Talk:The Shadow/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Radio drama?

Does anyone know what the radio drama linked in the "Listen to" section has to do with The Shadow? As far as I can tell it's just a random soap opera type deal with nothing to do crime fighting or anything. Gnos 23:04, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, someone mention his armament too.

(Most have assumed this power was hypnotism, while some have argued for Qi.)

actually, the shadow has said repeatedly to his qarry that he clouded there minds with hypnotism.

For a period of 6 or 7 or 8 years, I'm not entirely sure which, The Shadow Magazine was actually published twice a month. Which is why the numbers don't quite match up in regards to (sic) '325 stories a month for 20 years'. So at the height of his popularity The Shadow had a weekly radio show, two monthly pulp-fiction magazines, a monthly comic-book and a weekly comic-strip.

Dunninger as role model

Mentalist Joseph Dunninger, friend of magician Harry Houdini and of The Shadow author Gibson, is said to have been a model for The Shadow (and is named as such in de.wiki.x.io). Shouldn't we fit this piece of information in somehwere? Gwyndon 03:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

"resembled" vs. "disgusied himself as"

It was remarked in several Shadow tales that Allard had a close physical resemblance to Cranston, making "resembled" more accurate than the clumsy phrase "disguised himself as" (besides, ending phrases with prepositions is bad style).Rabidwolfe 01:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Which tales mention this? According to "The Shadow Unmasks," Allard claims to have adopted Cranston's appearance, using those very words. The Shadow was a master of disguise, and therefore able to transform himself into Cranston. "The Shadow Unmasks" describes the two of them, and there is little similarity(72.144.183.221 07:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC))

I have no dog or god in this fight. Haven't read all the pulps and only listened to a handful of radio shows. I do know the movie novelization, which heavily references the pulps, has a sentence that says Kent Allard and Lamont Cranston looked so much alike, Allard needed no disguise, or something like that/words to that effect. Perhaps that is where the confusion is coming from? I doubt the movie novelization is "canon" as far as this article goes. I tried a compromise phrase that is also stylistically better than the above offerings. 129.116.141.238 14:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

But by switching it back to "resembled," it's misleading, since it makes it sounds like Allard naturally resembled Cranston, which the pulps make clear is not the case. And the movie novelization is indeed not canonical, especially as far as the pulps are concerned. "Resembled" may be stylistically better, but it is inaccurate.(72.144.172.6 15:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC))

The pulp "Crime Over Miami" can be read as saying that the Shadow looks like Cranston, since it has the Shadow in daylight, looking just like Cranston. Of course, it uses the verb "disguise", so I doubt that's what it is. However, "Dictator of Crime" contains the following passage -

"Kent Allard reminded Margo of Lamont Cranston. When she tried to reason out the resemblance, Margo decided, smilingly, that it was because the two were so different. Allard's face was thinner than Cranston's; in a sense, it was almost gaunt. His eyes were set, rather than steady. His motions, though deliberate, were done with a precision, whereas Cranston's were leisurely to the point of indolence . . . argo didn't begin to realize that one background could be dropped at will, and the other taken up. Few people could have done it, however, though The Shadow did. He'd found, though, that people would compare Allard with Cranston, as Margo was doing at present. It didn't matter, because the longer the comparison continued, the more they would argue themselves into deciding that the two were different . . . Thus, Allard and Cranston, twinned at first impression, veered from each other, never to be reunited in any person's mind." That seems to imply there is a basic resemblannce, as "Allard and Cranston" are "twinned at first impression" even if they don't look exactly alike. "Resembled" seems accurate enough. 128.83.209.73 16:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Suppositions aside, "The Shadow Unmasks" contradicts this, though. Cranston's face is frequently described merely as masklike throughout the pulps, while Allard's, when we first meet him, is "thin, bronzed." Also, no other pulps make reference to a similarity between Allard and Cranston that I am aware of. Besides, if Allard's true face resembled Cranston's, the villains who saw his true face in the stories mentioned in the article ("The Black Master," "The Shadow's Shadow") would have said something to that effect, not remark that The Shadow had no face of his own. So that's several points contradicting the "Dictator of Crime" account and giving credence to the possibility that Allard's resemblance to Cranston was the product of Allard's talents for disguise. It could be that in "Dictator of Crime," Allard's appearance was retconned to resemble Cranston, especially in the period where the writers were emulating the radio show. Such retcons happened frequently, either deliberately or possibly by mistake.(72.144.198.7 14:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC))

The pulps contradict each other all the time. The quote above seems to prove that there is a case to be made for resemble. You need to get over it. You lost the debate. (Also, I'm using different public access computers. I'm the same guy who provided the quote above and some of the other posts above, despite the differing IP addresses. I really should get a Wikipedia accout. As should this other guy who thinks Allard and Cranston look nothing alike.) 128.83.34.194 18:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Uhm, whatever. I've decided that this isn't THAT big of a deal. However, before any changes are made to that section again, I'd like to hear from some other people besides unregistered IP addresses. Rabidwolfe 18:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TheShadowComic01.jpg

Image:TheShadowComic01.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) 06:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Penelope Margo Lane.jpg

Image:Penelope Margo Lane.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 ensure 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) 00:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

hiding and nearly invisible

In part, that new incarnation was born of necessity; radio's time constraint made it difficult to describe the Shadow hiding and nearly invisible.

This sentence wants a bit of editing for coherency. What is the last clause supposed to say? "made it difficult to describe the Shadow's ability to hide so he would be nearly invisible"? --68.158.65.87 23:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyright issues

Someone should write something up about the copyright issues surrounding the Shadow (and Doc Savage) pulps--how they were assumed to be in the public domain and have been made available on-line, except that they really were renewed and so aren't, and now the main site making them available on-line is being sued by Conde Nast, the copyright owner.

The information to be found in the story and reader comments here would be a good place to start. --Robotech_Master 14:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree 100%. Ownership is a FACT relevant to the characters and should be included in their enclyclopedia entry. 69.182.106.50 19:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Title ("The")

Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name), this article's title really ought to be changed. I would suggest Shadow (character) because the Shadow has been in so many media. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Given the structure of the article, and the various "Naming conventions" guidelines, I agree the article needs either a name change or a re-writ to focus on the show. The name change seems the easier route at this point. — J Greb 01:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The character's name has never been stated without the definite article preceeding it: unlike the guise of Bruce Wayne who is sometimes referred to as "Batman" and sometimes as "The Batman", the guise of Kent Allard (in the pulps) and Lamont Cranston (on the radio) is never "Shadow", but always "The Shadow". The article title is exactly as it should be. -- Davidkevin 15:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

In the pulps, as the original, printed source material, and in verifiable secondary refrence works is it always "The Shadow", regardless of where it falls in the sentence, when referring to the character? Never "the Shadow"? — J Greb 22:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

While the 't' in "the" may or may not always be capitalized, the point is that the definite article is always used. A character may say "That was Batman," or may say "That was The Batman," or "That was Green Lantern, or "That was the Green Lantern," but always would say either "That was the Shadow" or "That was The Shadow." -- Davidkevin 15:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:NCD 1 & 2 apply here. -- Davidkevin 16:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually WP:NCD point 1 is exactly why I asked the question. Based on the answer you gave, "the" in this case is not always capitalized in running text when discussing the character. As such the convention would be to drop it from the article title.

As to point 2... If this article was primarily about the pulps, radio show, and/or films, then an argument could, and should, be made that the title of the article is reflective of the title of a work. As the article stands though, the lead start off by defining it as a character article.

That's why I originally commented that either the article name needs to change, as proposed, or the article needs to be rewritten so that the lead section, and the overall tone, focuses on the works not the character.

— J Greb 18:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The fact that you're so insistent on making this change causes me to infer that you're fairly ignorant about the character. Wikipedia rules are to facilitate accuracy, not impede it. The character, the radio program, the pulp magazine, have all always been "the Shadow", capitalized or not. Nobody in any of the stories, radio or print, ever calls him "Shadow" without the definite article, no fan I've ever met in 35 years of fannish activity has ever called him "Shadow" without the definite article, and the title of the magazine is The Shadow Magazine (as compared to, for example, Doc Savage Magazine from the same publisher). -- Davidkevin 03:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Bad assumption. Very, very bad assumption.

Just because someone looks at the guidelines, how they are applied, and how this article is presented does not mean that they lack knowledge or understanding about the subject.

I said it was an inference, based on your insistence on disincluding the "The" in the name, as it seems to me that anyone who knows anything about the character would know it's required. I don't claim infallibility, and no offense was intended. -- Davidkevin 02:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to try an be as clear on this as I can: this article states, at the top in it's lead, that it is about the Shadow as a character.

The guidelines seem crystal clear that in the case of an article about and titled for a character, "the" gets dropped from the character's name.

They are also just as clear that if an article is about and titled for a work, and "The" is part of the work's title, "The" is to be part of the article's title.

Since this article presents itself as about the character, one of three things should be done:

*Changing the title of the article to follow the convention of the guidelines;

*Edit the article's lead to make it clear that the article is about a work or body of works;

or

*A good, solid reason needs to be shown as to why this article is an exception to the guidelines.

Looking at those options, I'd rather see the lead tweaked to move the primary focus off of the character. That seems the least disruptive way to address the discrepancy.

— J Greb 04:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Change the lead. David is correct that "The" is a vital part of the name and J Greb is correct about the guidelines. While this could be a case for Ignore all rules, adjusting the lead should satisfy everybody. CovenantD 06:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Changing the lead works for me. -- Davidkevin 02:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

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

1994 Movie Pinball and Video Game

Removed the subsections on the 1994 movie pinball game and video games from this page and put them in the page devoted to the movie 64.134.145.99 16:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Kenneth Strickfaden

Kenneth Strickfaden page has been started. He is one of the special effects artists responsible for The Shadow. Rogerfgay (talk) 16:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Orson Welles?

im new to this, but a man and a fan of the shadow told me that orson welles was NOT the first shadow. his uncle worked on the show...... i dont know how to change it, but im just letting you know, if you wish to be accurate.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.22.136 (talk) 18:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Old Requested Move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus for move. 199.125.109.104 (talk) 05:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The next two discussions on "the" and "rename" belong to this debate. Rabidwolfe (talk) 23:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Golden Vulture

The part about the Golden Vulture shows point of view saying that Gibson "butchered" the script and "feared Dent's skill as a writer". Matthew Ilseman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.152.192 (talk) 03:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The content about "The Golden Vulture" seems pretty trivial, dealing only with one book of the series, and more interesting to Doc Savage fans than to encyclopedia readers looking for The Shadow. Also, it does have POV. It needs to be sourced or discarded. Pending that decision, I'm removing it to here for future reference:

Fans of Doc Savage who read "The Golden Vulture" (July 15, 1938) are disappointed as it is a run-of-the-mill Shadow story. This is said to be because Gibson, fearing that because of Dent's obvious skill as a story writer he could be called on to do more and more stories until he took over The Shadow, butchered the story, cutting out important and exciting elements from it. This is possible because it was far from Dent's normal standard and because Dent did no more Shadow stories.

Zaslav 04:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

In the Nostalgia Ventures reprint of The Golden Vulture there is an introductory article that talks about the reasons for why Gibson edited The Golden Vulture. The story had been sitting for five years so Gibson had to update the story to fit the current Shadow mythos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.142.101.38 (talk) 00:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Animated Series

In the TV series section the animated series that never went into production isn't mentioned. I remember seeing clips for the series on the internet. Even though not one full episode was ever produced the fact that it was seriously considered and test clips were made warrants a mention I would think.

Here are the clips on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nClZXgIb6NU and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuFxljle30A&NR=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.142.101.38 (talk) 00:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

In order to write about an animated series we would first need to know about its production and development, even if it was halted mid way. What company and crew worked on it? How far along did it get and what were the reasons for canceling it? To that end we would need reliable sources that discuss the subject. As it stands, these videos don't demonstrate any "history" of the project and some may speculate as to their authenticity. I could see fans putting something like this together in flash and it snowballing once the internet got ahold of it. Hewinsj (talk) 13:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Page move

I've performed the discussed and requested page move, and I'll look at the disambiguation paragraph at the top of the article to ensure it reflects the current status. I think it would be wise if someone checked to make sure that everything is as it should be, since I don't do many of these moves; if anyone has any comments or requirements, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste:talk 03:17, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Internet Archive

I should probably ask at an admin board or the radio project, but I figured I'd bring it here first. Some anonymous IP seems to have a problem links to old radio dramas being posted in the external links section of various shows. In the case of this article the problem is with the link to the Internet Archive's "old-time radio collection" of The Shadow episodes. I don't know about links to other similar sites, but the Archive Project is considered a library and is recognized as such by the state of the California (as per the lead in the IA's article). There shouldn't be any problems linking to them, but I wanted to ask how to proceed. Is there anything we can do to prevent this from being pulled or should should we just put up with it? Hewinsj (talk) 04:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't tell if its vandalism or an honest mistake. Their User Contributions includes a lot of this but also at least one typo correction (although I didn't look through all of the edits). If you think it might be a mistake, you could ask them politely not to do it anymore. If you think it's vandalism, try the Wikipedia:Vandalism process (which also begins with a notice on their talk page, although I'm not sure if an anonymous user is likely to check the talk page for their IP). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

If they were pulled for copy-vio there's nothing that can be done for it. I guess we can just wait until they enter the public domain. Hewinsj (talk) 16:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Archive

This talk page is getting quite long. Should we archive it (or at least some of it)? Rabidwolfe (talk) 16:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I see no problem with that. You can probably archive the discussions that haven't been touched in the past month. Hewinsj (talk) 04:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Did some moving, anyway. More could be moved, but I tried to move older stuff that seemed no longer relevant.Rabidwolfe (talk) 16:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Penelope Margo Lane.jpg

The image Image:Penelope Margo Lane.jpg 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. --06:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Comics B-Class Assesment required

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) 17:43, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Done - it needs a lot more references to meet the B-class criteria. (Emperor (talk) 01:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC))

Signature line

This article gives the Intro line as "Who know what evil lurks in the hearts of men". This is the line from the recent movie. The actual line from the classic radio shows is "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of MAN" —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Well, Google claims only 183 sites used the "man" version, but ~36,800 for "men," including a few commercial sites selling recordings of the original radio program [1] [2] [3] [4]

I wouldn't have said anything, but there's a recording from the intro. Sounds like "men" to me.

Oh, sign posts on talk pages. You can do this automatically with four tildes (~). JordeeBec 16:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

PLEASE. It is recommended and it's polite; it also makes it possible to parse who is saying what, which is otherwise impossible without sifting through the page history. I have heard many of the radio shows, and it's "men", not "Man". There are several quotes associated with the character ("The weed of crime bears bitter fruit..."), so maybe you're confusing two or more of them, although I only remember the two of them and neither used "Man". 12.233.146.130 (talk) 22:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)