Question about FALSE first appearances (ie., Wolverine)

[jools&jim]

 

And regarding FF48...Galactus is on the cover. In fact, he is the defining character on the cover.

 

you're thinking of The Watcher...

 

(Btw...I dig the Buffalo Springfield avatar! (thumbs u )

[Rodey]

OK. Why don't we do this. Somebody start a New Thread about First Appearances. Start with a questionable cameo/appearance/full appearance whatever and people debate it and vote. Then start doing for other appearances as well. At the very least, we can clean up what wrong statements OS provides in its book.

[joe_collector]

JC you are a tool. It's a fictional cameo in a fictional book. I'm not saying Wolive made a cameo, that was a mistake but MJ did make a cameo in #42.

 

So what role was MJ playing?

 

I may seem to be playing this a bit too tongue-in-cheek, but what I am saying is 100% correct. A cameo is a famous person playing someone they're not in a very limited role, so "Wolverine as a waiter" is a very apt comparison.

[shadroch]

Are you suggesting Rin Tin Tin couldn't make a cameo apperance? Or KITT?

[Rodey]

I think JC is actually on the right track. We are all starting to agree that "cameo" may not be the best description. At the very least, I think comics need a new denotation for "appearances".

[JohnT]

 

And regarding FF48...Galactus is on the cover. In fact, he is the defining character on the cover.

 

you're thinking of The Watcher...

 

(Btw...I dig the Buffalo Springfield avatar! (thumbs u )

 

Ditto Keith. (thumbs u

 

On the FF48, what I'm getting at is that this: what is everyone looking at? Who's name is plastered on the cover? What is the whole storyline leading up to? The name of the story is "The Coming of Galactus." In my mind, that constitutes more than a cameo appearance, even if he does only make an appearance at the end.

[minty_fresh-migration]

 

And regarding FF48...Galactus is on the cover. In fact, he is the defining character on the cover.

 

you're thinking of The Watcher...

 

(Btw...I dig the Buffalo Springfield avatar! (thumbs u )

 

Ditto Keith. (thumbs u

 

On the FF48, what I'm getting at is that this: what is everyone looking at? Who's name is plastered on the cover? What is the whole storyline leading up to? The name of the story is "The Coming of Galactus." In my mind, that constitutes more than a cameo appearance, even if he does only make an appearance at the end.

 

Are you the guy that wrote the "Greatest Comic This Month" article for CBM a while back? The guy who kept going on about Galactus being on the cover?

[JohnT]

 

And regarding FF48...Galactus is on the cover. In fact, he is the defining character on the cover.

 

you're thinking of The Watcher...

 

(Btw...I dig the Buffalo Springfield avatar! (thumbs u )

 

Ditto Keith. (thumbs u

 

On the FF48, what I'm getting at is that this: what is everyone looking at? Who's name is plastered on the cover? What is the whole storyline leading up to? The name of the story is "The Coming of Galactus." In my mind, that constitutes more than a cameo appearance, even if he does only make an appearance at the end.

 

Are you the guy that wrote the "Greatest Comic This Month" article for CBM a while back? The guy who kept going on about Galactus being on the cover?

 

Nope, not me.

[minty_fresh-migration]

 

And regarding FF48...Galactus is on the cover. In fact, he is the defining character on the cover.

 

you're thinking of The Watcher...

 

(Btw...I dig the Buffalo Springfield avatar! (thumbs u )

 

Ditto Keith. (thumbs u

 

On the FF48, what I'm getting at is that this: what is everyone looking at? Who's name is plastered on the cover? What is the whole storyline leading up to? The name of the story is "The Coming of Galactus." In my mind, that constitutes more than a cameo appearance, even if he does only make an appearance at the end.

 

Are you the guy that wrote the "Greatest Comic This Month" article for CBM a while back? The guy who kept going on about Galactus being on the cover?

 

Nope, not me.

 

I didn't think so, especially since your explanation makes a hell of a lot more sense than that article did.

[djpinkpanther67]

 

And regarding FF48...Galactus is on the cover. In fact, he is the defining character on the cover.

 

you're thinking of The Watcher...

 

(Btw...I dig the Buffalo Springfield avatar! (thumbs u )

 

Ditto Keith. (thumbs u

 

On the FF48, what I'm getting at is that this: what is everyone looking at? Who's name is plastered on the cover? What is the whole storyline leading up to? The name of the story is "The Coming of Galactus." In my mind, that constitutes more than a cameo appearance, even if he does only make an appearance at the end.

Cut and dried - IH #180 doesn't mention Wolvie on the FC, nor in the story...Cameo at the end...1st App? IMO no.

 

OTOH, FF #48 The word "Galactus" is on the cover. Though his appearance is the last panel, the whole storyline tells about him and leads up to the climactic appearance of him at the end of the issue. You have a fair idea of the all powerful G-Man before you ever see him. 1st App? Yes! Though he looked different the next issue :shrug:

[joe_collector]

Are you suggesting Rin Tin Tin couldn't make a cameo apperance? Or KITT?

 

I stated earlier that real people in comics are bit of a grey zone, and may or may not be depending on your POV.

[Broken Shakespear]

I can think of another example. The first appearance of Hellboy was on a back page ad of another comic. The character was used to promote a product. No one considers this the first appearance because it is cover only. Then in San Diego Comic-Con Comics #2, there is a 5-page Hellboy story. Mignola himself credits this issue as Hellboy's first appearance. However, Wizard, CGC, Overstreet, etc. all acknowledge Next Men #21 as Hellboy's first appearance.

 

To contradict that though, the first appearance of Warrior Nun Areala has always been cited (Overstreet, Wizard, etc.) as Ninja High School #38. However, this is a cover appearance only. She appears nowhere in the book.

 

So for Hellboy, his cover appearance doesn't count as a first appearance, because it is only a cover. Yet for another character, her cover appearance is counted as a first appearance. From what I've seen, there is really n o stanard being applied. Whatever Overstreet or Wizard claim is a first appearance, the hobby accepts withough question and moves on.

 

I also know for a fact, that in the past, Overstreet has intentionally attributed some first appearances to issues that were not first appearances (sometimes the characters didn't even appear in that issue). Overstreet intentionally includes errors (including incorrect first appearances) in their guide so that if someone attempts to copy the info and resell it (for example prices in collecting software), Overstreet can match up the errors and prove copyright infringement. This can often lead 1st appearance collectors astray.

[Mac Man]

 

On the FF48, what I'm getting at is that this: what is everyone looking at? Who's name is plastered on the cover? What is the whole storyline leading up to? The name of the story is "The Coming of Galactus." In my mind, that constitutes more than a cameo appearance, even if he does only make an appearance at the end.

Cut and dried - IH #180 doesn't mention Wolvie on the FC, nor in the story...Cameo at the end...1st App? IMO no.

 

OTOH, FF #48 The word "Galactus" is on the cover. Though his appearance is the last panel, the whole storyline tells about him and leads up to the climactic appearance of him at the end of the issue. You have a fair idea of the all powerful G-Man before you ever see him. 1st App? Yes! Though he looked different the next issue :shrug:

 

But Thomas... if it's not some sort of first appearance, what is it? Because if you read Hulk in chronological order and after reading 181 were asked, "have seen this Wolverine guy before?" you'd have respond, "Yes, in the last issue." It's a bit of a problem to discount the last page appearance in Hulk 180 when you consider there are other instances of OS giving credit for first appearances for other characters.

 

And as Broken Shakespear said and others before have stated, the simple problem we are all chasing round and round is the system is broken and inconsistent in its application. I would again suggest the need to adjust our labelling system to brief appearances and full appearances. Another example is ASM 299 and ASM 300--the Venom cameo and first appearance. By labelling 299 as a brief appearance we recognize his presence but also that he merely shows up and doesn't drive the plot forward or contribute to its development throughout the issue. A full appearance annotation allows for this understanding.

 

:shrug:

[joe_collector]

And as Broken Shakespear said and others before have stated, the simple problem we are all chasing round and round is the system is broken and inconsistent in its application.

 

Here's how it works:

 

OS haphazardly applies the "first appearance" notation to various characters, and usually doesn't care too much about which are 1-panel, limited, cover-only or full first appearances.

 

If the issue ever gets hot, or the character becomes a key player, and values skyrocket, etc., then suddenly Bob and Co. drag out the microscopes and start poring over the data, looking for the correct interpretation.

 

That's some books are notated correctly (Hulk 180-181, Iron Fist 13-14, New Mutants 86-87, ASM 298-300), while others (Avengers 195-196, Defenders 17-18) are not.

[cd4ever]

I don't believe advertisements should count as anything. Nor do they in the collectible market, at least not that I've seen. I remember a guy trying to hawk his Action 251 as the first appearance of Supergirl due to a picture in the next issue advertisement. Bollocks as Gordon Ramsey would say.

 

Hulk 180 is obviously and indisputedly the first appearance of Wolverine. By the very definition of the words, he does appear. Perhaps not enough to make it an ultra-highly marketable key, but he certainly does appear. I've checked.

 

[ashrael]

I don't believe advertisements should count as anything. Nor do they in the collectible market, at least not that I've seen. I remember a guy trying to hawk his Action 251 as the first appearance of Supergirl due to a picture in the next issue advertisement. Bollocks as Gordon Ramsey would say.

 

Hulk 180 is obviously and indisputedly the first appearance of Wolverine. By the very definition of the words, he does appear. Perhaps not enough to make it an ultra-highly marketable key, but he certainly does appear. I've checked.

 

I agree. First appearances (no matter how brief) are just that...a first appearance. Brief, long, etc don't really matter.

 

Ads are not appearances, though are interesting and note-worthy in the cases of big appearances such as Cap 1, Tec 27, or Action 1 (not TMNT 1).

[joe_collector]

The point I'm trying to make is the reason Hulk 180-181 and ASM 299-300 are notated correctly (brief/cameo vs. full) is because the issues skyrocketed in price, so OS was required to make sure these were correct.

 

On the other hand, books like Avengers 195-196 and Defenders 17-18 are incorrect, and will probably stay that way until Taskmaster and The Wrecking Crew get ultra-hot.

[valiantman]

Then in San Diego Comic-Con Comics #2, there is a 5-page Hellboy story. Mignola himself credits this issue as Hellboy's first appearance. However, Wizard, CGC, Overstreet, etc. all acknowledge Next Men #21 as Hellboy's first appearance.

 

Is there such a thing as first "mass-market" appearance?

Next Men #21 was a comic available to the mass market,

while San Diego Comic-Con Comics #2 had a very specific purpose.

[joe_collector]

Yeah, I think it's got to be a comic off the shelf.

[valiantman]

In regards to Hulk #181 it is no longer considered a cameo, but a brief first appearance. It should have been considered this years ago as the language used in explaining these types of appearances was incorrect. You can't have a cameo appearance of an unknown character.

 

Tom, I'm sure you meant to clear things up... but it seems like you meant to say Hulk #180.