Jump to content

Talk:Todd McFarlane

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mark McGuire's home run ball

[edit]

Isn't he the guy who paid $3 million for Mark McGuire's 70th home run ball? If so, I wonder what it's worth now? 17:41, 13 October 2002 209.105.200.196

No article for Spawn?

[edit]

? Todd Macflarne is a person, he isn't spawn how come there isn't a seperate article on him><ino 06:34, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Toy designer

[edit]

While Todd certainly put out toys, is there any indication that he actually designs them himself?Zentinel 23:40, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • no, he doesn't. He just won't credit those who do the work. The 4 Horsemen(the guys who did the MOTU and DC Mattel lines) and some NECA guys did a lot of older Spawn toy sculpting.

Lance Gueck

[edit]

Is Lance Gueck the credited scripter of Spawn #1? Can this be verified?

Spawn/venom?

[edit]

Is it just me or does venom look kinda like spawn without the chains and cape? I mean the lines on the chest, the large white area around the eyes... there's even a spawn-carnage character isn't there?

You can probably chalk that up to McFarlane's piss-poor drawing skill. That's also why he digs capes.

67.71.142.157

  • he "co-created" Venom(his extent there is debatable) too. Though Spawn also looks a lot like Marvel's Prowler character in the wrong colors
This hack and originality do not go together. 67.71.143.95 14:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I don't bedrudge the guy for making a good buck (or do I?), but here's a personality who hasn't contributed even one good thing to the world of comics, entertainment, film, etc etc. EVERYTHING he's worked on seems to be simply awful! Talk about someone being in the right place at the right time. His brand of overworked, over detailed, and ugly illustration for some reason is just what the know-nothing kids, and comic collectors of the early 90s wanted. Go figure! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.115.62 (talk) 20:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where I read it, but I remember that he was basically told to make a black monster that looked similar to Spider-Man. He had no idea it was a suit or that someone was going to be inside the "creature" and so in his mind he pictured Spider-Man from hell. Spawn came from hell. Seeing as how he did both and they (well at least in his mind) had similar origins, it's no surprise the amount of similarities.mcnichoj (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Felix the Cat

[edit]

Doesnt anyone remember when he would put in Felixs face? I have SEVERAL issues with it including Incredible Hulk #340, Spider-man #1, and all the inferno issues of Amazing Spider-man plus more. He did it just about every issue.Wrestlinglover420 01:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite sure that the Easter Egg Archive qualifies as a reliable source for this. Also...is it really necessary to include this in there? Metros 02:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is any of his early work if you look at it has Felix the Cat its one of his trademarks. Its very important.Wrestlinglover420 02:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any sources that say this is a trademark of his or that it is important to his career? Or is this just all original research and your personal opinion? Metros 02:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you your source man. It is his trademark ask any fan of his from before he went to Image. There was even a article in Wizard a few years back I think about 97 or 98.Wrestlinglover420 02:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I do not believe that the Easter Egg Archive counts as a reliable source. See this section: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Examples#Are_wikis_reliable_sources.3F. Essentially the Easter Egg Archive is a form of a wiki since you can log in and change the Easter Egg. Metros 02:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, this is trivia and we should avoid trivia sections altogether (I'm assuming everybody noticed the big trivia disclaimer on the section?). Adding to the section isn't going to address the problem. However, this is one example of trivia that (if properly sourced) would be easy to incorporate into the prose of the rest of the article. Drewcifer3000 04:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we should keep trivia sections out. Wikipedia is supposed to be informative, not entertaining or interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.162.204.6 (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Spawn8cover.jpg

[edit]

Image:Spawn8cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

[edit]

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb (talk) 17:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - as should be obvious from the banner across the top and other requests for sources, this is thinly referenced and things dealing with controversial/legal issues could be violating WP:BLP unless properly sourced. (Emperor (talk) 02:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Place of Birth

[edit]

The article shows two different places of birth for McFarlane, Canada and USA. Which one is the correct? Vipseixas (talk) 15:50, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GIL KANE INFLUENCE

[edit]

In an article\interview promoting his "Adjectiveless" Spider-Man in AMAZING HEROES, Todd went to great lengths in extolling the virtues of G.Kane's artwork and how it was one influence on McFarlane's own depiction of Spidey. I don't have access to this magazine otherwise I would list the specific issue and page for the needed citation.MARK VENTURE (talk) 09:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This may be so, but I see little of Gil Kane's fine illuistration style in either characters, design, page layout, or anything else in McFarland's work. A comics illustrator where Kane CAN be seen in some earlier work is Jim Starlin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.228.36 (talk) 01:18, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General critical appraisal

[edit]

While certinly Wiki is no place for original research or criticism, certainly there should be enough general criticism for a section. McFarlane was hardly alone, but he was at the forefront of what many felt was the beginning of the end for good illustration in mainstream superhero comics in the late 80's and early 90's. Fans loved this new approach, but most older fans and most with a critical eye didn't, and I clearly remember his artwork being quite controversial in it's day. Spawn, certainly, and most of Image contained some of the most offending to the eye comic art this side of the various X titles, which (along with much of Marvel) all ended up having cartoonists who ripped off McFarlane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.228.36 (talk) 01:26, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Todd McFarlane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Todd McFarlane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:58, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Todd McFarlane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Todd McFarlane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

notification of RfC

[edit]

There's an RfC at Talk:Steve Englehart#Request for comment that concerns McFarlane and some of the wording in this article. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:31, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Todd McFarlane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:49, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Spawn film

[edit]

I have the draft for the new Spawn film here. If anybody wishes to contribute to the contents of the page or discuss an alternate temporary name, you're more than welcome to. DARTHBOTTO talk•cont 00:08, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Clumsy, unsophisticated and pretentious" as a writer

[edit]

As a casual reader of the article, the following sentence jumped out at me as harshly opinionated, and therefore needing extra clear support: "fans found McFarlane's writing to be clumsy, unsophisticated and pretentious". It was pointed out that there is a citation near the end of the paragraph that readers should assume it belongs to, of the comics bulletin piece, but there are seven sentences in between, and so the connection could easily be missed. It also means the statement reflects a single person's summary, in an opinion column, which uses the exact phrase "clumsy, unsophisticated and pretentious", so I think it is more appropriate to present it as a quotation by that writer, David Wallace.

If it now looks like the comics bulletin piece is carrying too much of the load in this paragraph, I think that's a good sign that more citations should be added to support that there was a widespread consensus about his writing. BrightVamp (talk) 01:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Todd_McFarlane&oldid=1208914034"