Talk:Human Torch

Comics: Marvel High‑importance

	Comics portal This article 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Marvel Comics work group.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

94.4.41.164 (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)leroy94.4.41.164 (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Human Torch powers

Under powers and abilities, would it be worth mentioning that he is resistant to injury from impacts such as when the silver surfer took him above the atmosphere and he fell back to earth but was uninjured despite colliding with the ground at high speed

Human Torch flight copyright?

Simple question. Is the Human Torch's fire flying technique copyright?

I hope not; I've been flying that way for years. --Chris Griswold 14:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First appearance

the human torch first appeared in marvel comics #1 with the submariner and the angel...not fantastic four #1

Wrong Torch. See Original Human Torch. - SoM 16:08, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

why are there two human torches? im sorry i guess i was wrong...my bad

Because the original was created during WWII, but disappeared. The concept of a "Human Torch" is too good to pass up.--Kross 23:29, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Due to Wikipedia policy, the most well-known and commonly used name for the character is the title of that article. Shouldnt Johnny Storm have the main Human Torch article, since he is the character most people associate with the Torch? --DrBat 23:28, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Requested move (2005)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

This character is what most people associate with the name of "Human Torch". There then would be a disambig notice at the top of the article mentioning the Golden Age character. --Apostrophe 00:09, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

Support, provided someone else fixes the links. - SoM 00:28, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Evan L. Kester 03:44, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The other Fantastic Four members do not incl. their character's real name, so why should this one be any different. – AxSkov (☏) 09:21, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Even Marvel mini-series starring the other guy bill him as the Original Human Torch so Johnny should have the page. Timrollpickering 21:23, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as per Timroll.--Kross 23:30, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been renamed after the result of a move request. Dragons flight 00:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Add any additional comments

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Expansion request

Comparing this article to the other Fantastic Four members, I'm assuming what is most desired to be expanded on is the Character Biography. Cybertooth85 22:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

As much as I know this article needed the expansion, I've just realised - the entire biography section has been copied verbatim from Johnny's entry in the 2005 Fantastic Four Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe. - Chris McFeely 14:14, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not Pyrokinesis??

Pyrokinesis, especially in the marvel universe, refers to mental control of fire by those with various psychic abilities. Something along the lines of what Legion's personality Jack could do, or maybe, maybe the mutant Pyro. The Human Torch generates flame from his body, and can move heat around to various effects - but none of this a "mental power" per se...

Pyrokinesis is more like Pyro's ability. Pyro can mentally shape fire into constructs and creatures, as well as move it about. The torch can pretty much just blast plasma and alter temperatures. The only shape I recall Johnny making with fire is a "4." Scrapper 21:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Scrapper[reply]

I remember him making cages, darts, loads of things with the flame. 86.0.232.60 18:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Torch has demonstrated this ability in the past. It's been a long time since I've read a FF comic, though. So I guess it's possible his abilities have changed since I've followed him, but he has definitely exhibited pyrokinesis in the past. Check out his run-in with Quasar for clarification. CPitt76 19:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Family Guy

I wouldn't consider that Family Guy episode to be a Human Torch reference. The use of fire as a power is by no means limited to the Human Torch within comics, and also, in that episode Chris doesn't use his powers in a similar way to the Torch - he causes things to spontaneously combust or heat up. If he had burst into flames, then maybe, but to me it doesn't seem to be a Human Torch reference. If anyone can provide proof that it was, feel free. 86.0.232.60 19:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civil War

Aside from being rather poorly written, this paragraph doesn't add a whole lot to an article about the Human Torch. Additionally, the last two sentences are not referenced and sound like speculation. I'm deleting it. CPitt76 19:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...and it was reverted. Please read this paragraph. It sounds like it was written by a child, doesn't really add anything important about Torch (are we going to mention every time he's lost a fight?), and contains elements of original research. As I've already stated the last two sentences are complete speculation. I'll leave it for now, but we need to address this in a way that doesn't boil down to a revert war. CPitt76 02:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted it. It's more to do with Civil War than Human Torch. The only thing that might possibly matter is that some people got into a slapfight with him; however, we don't know how important that even is at this point. Also, we don't know what side he's on and shouldn't guess. --Chris Griswold 14:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And it was reverted again (with improvements). JQF, your rewrite definitely made the paragraph better, and the speculation was removed, but the fact remains that there isn't a whole lot to Torch's involvement in Civil War to this point. His getting mobbed on one page doesn't merit a subsection in this article. Please give a valid reason here before reverting again. Nice work on the headers, by the way. Big improvement. CPitt76 01:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment. As for the Civil War bit, I think it's important, as Johnny gets beat into a coma, which is a pretty serious thing, and it may have future impact on him. If you fell it's poorly written, then let me take a crack at re-writing so it's more HT centric. JQF 16:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your last rewrite took care of any editorial issues I had, it sounded a lot better than what was there before. But the bulk of that paragraph was still mostly about the Civil War storyline. There's the fact about Jonny getting mobbed at the club, but the rest of it was pretty much a recap of Civil War. Go ahead with the rewrite to and we'll discuss again after you add it in. CPitt76 00:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I put up a new part. JQF 17:07, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much better. Good edit. Thanks for the rewrite. CPitt76 19:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. JQF 21:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of Invisible Man in bio?

I'd like to have some more information about his Invisible Man persona that's mentioned in his noticable aliases. --68.103.154.140 00:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

section for personality and character

Does anyone else think there should be a section about the general character as well as promanent personality traits of Johnny Storm which are the key factors to the character especially the way he interacts with the other members of the F4? - RVDDP2501 14:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

I don't think a picture of Chris Evans making bambi eyes at the camera really captures the spirit of the comic book hero. Someone please change it, I still don't understand about these image copyrights.Arc Lamps & Signal Flares 10:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - the Chris Evans picture from the horribly subpar FF4 films is a terrible representation of the Human Torch. The origin and the history as well as the present storylines of the character derive from Marvel's comic book depictions, which are the most canonical and reliable source for Human Torch as they continue to publish work featuring him.

At best, the movie depiction of Human Torch should be in a subsection of the article related to how he is represented on film.

FF7SquallStrife (talk)

Lessening injuries

Doesn't Johnny have the abillity to draw in heat from the burns on other people, thus lessening the severity of the injuries? If so, this should be mentioned.

Lots42 06:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:La Antorcha Humana.JPG

Image:La Antorcha Humana.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) 18:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Htorch.PNG

The image Image:Htorch.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --16:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 January 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. There is a consensus that this topic should stay at the primary location for the time being. Jenks24 (talk) 05:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Human Torch → Human Torch (Johnny Storm) – Discussion in Talk:Human Torch (android)#Requested move 16 January 2016. NeoBatfreak (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precedural objection – This needs to be a multiple RM with a single discussion. Dicklyon (talk) 05:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and as per Talk:Human Torch (android), Human Torch (disambiguation) should be the baseline if neither of these two is a clear absolute majority topic. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:51, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment per Dicklyon, this is a badly formatted multimove request -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 10:10, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Support the base name should be a disambiguation page, move Human Torch (disambiguation) there -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 10:10, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and keep everything as it is, the Fantastic Four character is obviously the most notable one in a two dab situation. Cavarrone 23:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and specifically note my opposition to the other move request as well. This is the best-known "Human Torch" character. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 11:20, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Infobox image

The infobox is supposed to use the most commonly seen form of the character. What's there is far from the most common, iconic version of the character and needs to be changed.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:56, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Human Torch. 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, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Human Torch. 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) 11:06, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion nomination(s)

One or more images currently used in this article have been nominated for deletion as violations of the non-free content criteria (NFCC).

You can read more about what this means and why these files are being nominated for deletion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Image deletion nominations for NFCC 8 and 3a.

You can participate at the deletion discussion(s) at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 April 28. If you are not familiar with NFCC-related deletion discussions, I recommend reading the post linked above first.

Sincerely, The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Mister Fantastic which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deadpool and Wolverine Johnny

So, I believe this should be up for consideration. But I have seen theories that the Johnny that appeared in Deadpool 3, is either the one from the fox movies. Or a variant that happens to be considered the worst version of the Human torch. What I'm trying to say I'm a way, I believe we should specifically clarify what version of Johnny appears in Deadpool and Wolverine. In "other media" MadBlade 2 (talk) 03:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]