This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Comics: Marvel Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-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

I think the first appearance is wrong. Davos is NOT in Iron Fist #1. The guy you see Danny knocking out in flashback is Merrin as revealed in the next issue. Danny beat Merrin to gain the right to fight the dragon. Davos fought Wendell Rand not Danny for his right to fight the dragon. 66.110.195.254 (talk) 19:22, 14 October 2016 (UTC)Meteor[reply]

The version of Scorpion from the Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon, while not named as Davos, strongly evokes the character in personality, backstory, and role. I have added a section pointing this out, as this could be considered a case of character amalgamation. If this doesn't belong here, please direct me to which page this should be put on, as it is frequently removed from the page of the Mac Gargan incarnation of Scorpion (as it's also not named as Mac Gargan). Any assistance is appreciated. 75.102.244.71 (talk) 21:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't tell you where it does belong, but it certainly doesn't belong here. The fact that you are saying it "strongly evokes" or claiming in the article that the comparison is "unmistakable", and again state here that it (emphasis mine) "could be considered a case of character amalgamation" but you have no reliable source to prove these claims, tells me that this comparison is actually original research on your part and therefore strongly disallowed. I can say with some certainty that it also doesn't sound like it belongs on the Mac Gargan page either. 207.229.139.154 (talk) 06:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

fair enough, I expected it to get removed. Thank you for your assistance 75.102.213.250 (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]