Pinball_Lizard wrote:

Is anything known about how Daniel Way's Venom run was supposed to end? It was canceled on a cliffhanger with the villains seemingly triumphant, and then promptly ignored apart from a few details like Venom's clone Mania.

Even the Handbooks just say something like the evil plan was "apparently unsuccessful."

If the handbook entry leaves it vague like that then we presumably don't know (I say presumably because I didn't write the entry in question). Either we didn't ask for the resolution of the cliffhanger, or did but it wasn't forthcoming; sometimes writers are happy to provide such details, other times they prefer to leave it in the hope of one day getting to resolve it in another story.

RVcousin wrote:

The Infinity Comics from Marvel Unlimited could be a good place for new handbooks, what do you think ?

I wouldn't disagree, but it's not me, or indeed any of the handbook writers, you need to convince. Feel free to suggest it to Marvel.

When did Don Blake go from "Human guy channeling the power of Thor" to "Literally Thor?" I know he started as the former but it just struck me that I have absolutely no idea when the switchover to the latter happened.

Although Simonson and others later embellished upon it, the precise relationship between Donald Blake and the "real" Thor was first addressed in Thor #159 which introduced the back-story of Thor having been banished from Asgard for lacking humility.

During the original Spider-Verse storyline Dan Slott killed off what he considered to be the Spider-Friends from the Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends cartoon series. Because he used a different reality number, people online have insisted he only killed off the versions from the comic book tie-in (previously treated as the same version being an episode tie-in) though Slott still insists he killed off the animated version. Have any official works confirmed that he only killed off the comic book tie-in version?

Both have been seen on panel together and both have been X-Men members so i say yes.

RVcousin wrote:

Lonewolf36 wrote:

Both have been seen on panel together and both have been X-Men members so i say yes.

Yes but like Old Man Logan/Wolverine or like the Time displaced original 5 ? 😶

No she was hatched on Krakoa when Talon was believed dead. She is not time displaced and more like a clone of a clone. I could be wrong but much like twins i consider them seperate.

I'm deleting the photo covers thread and moving the discussion here because it seems to be more of a general question and not something that needs a separate thread. It was also in the wrong section (Individual Official Marvel Handbook, Guidebook, and Files Book Discussion) is for threads on specific Handbooks). If there was an actual Handbook or Files book called "Question about photos" featuring Phil Sheldon, Peter Parker, and other photographers of the Marvel Universe it would belong there. Here's a screen capture of the conversation thus far so it can be continued here:

Spider-Giddeon wrote:

Picture under character identity is an obvious cover photo that never appeared in the comics. So is the one that says ...continued the Spider-Man identity...

So is the one with Katie Bishop and the Spider-Man costume in the street alley.

The first three are fairly generic images. Did Miles ever make that face with his mask torn? Did Katie ever dangle a spider in quite that way? Perhaps. I think it's fine to think of it whichever way you want. The mere inclusion of such an image in a handbook entry probably doesn't change its canon status; the image is meant to be a symbolic illustration, just as it is on the cover. It's included in the handbook entry because it's a striking image. On the other hand, it's unlikely that a handbook entry would incorporate a cover image that blatantly couldn't have occurred.

As for the street alley illustration, it was probably used on the cover—and in the handbook entry—because it pays homage to a very famous panel from Amazing Spider-Man #50, and those who are familiar with the original story would instantly understand that Miles is going through a similar situation that Pater did. I skimmed the issue and there doesn't seem to be any natural place that scene could have occurred. But it could have easily happened at the end of the previous issue.There's nothing to suggest that after ripping up his costume Miles dumped it in a street trashcan... but there's nothing to suggest that he didn't. (Apart from the fact the suit on the cover doesn't look like it's been ripped to shreds... but "artistic license" and all that.)

And now there's other lots of colour guides, with more surprises. Clay Quartermain, Clive Reston, James Rhodes. Curiousier and curiousier.

Lonewolf36 wrote:

RVcousin wrote:

Lonewolf36 wrote:

Both have been seen on panel together and both have been X-Men members so i say yes.

Yes but like Old Man Logan/Wolverine or like the Time displaced original 5 ? 😶

No she was hatched on Krakoa when Talon was believed dead. She is not time displaced and more like a clone of a clone. I could be wrong but much like twins i consider them seperate.

This is opinion rather than official stance, at least until a relevant handbook allows confirmation one way or another, but given that we consider other clones (e.g. Joseph) as separate individuals from their genetic progenitors, and given X-23 is herself a clone and counted as separate from Wolverine, then yes, both old and young Laura would be considered separate members.

I just found another image of Clive Reston, in B&W but otherwise matches the above. It may be that the art was made but the profile wasn't written. David Day was the artist. Sidney's first post appears to be all Deluxe Edition profiles and his second all Update '89. The link below also places Reston in Update '89.
https://www.2dgalleries.com/galleries/comics-the-official-handbook-of-the-marvel-universe-11806?timespan=4&order=8&catid=2&typeofart=all&offset=48

I assume the Nemesis one was in the wrong grouping. The art seems similar to that of other profiles of Alpha Flight characters in the Update '89 and the small picture under the main one doesn't seem to depict a death, which it would if it was from the Book of the Dead.

Also, I assume the Rhodey profile was cut because he already had one in the Deluxe Edition as Iron Man "II" (since Eddie March wore the armour before him) and not really much had changed since then.

Interesting to see the unpublished Master Edition profiles.
 

Sidney Osinga wrote:

In the preview for an upcoming auction, there's the colour guide for a Shamrock entry in a group of Update '89 guides. It does make me wonder how many other profiles got cut. I know the Sunrise Society had an entry reference in the Shadowmasters entry, and I assume Leiko Wu would have gotten since the rest of Shang-Chi's Marvel created supporting cast did.

i also found the art to a number of unpublished Master Edition profiles, such as Hellcat, Ferocia, the villain Magma, the 3rd Foolkiller (identified as II), Sif, the Two-Gun Kid, Battleaxe, Vagabond, and Andreas von Strucker, as well as alternate costumes for Falcon and Thor.

I'd love to see those other images.

In terms of profiles being cut, from my own experience working on the modern handbooks it can happen for a variety of reasons. Sometimes another profile proves to need more space, so a smaller profile gets cut. Sometimes another character suddenly becomes more prominent in the comics, and either we writers or editorial feel that they need an entry instead. Once or twice, in cases specifically related to licensed titles, characters got cut because doubt arose as to whether or not ownership lay with Marvel or the licensee, so we had to play it safe. One entire themed handbook got dropped, after several entries had been written and a cover produced, because handbook sales hadn't been sterling and so this particular one was deemed unlikely to do well financially - many, but not all, of the profiles planned eventually made it to print elsewhere. 

When creating character or index profiles have there been times when two stories contradict each other (beyond different clothing/dialogue) but can't been explained away by alternate realities/successor characters or other simple means, and you've just had to gloss over the contradiction to avoid a really complicated explanation?