Talk:Sentry (comics)

Sentry/Superman?

I know The Sentry is pretty much Marvel's answer to Superman, and the third one at that. But unlike characters like Hyperion or Gladiator, I think it is pretty clear he is actually modelled after the Miracleman. The realtionship between both sides of the character (the human and the "god"), and the whole theme of an amnesiac godlike being searching for his true identity make it quite obvious for me. 140.185.215.122 19:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Anonymous

Wrong. Not "pretty much Marvel's answer to Superman". But you weasels do love your "pretty much", don't you? That seems to be the weasel-word phrase you lovingly linger over the most. It just makes almost ANY absurd, untrue statement work, doesn't it? And it rolls off the tongue SO much better than "more or less", am I right?

Anyway. I don't know shit about Miracleman (like "pretty much" everyone else.) But if you wanna run around saying the Sentry was a rip-off of Miracleman, instead of Superman ... at least you get points for being original. For not duckspeaking an absurd lie, a factoid. You'll see my comment later in this section. Thank you for your attention.

-Ben Culture (talk) 02:30, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

That comparison was also made in Toyfare and other places... A blonde Superman pastiche that gains his powers by transforming from a human to a superhuman. In TTT, Spider-Man points this out, Sentry argues with him, and Spider-Man says "Kimota", turning Sentry into what appears to be Billy Batson (Captain Marvel/Shazam!), who Miracleman/Marvelman is in fact based on.

Of more concern is the pointless comparisons to Superman in the Marvel Zombies section... It is fairly obvious that it is in fact Sentry, bearing his original hairstyle, and as of Marvel Zombies vs. The Army of Darkness #1, the hole in the uniform is explained as having been caused by a shotgun blast, not having anything to do with Superman's S shield being torn off... There are some really needless leaps in logic being made in there. 140.185.215.122 19:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Steve

Also: The above (anonymous) was not posted by me... Why is it displaying my IP? 140.185.215.122 19:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Steve

Yes, the Sentry is just like Superman. After all, we all know Superman is a sun-themed, married, blonde human being, with a history of mental illness and drug addiction, who got his powers after he broke into a lab looking for methamphetamine ingredients, and drank an unknown serum hoping to get high, unleashing a second, evil personality who kills as many people as he saves as Superman. Oh, that Superman, always weeping and clutching to his naggy, frightened, cheating wife! My favorite supporting character in "Superman" comics is his psychiatrist. I love watching Clark argue with his doctor about how the antipsychotics make his mouth dry, because it's sooo true! I also love how he doesn't understand his own powers, or even know their limits. It's so much fun watching Superman repeatedly die and come back to life, unable to explain himself. Because Superman's ONLY WEAKNESS is his unstable psyche! Other than that, he's ominpotent and immortal -- but literally his own worst enemy! I forget, what's the name of his murderous anti-persona? Was it "The Abyss", or something like that? Anyway, I LOVE him, Superman's evil counterpart is so scary!!! Superman is a character people with mental illnesses can really relate to! He's such a fucked-up guy, he's barely a hero! Maybe he isn't a hero at all. It's this ambivalency, the "unreliable narrator" aspect, that makes Superman SUPERMAN!!!

Feel like an asshole now, anybody?!? I swear, it's like watching George W. Bush run for a third term, this "Sentry is an imitation of Superman" stuff, it's a lazy lie. There are more worthwhile reasons to dislike the character (personally, I do like him, very much). Saying the Sentry is an imitation of Superman is like saying "I haven't read the Sentry, and I've never understood Superman."

--Ben Culture (talk) 08:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

If it need be said, I would refer the reader to the original miniseries, written by character creator Paul Jenkins and drawn by Jae Lee, and The Sentry: Reborn AKA The Sentry, vol. 2, also written by Jenkins, but drawn by John Romita, Jr. Too many people have only read Brian Michael Bendis's take on the character in the various Avengers titles, when he was characterized much more strongly, defined more clearly, by his original creator.

--Ben Culture (talk) 02:39, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

• Oppose - Sentry should become a disambig page. violet/riga (t) 17:49, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, I agree with Violetriga. Sentry has many other uses, e.g. I beleive the guards outside Buckingham Palace are sentries, and there must be a hundred security firms with Sentry in their name. Thryduulf 16:45, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. violet/riga (t) 08:41, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Someone tell Bendis!

Great lineup for the Avengers, don't ever change 'em, no matter what anybody says. But if you'd take my opinion seriously, consider these options; Nova instead of Sentry (don't copy Superman. You've gotten rid of your Green Arrow rip off, don't back pedal). Wasp instead of Spider Woman. Better for Spidey. Cloak and Dagger instead of Black Panther. Reserves; She-Hulk, Hulk, Doctor Strange, Shanna the She-Devil, maybe Dazzler. Other than that, keep it going. X-men will be just fine, I promise.

Nobody cares. Stop behaving as if Wikipedia is a forum. Apostrophe 02:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

THANK You! At first, I was getting angry with the idiocy of the opinions. Then, I realized I was angry that I was angry, because I participate in Wikipedia to get away from the opinions, opinions, opinions, everywhere! Always, the stupid dancing on the line between opinion and fact, the weasel words, the whole mess. Wikipedia is an oasis of fact.

Now, here, I have to hold myself back from tearing into these particularly absurd opinions. For one example: "Wasp instead of Spider Woman. Better for Spidey."?!? That's especially poor because (a.) Bendis only uses Spider-Man in The Avengers sparingly, grudgingly, and badly; (b.) Bendis has been building up Spider-Woman for years; (c.) The Wasp is dead; (d.) Bringing her back can only mean bringing Hank Pym and all their shabby Hank/Jan baggage into the picture; and (e.) The Sentry was never anything like Superman, for the fucking record!

I know: Nobody cares, right? Good -- nobody shoud. And that's the problem once you start blasting out your opinions forum-style, someone like me says "Hey, I had to read someone else's opinion, so now I have to express mine! I don't much care if anyone reads it, but I have to post it!" and soon there's a bunch of unreadable garbage. I apologize for my role in it.

--Ben Culture (talk) 01:30, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Concerning the Sentry's Power

It's stated in the article that the Sentry "may" be as powerful as the Silver Surfer or the Phoenix - well, it's stated plainly in the original Sentry miniseries that the Sentry fought Galactus to a standstill at some point in the past. Wouldn't this make him significantly more powerful than either of those figures? 66.157.177.27 18:04, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Wasn't the Sentry just depowered? Also, standstill means tie. And Phoenix has defeated Galactus before. --DrBat 18:31, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Depowered? Did something happen in the new issue of the New Avengers, which I have not been able ot procure? Aside from that, consider that fighting Galactus to a standstill is about the limit for anyone who doesn't want to kill Galactus, unless they're willing to destroy the universe. I mean, I may be wrong here, Galactus may have been as weak as when he fought hte Phoenix when he squared off with the Sentry, but the Void - half of the Sentry's complete strength, if indeed it is finite - was still capable of literally erasing the universe from existence, and killing every hero on Earth in a matter of minutes. It's not inconceivable that the Sentry would still be more powerful than the Phoenix (and certainly more powerful than the Surfer). 66.157.177.27 21:04, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Bendis recently mentioned some of the plans he had for the Sentry in an interview with comiXtreme. In response to the question, "What is the Sentry’s role on the team, is he going to be de-powered to fit the team, and also will we see The Void in New Avengers?" Bendis responded, "Yes, the Sentry’s role will be defined very clearly in the second arc of New Avengers. His powers will be defined, and The Void will make an appearance." Anyway, I thought he was depowered or something. Most fans have assumed he will because there's no point in there being any threat, with such a power-house in the team.

And as for the Void; Dark Phoenix is also capable of destroying the universe. --DrBat 21:15, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Hey lookit me, I logged in. An excelelnt point concerning the Dark Phoenix, except that the Sentry on the whole is twice as powerful as the Void is, if not infinitely powerful. And that wasn't my original point anyway - the Sentry has slugged it out with Galactus and is more than capable of destroying the entire universe Infinity Gauntlet style. Maybe the Dark Phoenix is comparable, but there's no way that the Surfer is. Wyborn 22:05, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, he's designed as (1) the most powerful hero in the MU (2) someone you wouldn't trust with the power to boil water, let alone the most power of any hero in the MU - SoM 22:27, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Very witty! LOL. --Ben Culture (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

It's also quite possible that battling Galactus to a standstill didn't actually entail a slugfest. Past conflicts with Galactus involving other heroes could also have been referred to in a similiar way: Galactus' attempt to eat a given planet is thwarted, but he goes on his merry way. I think it's best not to regard a vague, passing comment as being terribly conclusive of anything--steveg99

What I'm realy driving at is this: would anyone care if I added that the Sentry has fought Galactus to a standstill and basically made him out to be more powerful than the Surfer? Wyborn 22:35, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes. - SoM 23:02, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

If the whole fighting-Galactus-to-a-standstill thing is just heresay, rather than something actually depicted, then there's a lot of about that conflict that we don't know.--steveg99

In the new miniseries he defeats Terrax quite easily, so I just don't think he is depowerd by any means. By the way, there is a small mention in issue #2 that in the Negative Zone the Sentry is almost powerless, while the Void grows in power. I am not sure if that bit of info is worthy enough to be added to the Wiki entry (perhaps it's better to wait #3 for confirmation?).

Astro City's Samaritan similarity

This is about the paragraph that starts with "The Sentry has adopted a solution that would likely be unthinkable in the DCU..."

I think it might be a good idea to point out the very strong similarity here between the Sentry and the Samaritan from Astro City. The Samaritan is a similarly-Supermanesque hero who uses his computer (the "zyxometer", I think it's called) to calculate the closest, largest group of people in the most danger. The Cloc/Sentry zyxometer/Samaritan similarity seems so striking that it almost borders on plagiarism. (I'm not accusing anyone of anything -- I was just surprised by how similar the two were.)

CSWarren 00:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

You know, I've read all my Astro City trade paperbacks again recently and I'm pretty sure that there's no mention that Samaritan uses his zyxometer to calculate the odds. The zyxometer simply alerts him to disaster and he goes to prevent it (and in that respect the zyxometer and CLOC are similar), but it doesn't calculate anything, at least not explicitly. Could you tell me where this comes from? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 06:32, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I haven't got my books available right now -- I concede the point. I was probably conflating calculation with the notification/alerts. (The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that that's what happened.) I apologize. CSWarren 00:43, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah, no harm, no foul. I was just wondering if I missed something! :) --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 01:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

The zyxometer alerts him to disaster, and as it's a hyper-advanced computer, isn't it pretty much implicit that it performs calculations? Clearly, Samaritan's activities would be impaired considerably if he had to stop and untangle dozens or hundreds of possible moral dilemnas that he's alerted to at every given second. OTOH, Samaritan does not robotically follow the zyxometer's alerts; he slowed down so that a girl could see him, and as a consequence he almost failed to save a man's life. Steveg99

The rip-off of Superman thing goes on so long and seems rather Superman-friendly and Marvel-hostile.

Down on Marvel?

The "rip-off of Superman" argument/discussion goes on so long and seems rather Superman-friendly and Marvel-hostile.

Yes. It's bullshit, entirely. A factoid kept alive by constant duckspeak. It does not bear the slightest scrutiny. --Ben Culture (talk) 02:47, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Cleanup this wiki!

This page is badly POV and in need of cleanup. It is quite confusing, especially the repeated information in different forms. Dyslexic agnostic 18:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Split?

So many Sentries so little page, I suggest a split to a disambig. page.-ss

• Nope. So little information on the two last ones to stand their old article. Disambig. on the same page works fine in Red Skull, Green Goblin, and Hobgoblin. Although they are wearing the same costume, there are counterexample for that too e.g. in Grasshopper. As you can see there are fewer examples where characters in the same coutume are separated. You can decide which one looks better. I suggest to leave them in this form unless the page gets too big (in kilobytes I mean). Lajbi 00:16, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

This is very, very silly to have all of these characters on one page - disambiguation is very necessary. It was just the Marvel, Paul Jenkins-written Sentry a week or two ago, and that worked far better

• I don't agree with you.
  • It's all Marvel.
  • The top-of-the-page-Sentry was the first one.
  • Sentry I (The Jury) has at least 10-issue appearance.
  • Sentry II. ("Superman") has only 6 (counting with the latest release in 2006)
  • Sentry III. (the Senator) has four as I know
  • Sentry IV. (the foreigner) has one.

So why it is so important to have Sentry-Void as it was his main page and to make him the real one? What's wrong with the current order? And I still consider the two last one too short to get split. And as being so it doesn't bother the the two other relatively long ones in the same article. We must try to be as accurate as possible. If there's four of them, then be it, we have to enumerate all of them (at least they're worth mentioning for sure).Lajbi 00:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Sentry/Void has a six-issue mini, an eight-issue mini, four one-shots released during the first mini and a four-issue arc of New Avengers devoted to him, suggestions of an ongoing series to follow the second mini and is a current Avengers member. I vote for creating a Jury (comics) page and incorporating the first Sentry in there (like most of the characters in Morlocks (comics) he's not really individually notabvle), sending the Spidey Byrneboot character to a Senator Ward page, since that's how he's best known (Was he even called "THE Sentry," or just "a sentry"?), and punting the one-off character either to some Minor characters list or deleting him completely as non-notable - SoM 16:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, if anybody deserves a real page, it'd be Rob Reynolds, but while I might not mind him being moved up to first on the list, I don't see a need for a new page yet. Maybe if more content is developed for him. FrozenPurpleCube 04:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I've given the other characters their own articles; it was too cluttered as it was for such small characters. --DrBat 00:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

While I respect that you may have had good intentions, I don't think I can quite agree with your choices. For one thing, you didn't even leave pointers to the other Sentry's on the main page. And I'd suggest doing something like "Sentry (Real Name)" instead of just their name. At the least though, it's important to mention them somehow, just in case somebody wants to look for them. FrozenPurpleCube 02:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Here's my suggestion, make the Sentry (comics) page point to the various Sentry characters, like Sentry (Curtis Elkins), Sentry (Robert Reynolds) etc.. Or even do it on the Sentry disambig page. FrozenPurpleCube 03:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

The Steel (comics) page was recently split to a disambiguous page, even though both the Commander Steel characters were light on information. In my opinion, this did not deminish the quality of the page or the information for the characters, but improved on the clarity of the material. Robbie and Curtis could get their own pages with short summaries left on this page, while the other character could remain as they are. Someone please split this page to improve the quality. -ss

I could something in that style a lot more. Thanks for providing a good model. FrozenPurpleCube 04:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Most of the other characters are obscure and need a separate page. Ward wasn't even known as the Sentry in most his apperances. Curtis isn't that notable either. --DrBat 00:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

That would point to having Sentry (Robert Reynolds) as its own page, since it is the one most likely to grow. FrozenPurpleCube 01:30, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

No.... Reynolds should be at Sentry (comics), as he is by far the most notable comicbook character to be named Sentry, not these other obscure and unnotable characters. --DrBat 01:43, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:Naming conventions (comics). From that:

The rule of thumb established by Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics is as follows.

Use the name itself (e.g. Green Arrow) unless that leads to ambiguity, in which case...

Follow with "(comics)" (e.g. Love and Rockets (comics)) unless that leads to ambiguity, in which case...

Use the publisher (e.g. Captain Marvel (DC Comics)) unless that leads to ambiguity, in which case...

Be more specific if necessary (e.g. The Sandman (DC Comics Silver Age)), though in difficult cases it's a good idea to check for community consensus at the WikiProject talk page.

From that, it seems clear to me that Bob Reynolds should be listed as FrozenPurpleCube as said. It's not a matter of popularity, it's a matter of clarity. CovenantD 15:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Most people who type in Sentry (comics) are looking for the Reynolds character, not the Senator or the Jury character. Furthermore, most links to the article are linked to the Reynold's character. Wikipedia:Disambiguation says, "Ask yourself: When a reader enters this term and pushes "Go", what article would they realistically be expecting to view as a result? When there is no risk of confusion, do not disambiguate nor add a link to a disambiguation page." --DrBat 22:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, anybody who puts in Sentry is going to get a disambig page anyway, so you're going to have to deal with it even if there were no other characters named Sentry. Personally, I'd see no real reason why there couldn't be a link to Sentry (Robert Reynolds) on that page if you wanted more direct access, with the other characters given a combined page. FrozenPurpleCube 23:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I propose that Robert Reynolds gets his own page, which is linked to from this page ("See also: Robert Reynolds (comics)" or something) rst20xx 10:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Argh. REYNOLDS IS THE MOST WELL-KNOW COMICBOOK CHARACTER KNOWN AS THE SENTRY. ALL THE OTHER CHARACTERS ARE OBSCURE CHARACTERS, AND IT IS ARGUABLE THEY AREN'T EVEN NOTABLE ENOUGH TO DESERVE THEIR OWN ARTICLE. Furthermore, the Ward character was known mostly as 'Senator Ward' not 'The Sentry'. Give the other obscure character their own page, like on a disambig page. Let Sentry have the main (comics) article. --DrBat 16:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it'd be much simpler to have two articles, one Sentry (Robert Reynolds) and one Sentry (comics) (with a pointer to the Robert Reynolds on it, and the main Sentry page. It'd be much simpler than having individual articles for the minor characters, who, I agree, don't deserve their own individual articles. FrozenPurpleCube 20:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

And someday somebody will create that page, rather than trying to ignore that other Marvel characters have used the name. CovenantD 21:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

BEING THE MOST WELL-KNOWN CHARACTER KNOWN AS THE SENTRY, REYNOLDS SHOULD HAVE THE PAGE TO HIMSELF AND NOT HAVE IT BE CLOGGED UP WITH UNNOTABLE AND OBSCURE CHARACTERS. --DrBat 23:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Yelling isn't going to change the fact that there is not consensus for your idea. CovenantD 01:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Solution

Guys, the solution has already been given. Make a page called Robert Reynolds (comics) or Sentry (Robert Reynolds) and add a See:Article to the page. The explanation at the top (stating that Robert Reynolds is currently the most prominent) will be enough to direct them at the approiate page. Kusonaga 07:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, asnd since there seems to be enough agreement on the Sentry (Robert Reynolds) idea, I went ahead and moved all of his section over there. Probably didn't do it right in terms of style, but hopefully it will work for folks. FrozenPurpleCube 17:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Fine, have it your way and keep the main article clogged up with unnotable and obscure characters, while shunting the main character off onto a separate article. *sigh* Why you couldn't have just moved the other characters onto a separate page, and keep the Reynolds character on the main page, is beyond me. --DrBat 01:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Sentry (Marvel Comics)

Damnit, DrBat, there are rules for this. Chief amongst them: consensus. No other decision was reached but the one took, and you acted against the majority. Kusonaga 16:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Senator Ward

I'll leave the rest for now, since my internet time's just about up, but WTH is Ward on this page? After my last post, I checked and I cannot find one reference to him being called "Sentry" (As in a codename. He may have been referred to as "a sentry", but I can't confirm this). Plus, many of the details (including his first appearance), are badly inaccurate (he first appeared a couple of years before the "first appearance" given here...) - SoM 19:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it was a user named Lajbi who added the Stewart Ward character back in Feb. Maybe ask them? FrozenPurpleCube 02:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Kree Robots

There've been a few Kree robots called Sentries. Should they be mentioned on this page, or should they only be on the (as-yet-to-be-created) Kree Sentries page? Dr Archeville 04:13, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Misleading information

I cleared up some misleading information in the section about Curtis Elkins. The previous wording implied that the Jury were sanctioned by the united states government...this has never been mentioned in a single Jury appearance. Also instead of calling them "anti-crime" I think it would be more appropriate to refer to them as vigilantes.

Also Elkins was a corrections officer at a federal prison...He wasn't an actual police officer as implied by the article. --ksofen666

Fair use rationale for Image:Newaveng9.jpg

Image:Newaveng9.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 22:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I propose that Val (comics) be merged into this article. The content of Val (comics) is quite similar to what is here regarding the character.--Rockfang (talk) 16:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

• Merge the current entry is awfully thin. Merge it in here and if the section here grows large enough we could look into splitting it off later - this is the way round things should have been done. (Emperor (talk) 13:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC))
• Merge there is nothing to reflect notablity outside the context of the comics character overview. -66.109.248.114 (talk) 01:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC).

I did the merge. I didn't copy over the infobox though. Wasn't sure if it would look right in this article. Someone else can if they want to.--Rockfang (talk) 18:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)