 October 2010[edit]

((edit semi-protected)) In the hidden message placed in the "Supporting Cast" and "Villains" groups, please change have been in comic retellings (e.g Ultimate Spider-Man) to have alternative comic versions. 24.180.173.157 (talk) 03:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done Thanks, Stickee (talk) 08:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You forget to put it in the villians section. 24.180.173.157 (talk) 16:16, 30 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Fixed Stickee (talk) 23:32, 30 October 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Carlie Cooper[edit]

While some may be hesistant to add any of the new characters from "Brand New Day", Carlie Cooper's status as Peter Parker's current girlfriend sets her apart. Excluding her from the template at this point makes no sense. ABCxyz (talk)

I support her inclusion in the template. Spidey104contribs 03:30, 24 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also agree that she should be included. Kurt Parker (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

_______________________________________________________________________________

I would wait a little bit before removing her from the template. The current rationale to include her was because she's Peter's current girlfriend. Yes, they broke up, but in the very next issue they started working together. I realize it counts as speculation to say I think this is a sign they will get back together, but it does not hurt the template to leave her in for a little bit longer until we're sure they're staying broken up. Spidey 104 14:08, 19 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Carlie revisited

Carlie was important during The Superior Spider-Man, but she has disappeared from The Amazing Spider-Man volume 3. Her inclusion in this template was based on her "status as Peter Parker's current girlfriend" and she is not any longer. She doesn't meet the criteria of "The following supporting characters have appeared throughout the 45 years of Spider-Man's history, have alternative comic versions, appeared in multiple media, and/or received media attention." I think she should be removed. Does anyone disagree? Spidey104 17:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit request from GravitonStrikes, 25 January 2011[edit]

((edit semi-protected)) I want to edit Graviton in the Spider-Man templete because Spider-Man fought him in the Acts of Vengance Comics.

GravitonStrikes (talk) 02:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC) Not done: Since templates contain only the most general information, we can only include the villains here that Spider-Man fought regularly, often, and at many time throughout his "career". A single series enemy is not sufficient for inclusion here. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was one issue. That hardly constitutes him as a Spider-Man villain. The note within the template says "The following villains have appeared throughout the 45 years of Spider-Man's history," and he definitely is not throughout Spider-Man's history. So I completely agree with Qwyrxian to NOT include him in the template. Spidey104 14:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One issue does not make a villain Spider-Man centric. Graviton is mainly a Avengers villain, we will leave it to that. ;) Jhenderson 777 15:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ezekiel[edit]

I am well aware that Ezekiel has Spider-Man type powers which can make him considered part of the Spider-Man family. But I feel he's too minor to be included in this template. Two issues doesn't cut it. He doesn't seem to deserve his own article. Media adaptions and alternate issues still compy even with the Spider-Man family. Does anyone disagree. Jhenderson 777 21:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

He makes a good point. I am not opposed to the removal of Ezekial from the template, but we should wait a few days to see if anyone disagrees. Spidey104 01:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit request from 74.110.23.213, 5 May 2011[edit]

Wasp (comics)

74.110.23.213 (talk) 21:25, 5 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why should a link to Wasp (comics) be included in the Spider-Man template? Wasp and Spider-Man have interacted, but it has been minor occurrences of no major notability. Spidey104 21:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Additions That should be made[edit]

I really think that this template needs a few additions that were there before but have since been removed. I have outlined the additions I think should be made and my reasons. If no one disagrees soon, I think I'll make the changes (even thought this template seems to be inactive):

1. Ezekiel - He should be readded to supporting characters. Ezekiel was a major character in the series between issies (Vol. 2) 30 and 508. Rescently he has been the disguise of the Chamaleon (635) and was one of the major losses to Peter in 654. He is as much a supporting character as some of those already listed. I mean, Rocket Racer is on the template.

2. Mister Negative, Alistair Smythe, Spencer Smythe, Boomerang, Swarm- I think all these villains are as significant as Morlun and some of the others to be on the villains section. On the list of Spider-Man villains page, all these are actually considered main villains, so I do not see any reason why they can't be on the template when Morlun and the Spot are when Spidey fought all of those villains more than Morlun. It's not like these guys were Disco Hussler. They're very significant villains. The Smythes should not have any problem. I see though that there could be problems with Mister Negative (he is too new) and Boomerang and Swarm (not significant enough), but if Morlun and the Spot are on the template there is no reason they shouldn't mean.

3. Puma - While he was a villain, his case is similar to Prowler or Black Cat as he is more of an ally to Spider-Man, and he is more signficant than Prowler or Rocket Racer so I do not see why he can't be in supporting characters when they are. There is an issue whether he is a villain (like Morbius) or supporting character (like Black Cat) since he was both like my two examples. Nontheless, he should be in one of those sections

I also think that we need to alphabetize the supporting characters to be uniform with all the other templates (ex./Captain America, Daredevil, Wolverine, etc.) Fett02 (talk) 00:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


So, right now I'm about to add all the villains listed in number 2. Numbers 1 and 3 I'll do later because I think the list should be alphabetized before I make additions to that. Now I'm going to make better justifications for the villains I talked about and explain how they "have appeared throughout the 45 years of Spider-Man's history, have alternative comic versions, appeared in multiple mediums, and/or received media attention.":

-The Smythes - Both Spencer and Alistair are vey important to the history of SM has they are ones who created and mainly use the Spider Slayers (which have their own page). Both characters appeared as primary villains in the 90's cartoon and were in many of video games like Web of Shadows.

-Swarm and Boomerang - While both not initially SM villains, they both eventually became a part of his rogues and have fought SM numerous times over the past 45 years. They both have alternate versions like in the Ultimate, Fairy Tale, and Adventures lines. Swarm was in the Amazing Friends cartoon and Turn Off the Dark musical while Boomerang has been in the Shattered Dimensions and Ultimate games.

-Mister Negative - He hasn't really had time to be siginificant over 45 years as he was only created in 2007. However, he is similiar to Carlie Cooper is for supporting characters in that he has been a major villain since Brand New Day appearing in over a dozen issues of the Amazing Spider-Man series, being villains in many one-shots and Spider-Man mini and secondary series, appearing in other Marvel titles, and even starring in his own mini series. Since his creation, he is probably the villain (excluding Osborn) that Spidey has fought the most

I think these reasons are more than enought grounds to add these 5 villains. I will wait a little longer to see if anyone objects to me alphabetizing the supporting characters and adding Ezekiel and Puma to that list Fett02 (talk) 20:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So, I decided its best to leave Mister Negative off for now. Fett02 (talk) 02:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Three days is WAY too short of a time to wait for a response. Editors are not on Wikipedia every day. You should wait for one week minimum; longer if the edit may be controversial. I support the changes you already made, but in the future you should wait longer.
I support adding Puma to the list, but I do not support adding Ezekiel because he only showed up for two storylines (three if you count the Chameleon impersonating him), and a lot of what he did to Spider-Man's origin was wiped away by One More Day.
I do not support alphabetizing the supporting characters because they are listed in, roughly, the order of importance. Spidey104 14:43, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I noticed this request that he has done and I think he's got the right idea that the character has to have media adaptions and alternative versions. So that make a no for Mister Negative and Ezekiel. I was even thinking it was about time for Swarm to be qualified after the Broadway hit of Spider-Man. And also when it comes to Brand New Day does anyone think Vin Gonzales can qualify since Carlie Cooper seems to now? I am also thinking Morlun could be included too because he is a big deal in a novel of Spidey's and is getting to be recurring in mainstream. Jhenderson 777 17:17, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I supported the inclusion of Carlie Cooper because she is currently Peter's girlfriend. Vin was introduced at the same time, but he hasn't appeared in "Big Time" at all (his last appearance was at the end of Brand New Day/Origin of the Species), so I don't think he belongs. Has Morlun been in anything outside of The Amazing Spider-Man besides the female "Black Panther" series and the novel? Spidey104 18:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am sort of hesitant with the Carlie Cooper inclusion because I am not sure she will be important forever. At least Gonzales has had a media adaption. But since she is a important love interest in the time being I was never really against it. So far Morlun has only established himself as a Spidey villain appearing in only his issues and the closest one to almost kill Spider-Man. Jhenderson 777 14:39, 7 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well I do support the Mister Negative addition since he was the only Brand New Day villain addition that has maintained a strong impact on the story compared to the other characters (Overdrive, Paper Doll, Freak, Screwball). Also I agree at keeping Cooper up since she continues to provide a strong supporting role to the series unlike Vin Gonzales who is no longer part of the supporting cast. I tend to judge by impact value on the storyline (strong supporting roles over minor and cameo roles) and not by when the character is introduced or number of appearances. If Carlie Cooper were removed from the supporting cast then since she's been around for only a few years that is when I'll agree with removing her from the template since she would no longer be a supporting character. -67.171.250.39 (talk) 17:33, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So we have one for a addition of Mr. Negative. Is anyone else for Mr. Negative being added? Jhenderson 777 01:44, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I oppose the inclusion of Mister Negative. According to his own article he hasn't even been adapted to another medium, only referenced in a video game. He was important for "Brand New Day," but that's over and he hasn't been seen much since. Spidey104 01:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well you see I would have agree with that...but I am still not certain that Carlie Cooper being on there. Are you ok with the inclusion of Spot and Swarm on here? Jhenderson 777 13:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Carlie: I originally supported Carlie Cooper because she was Peter Parker's girlfriend. Despite that being a recent event I thought it was notable enough for readers to be looking for her and to temporarily (to possibly permanently) include her. They have broken up, but her small/sporadic appearances might keep readers looking for her because little is mentioned about her within the actual comics since her appearances are so short. For right now I think it is fine to continue to include her, but I would not be upset if someone disagrees strongly and wants to remove her.
Spot: I think it is fine to continue to include him, but I would not be upset if someone disagrees strongly and wants to remove him. He has been adapted to one television show with one full episode as a villain and a second episode cameo. I'm not sure if that is enough to keep him.
Swarm: He has been adapted into multiple other media including the Broadway musical. I think that is enough adaptation for him to be included. Spidey104 17:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So current romantic interests are in. I guess I can allow that. As long as they are centered in his universe. Spot I asked because he is probably the most minor character on the list. In all honesty Mr. Negative and Morlun had more menacing role even though they aren't as recurring. Also sort of the same thing with Swarm but I do agree they are either a in or not in. Jhenderson 777 18:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  1. For my previously stated reasons I think Carlie and Swarm should be included.
  2. Spot is a well-known minor villain and he has been on the template for a long time without any objections, so I think he should be included.
  3. For now I think we should exclude Mr. Negative and Morlun to avoid recentism-creep.
  4. We have forgotten about Puma (comics) and I support his inclusion, because he is an older character that appears occasionally. However, I am not sure if he should be listed as "Villain" or "Supporting character". Spidey104 00:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If we were to include him then yeah I would just put him as a supporting character. Also I should also feel like noting other villains that have media adaptions:

Jhenderson 777 13:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Big Wheel has adaptations in video games that Rocket Racer does not, but they share the same episode from the animated series to follow their original storyline from the comic book. They are a loosely paired duo of sorts. I think it makes sense to include both of them. Spidey104 12:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually Spidey104, I think we may have gotten too far. Because that's really only half of it. There is still Human Fly (comics), Frederick Foswell and Richard Fisk and (to be honest) others with one or maybe more. Also just like the ones I listed I don't mean they should go but I think we need to be more than careful with the media adaption thing. Remember we did make a rule that the character should have been in alternative universe comic books as well. Also I think the MORE THAN ONE media adaption or alternate universe would be even a better rule. Also another note: Video Games do seem to highlight minor characters some times. Remember when Iguana (comics) did appear in the latest video games. Jhenderson 777 18:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think you're right, JHenderson. Only one media adaptation is too low of a threshold and this template would explode under those conditions. I'm sorry I jumped the gun and added those characters too soon.
There is no easy way to define if an appearance in a video game is major or minor and if the video game is well known or not, so we definitely need to establish a rule based on the number of appearances in other media. I also think being adapted into an alternative universe is a good sign of notability (but not a reason to exclude if they don't have it), so I agree that should also be considered. Like I said already one is too low of a threshold, but is two possibly still too low of a threshold? I think four would be too high of a threshold, but I'm not sure if it should be two or three media adaptions and/or alternative universe translation. Spidey104 00:18, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well let's see here. I would do two alternative universes myself. (Like Spot (comics)). Also for media adaptions I would go for at least three. If it's only video games and toys maybe not though. It's usually the animated series or movies that more commonly depict the main villains. I also think supporting villains of a major villain (like Calypso and Shriek) should maybe be avoided. I think they have to have both alternate universes and media adaptions at the same time with either more than one alternate universe or more than three video games. Unless it's somebody that is pretty recurring in the mainstream comics like Puma (comics). Jhenderson 777 14:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree that supporting villains of a major villain should be avoided. I disagree that alternative universes should be considered separately from media adaptations. I think their "number" should be how many of each they have been in. Add the media appearances and the alternative universes together. Spidey104 17:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It appears that you are saying the same thing I attempted to say. What I was trying to say is the same thing the hidden note is saying. "The following villains have appeared throughout the 45 years of Spider-Man's history, have alternative comic versions, appeared in multiple media, and/or received media attention." I agree with this. If they weren't in Ultimate Marvel then you might need to question them being major enough for the navbox. In fact I think I will change the at least two alternative versions and make that rule only in media adaptions. BUT ALSO if they appear at both even once or twice in a major role (like Molten Man) that's fine too. Jhenderson 777 17:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am sorry if I ain't explaining myself well. If not just let me know. Jhenderson 777 18:08, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Out of all those you added I left out Demogoblin and Big Wheel. Demogoblin only because he technically was in Ultimate Marvel and also in a toyline. That video game that adds the whole Carnage family doesn't count IMO. Although reading his plot summary I don't think he is a big deal in the mainstream comic books. He hasn't appeared much after he died unfortunately. Also the Big Wheel I don't think is being used much in modern comic books. I don't think he is a very recurring adversary of Spider-Man in the mainstream comic books (much like Spot (comics)). If you read his plot summary you will know what I mean. But he did have a few media adaptions to help people know him...so I will let you decide. You just might need to read his plot summary to decide. Jhenderson 777 18:41, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I get what you're saying and I agree with it. Spidey104 17:35, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(The Big Wheel has appeared recently with Overdrive stealing it for a get-away-car.)

Well thanks. Big Wheel might have been around but has he been a antagonist of Spidey currently and recurring. I am saying this in the form of a question because I really don't know. All I know is the citation only contains seven issues which doesn't sound very recurring enough for me imo. Jhenderson 777 21:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wasn't adding that information as an argument to include him. I was including that information in case you were curious about a recent appearance. I specifically wrote it as "The Big Wheel" instead of "Big Wheel" because the vehicle made an appearance, but the owner/creator of the Big Wheel vehicle did not appear. It was meant as a joke. It doesn't mean he should be included. Spidey104 23:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok sorry for the not telling it's a joke and not responding lately. I have been a little busier than usual. Inclusion is not necessary because I left him there even if I don't think he belongs there or not. I really do want to know what others (such as yourself) think about it though and the same with Demogoblin. I am not sure the media adaptions for him is enough IMO. Jhenderson 777 15:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

own[edit]

I just want to be clear. Sorry if I sounded like I was in a WP:own. I felt that I came across that on my last edit which I don't mean to. Perhaps character's like Shriek and the alter-ego characters are fine. But it's mostly best to have a certain guideline like what the reasonable hidden comment said (that I never created) because Spidey has a lot of bad guys. But we do have a freedom to add to even still. So be bold and give you're additions a try. That's how I started. :) Jhenderson 777 18:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2014[edit]

add spider-woman link to supporting characters 199.79.170.163 (talk) 03:56, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done Next time I strongly suggest being a little more clear about what you want added or changed. Thanks for your contributions to the English Wikipedia! — ((U|Technical 13)) (t • e • c) 14:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: Spider-Woman is a similar character to, but not a supporting character of Spider-Man. Additions like that need to be justified on the talk page. Spidey104 16:31, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Undone: This request has been undone. Spidey104, I have no problem with you reverting my edit and requesting a consensus on this page. Please use the correct template next time though. 199.79.170.163 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), you apparently are going to need a CONSENSUS to get this change made. Good luck and happy editing! — ((U|Technical 13)) (t • e • c) 17:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Technical 13, I apologize that I used the wrong template, but this was the first time I have seen the 'undone' template used. I have only seen 'done' and 'not done' templates before. Spidey104 03:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2014[edit]

add fantastic four to supporting characters (thanks) 129.49.11.131 (talk) 23:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the ((edit semi-protected)) template. — ((U|Technical 13)) (t • e • c) 23:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fantastic Four are not supporting characters of Spider-Man. They would be an equal. Spidey104 01:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Villain: Tarantula[edit]

I added Tarantula to the Antagonists list... the character has taken several different forms, first appeared in the 1970s (he's next to Kingpin in this classic roundup), has been in comics as recently as 2015, and appeared in a couple of comic book universes, newspaper strips and at least one video game. Seem OK? - grant (talk) 14:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2017[edit]

Remove uncategorized template, as this template is no longer uncategorized. Sparetimeinfo (talk) 06:17, 27 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done — nihlus kryik  (talk) 08:03, 27 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories