Who Watches the Watchers - Forum for the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe & Similar Works

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



2/06/2020 8:25 am  #1


Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Historical text from Comixfan CxPulp. Loki will update the first six posts periodically as needed.
This version created by Stuart V 12-14-2013, 03:01 PM
Re-posting the old thread.

Since the other thread is getting a tad long, and, more to the point, the corrections information is now mixed in amongst lots of other discussion, I’m restarting the thread, but with the correction info summarised at the start. In future the intention is that new corrections will not only get a new post in the body of the thread, but also that a brief summary of said correction will be added here in the early posts, so the corrections can always be easily checked.

A summary of points raised in the original thread, with links to the more detailed explanations follows.
 
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
 

2/06/2020 8:26 am  #2


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:05 PM
Get the name right! Proper names and spellings
There’s a ton of these, not all listed in this thread. While some didn’t originate online, the majority did – basically, the Wikis have offered either misinformed, malicious or just plain stupid people a chance to give wrong names to various characters – Wikipedia had a ton of false names added for SHIELD agents, Xavier School Students, random heroes and villains whose true identities had not yet been revealed, and loads of others. Most have been removed and reveals of real names in comics, including handbooks, have killed some, but some continue to pop up.

So, in no real order:
Incorrect: “Bloodscream's real name is Zachariah Ravenscroft.”
Truth: Bloodscream’s real name remains unrevealed.

Incorrect: “Warrior Woman’s real name is Frieda Ratsel / Frieda Rätsel / Frieda Ratzel”
Truth: Warrior Woman’s real name is Julia Frieda Koenig, married surname Lohmer.

Incorrect: “Tangerine’s real name is Tania Reen.”
Truth: Tangerine’s real name remains unrevealed.

Incorrect: “Sage’s real name is Tessa Hartley/ Tessa Niles / Tessa Basso.”
Truth: Sage’s real name remains unrevealed. Tessa was an alias, and Hartley, Niles and Basso are just fan-conceived cobblers.

Incorrect: “Venom’s symbiote offspring bonded to Leslie Gesneria, Carl Mach, Trevor Cole and Ramon Hernandez, and became Agony, Phage, Riot and Lasher.”
Truth: None of the four humans adopted codenames; they died before they could do so. Fans made up codenames, and have now been applied to the symbiotes, but only their new hosts, not retroactively to their old hosts (Peter Parker did not become known as Venom just because Eddie Brock and subsequent hosts have used that name).

Incorrect: “Emplate’s minions included a woman called Ebon.”
Truth: Emplate’s minions included a woman who used “ebon energy.” However, her codename is Nocturne.

Incorrect: “Sergeant Michael Tork of the NYPD.”
Truth: Sergeant Francis Bartholomew Tork of the NYPD. Michael Tork was Bloke of X-Force (the future X-Statix).

Incorrect: “In Ultimate Armor Wars #2, Ultimate Iron Man encountered an enemy called Ith Leopold Yankee Thwine.”
Truth: Ultimate Iron Man encountered a Russian enemy called Leopold, who had a lisp, and when Iron Man called the Russian “Ivan,” Leopold replied “My name is Leopold, Yankee swine.”

Incorrect: “Astra is Beth Al-Reraph.”
Truth: Astra’s real name has never been revealed.

Incorrect: “Turner Scholl and Mercedes were Castlemere’s allies in the Hellfire Club, until Wolverine slew Scholl and Castlemere.”
Truth: Turner was a different club member from Scholl. Mercedes was a different woman from Castlemere’s female ally. Castlemere's allies were Peter Scholl, a.k.a. Leonine, and Sandra Morgan, a.k.a. Tithe.

Incorrect: "Bliss of the Morlocks is Barbara Stacey."
Truth: Bliss' real name remains unrevealed.

Incorrect: "Captain America's real name is Steven Grant Rogers."
Truth: Captain America's real name is Steven Rogers. He has no middle name - Grant comes from a false memory implant.

Incorrect: "Sir Benedict Englande"
Truth: Sir Benedict, or Sir Benedict of the Falls. No known surname.

Incorrect: "Ghost Rider Alejandra Blaze"
Truth: Ghost Rider Alejandra Jones

Incorrect: The real name of Petra of the Deadly Genesis X-Men is Petra Kristensen.
Truth: Petra is her codename. We don't know any part of her real name.

Incorrect: The Kid Who Collects Spider-Man is Tim Hammond.
Truth: The Kid Who Collects Spider-Man is Tim Harrison.

Incorrect: Psylocke is Elizabeth (or Elisabeth) Gloriana Braddock.
Truth: Psylocke is Elizabeth Braddock, no known middle name.

Incorrect: The female Crimson Commando is Shelley Warkworth.
Truth: The female Crimson Commando's civilian name is unrevealed.
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 8:27 am  #3


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:06 PM
 
Just common spelling errors (often because the wrong spelling is more common in the real world, so people assume the correct one is an error):
Despite what Wikipedia likes to think, spelling errors, even frequent ones, are not legitimate alternate spellings.

Incorrect: Elisabeth Braddock.
Correct: Elizabeth Braddock.

Incorrect: Motormouth (Harley Davison / Harley Davidson)
Correct: Motormouth (Harley Davis)

Incorrect: Moon Boy / Moonboy
Correct: Moon-Boy

Incorrect: Johann Schmidt.
Correct: Johann Shmidt (but movie version is Schmidt).

Incorrect: Starlord (Peter Quill)
Correct: Star-Lord (Peter Quill)

Incorrect: Liz Allen
Correct: Liz Allan (but Ultimate Liz is Allen).

Incorrect: Harry or Norman Osborne / Osbourne
Correct: Harry or Norman Osborn

Incorrect: Cask of Ancient Winters.
Correct: Casket of Ancient Winters.

Incorrect: K’un-L’un / K’un L’un
Correct: K’un-Lun.

Incorrect: "The Vision is a synthezoid."
Correct: He is a synthozoid.

Incorrect: ROM
Correct: Rom

Incorrect: "Jetstream is Haroun ibn Sallah al-Rashid"
Correct: Jetstream is Haroum ibn Sallah al-Rashid. Haroum, not Haroun.

Incorrect: "American Ace is Perry Webb."
Correct: American Ace is Perry Wade. And this is one the handbook has gotten wrong a few times.

Incorrect: "Bethany Ann Cabe, formerly Van Tilburg"
Correct: Bethany Anne Camilla Cabe van Tilberg

Incorrect: HYDRA
Truth: Hydra

Incorrect: The X-Man Rouge.
Correct: The X-Man Rogue.

Incorrect: Jaime Braddock
Correct: Jamie Braddock
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 8:28 am  #4


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:06 PM
 
I thought you were one of us. Membership myths and misconceptions.
Incorrect: “Le Peregrine is an Avenger”
Truth: No, he’s not. Hawkeye made a joke about giving him membership while he and Peregrine were fighting the Red Skull, but it wasn’t a valid offer.

Incorrect: Battlestar is/was a member of the Garrison.
Truth: Battlestar was never a member of the Garrison.

Incorrect: Archer of the XSE was also a member of X-Factor.
Truth: Archer turned down the offer of membership, and the group disbanded almost immediately afterwards, precluding any possibility that he might have changed his mind.
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 8:28 am  #5


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:07 PM
 
Flatscan or Genefreak? Is you is or is you ain’t a mutie?
Incorrect: “Mutant Growth Hormone comes from mutants. Owl used his own body to make MGH, so he must be a mutant.”
Truth: The name “Mutant” Growth Hormone is a misnomer. It can and has been derived from non-mutant superhumans. Owl has occasionally been called a mutant, but his powers originally came from a serum he ingested, and there’s been nothing to counter that. The stories which claim otherwise seem to simply be incorrect, apparently unaware of the existing explanation.

Incorrect: “Falcon is a mutant. A Sentinel identified him as one. That’s why he is able to telepathically converse with Redwing.”
Truth: Falcon can converse with Redwing thanks to the Red Skull using the Cosmic Cube to give him that power. The Sentinel who identified him as a mutant was malfunctioning, as was clearly and unequivocally explained by Jarvis some time later.

Incorrect: “Madame Web was a mutant.”
Truth: Her powers appear to be natural, or possibly mystic, given she passed them on to Arachne. She has occasionally been called a mutant, but that seems more a case of assumption based on not knowing where her powers came from, and the assumption that any natural psi powers must make you a mutant (not the case).

Incorect: “Betsy's fellow STRIKE psis, including Alison Double and Tom Lennox, were mutants.” / “SHIELD’s Psi-Division were mutants.”
Truth: We don’t know if they were or not. Non-mutants can be telepaths and psychics.

Semi-incorrect: “Fenris (Andrea and Andreas Strucker) are mutants / are not mutants.”
Truth: They are and they aren’t. They showed contempt for mutants, seem to look down on them, and have claimed they were given their powers artificially via experimentation on them while they were in the womb. However, they’ve also been positively identified as mutants. Both are correct – they were normal, non-mutant fetuses, but the experiments added the X-Gene to their genome, and so they were born mutants.

Incorrect: "Valeria Richards' intelligence is a mutant power."
Truth: Valeria appears to be a natural genius, coming from a family of non-mutant genii. Her IQ doesn’t drop around Leech, and her fast development can be put down in part to her still retaining, perhaps only subconsciously, some of what she knew as the teenage genius Marvel Girl. That said, she is a mutant – Marvel Girl’s other powers mark her as such.

Incorrect: “Debrii is a mutant.”
Truth: We don’t know the origin of Debrii’s powers.

(Probably) incorrect: "Bushwacker is a mutant."
Truth: Bushwacker is a cyborg. In theory he might also be a mutant, but since he claims his ability to turn his arms into guns is his mutant power when those arms have been clearly shown to be cybernetic, odds are he's just lying / crazy.

As a counter to all the misidentifications as mutants noted above, two individuals who are mutants but most people forget / don’t realise: Devil Dinosaur and Moon-Boy.
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 8:29 am  #6


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:09 PM
 
General errors that have come about, belonging to no particular category.

Incorrect: "Devil Dinosaur is smart for a dinosaur."
Truth: He’s as smart as a human, not just a dinosaur.

Incorrect: “Master Man (William Lohmer) is German.”
Truth: Though his great-nephew, Max Lohmer, the current Master Man, is German, William Lohmer was an American, and only of German descent.

Incorrect: “Isaiah Bradley was the first Captain America and was experimented on before Steve Rogers when the US was trying to create the Super Soldier Serum.”
Truth: Isaiah and his soldiers were experimented on after Steve Rogers had already become Captain America, as part of an attempt to recreate the formula, not create it.

Incorrect: “Sunturion wears battle armor (like Iron Man).”
Truth: Sunturion is a being of living energy, and only assumes the appearance of wearing armor. His human form is false too.

Incorrect: “616 comes from the publication date of the first issue of Fantastic Four."
Truth: We’ve got conflicting accounts from those involved in first using the number, but they do agree that it wasn’t from the publication date of FF #1.

Incorrect: “Captain Britain (Brian Braddock)’s powers come from being a mutant, like his siblings”
Truth: Brian’s powers come from magic / incredibly advanced science. His sister, Psylocke (Betsy Braddock), is believed to be a mutant, but it’s not as clear cut as you might think. His brother, Jamie Braddock, is merely assumed to be a mutant because Betsy is; we don’t really know.

Incorrect: "Psylocke is a telepath because she's half-Otherworlder and everyone on Otherworld is telepathic."
Truth: She is half-Otherworlder, but many Otherworlders are perfectly normal humans, and telepathy is not common on Otherworld.

Incorrect: “Meggan is a fairy / faerie”
Truth: Evidence is heavily in favor of Meggan being a mutant, not a faerie.

Incorrect: “Captain Britain (Brian Braddock) is an alcoholic / recovering alcoholic.”
Truth: He’s had a few cases of drinking heavily, and, as he recently stated, he can be a jerk when drunk, but both those statements are true of most people. He’s never been dependent on drink to get through the day, suffered cravings for it, or unable to do without it, all of which are generally felt to be requirements to be considered an actual alcoholic.

And tied to the last:
Incorrect: “Captain Britain hit / tried to hit Meggan while he was drunk.”
Truth: Captain Britain shouted at her and called her a name he shouldn’t have while very drunk and wallowing in grief (see above “can be a jerk when drunk” note), but he made no attempt to strike her. Alan Davis, the artist who drew the scene people show as evidence of the supposed hitting attempt, confirms this.

Incorrect: "The current Union Jack, Joe Chapman, was originally intended to be gay and the lover of Kenneth Crichton (Spitfire's son)."
Truth: Joe and Kenneth’s creators had no sexuality in mind for Joe and Kenneth was intended to be straight. Any “clues” readers think were planted by the original storytellers are simply people reading stuff into the story that wasn’t there. Subsequent stories have confirmed Joe to be romantically interested in woman. Yes, they could in theory be bi or in denial, but there's no evidence this way.

Incorrect: “Richard and Mary Parker, Peter's parents, were SHIELD agents.”
Truth: Richard and Mary Parker were CIA agents. They died before SHIELD was founded.


Incorrect: "The Hulk once lifted a 150 billion ton mountain range."
Truth: He once supported the weight of part of a mountain range. The whole range weighed 150 billion tons, but Hulk wasn’t lifting it, or even supporting more than a tiny fraction of it.

Incorrect: “Albert Potter was the Hurricane captured by the Thunderbolts in Civil War: The Initiative.”
Truth: The Hurricane captured by the Thunderbolts was a new character, not Albert Potter.

Incorrect: "Blackjack of the First Line is a human-looking member of the Deviants."
Truth: He is not a Deviant. He’s presumably human.

Incorrect: ”Though there’s an entire organization of Scourges, one Scourge is responsible for all the assassinations during the initial Scourge killing spree.”
Truth: At least three different Scourges took part in the early slayings. Notably, female Scourge “Caprice” posed as Golddigger to slay Titania.

Incorrect: “Cordelia Frost is the Professor X of empaths.”
Truth: We have no idea what powers Cordelia has, apart from being immune to her sister’s telepathy. The Professor X of empaths quote apparently comes from some fan using photoshop to fake up said quote, then posting the modified image online.

Incorrect: "Yellowjacket (Rita DeMara) and Swordsman (Jacques DuQuesne) remained resurrected at the end of Chaos War, and are still alive out there somewhere."
Truth: Though they were last seen alive towards the end of the story, Tom Brevoort has confirmed them to be dead via his blog. Normally an online statement of intent can't be taken as gospel, but Tom is a senior editor and was heavily involved in the Chaos War story, so unless we actually see the pair alive in another comic, this counts as "Word of God" and they are dead again.

Incorrect: Elias Bogan is this guy
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/0...ogan_super.jpg
Truth: Elias Bogan has never actually been seen. The guy in the picture is one of his mind controlled pawns, Oliver Ryland.

Incorrect (maybe): "Elias Bogan is the Shadow King"
Truth: They are both powerful mind-controlling telepaths, and we've never actually seen Bogan, so he might turn out to be an alias of the Shadow King. But as yet, any actual link is speculation.

Incorrect: "There are two characters called Deadly Ernest. One if Ernest St. Ives, cursed with a death touch, the other is Ernest Desjardins."
Truth: There is only one Deadly Ernest at the time of this being posted, and that is Ernest St. Ives. The second one is a fan fabrication with absolutely no basis in fact that Wikipedia carried unchallenged for several years. While the fake one has now been expunged from Wikipedia, other sites have copied and pasted the false info.

Incorrect: "Marvel has its own Omniverse / there is a Marvel Omniverse, which does not include the world's seen in the comics belonging to other companies."
Truth: There is only a single Omniverse. It includes ALL realities, not just Marvel's. Marvel does not own it - there is no "Marvel Omniverse."

Incorrect: "Sat-Yr9 and Kaptain Briton are from Earth-839"
Correct: They are both from Earth-794

Incorrect: "Earth-9 is the Hub, native reality to Captain England and Saturnyne."
Correct: Saturyne is from Earth-9, but Captain England is from Earth-522, and Earth-522 is the Hub, not Earth-9.

Incorrect: "The handbooks take big liberties with continuity / make up stuff for no good reason. For example, they made up some stuff about Honey Lemon pulling a second Sunpyre out her purse when there was no reason to believe there was a second Sunpyre."
Truth: The handbooks' remit has always included providing new information, but it is never done casually. Usually any new info is limited to basic biographical info (names, place of birth, height, weight), but the handbooks also clarify continuity conflicts. Anything more tends to be volunteered info provided by characters' creators, rather than stuff the handbooks sought out, something said creators are perfectly entitled to do. The specific example listed falls into this case.

Incorrect: "This http://www.psysdomain.com/corps/lordgoldstar.html is Corps member Lord Goldstar."
Also incorrect: "This http://images.wikia.com/marveldataba...th-7123%29.jpg is Corps member Lord Goldstar."
Truth: We don't know the name of the blue cyclops Corps member. The second individual mistakenly called Lord Goldstar is Flight Leader. We've never actually seen Lord Goldstar (or, if we've seen him, he's been a face in a crowd and not matched to his name).

Incorrect: "Beep the Meep has a brother, Larry the Meep."
Turth: Beep has no known siblings.

Incorrect: "Wild Child is Scottish."
Truth: "Wild Child is Canadian. He was born there, not in Scotland."

Incorrect: "Nuklo is slow / of below average intelligence."
Truth: Nuklo is of above average intelligence.

False: "Hercules once pulled Manhattan Island back into place after it had been shifted from its foundations."
Truth: Manhattan was never shifted from its foundations, but Hercules claimed it had been so he could then boast he had pulled it back into place.

False: "Forge's mentor Naze was killed by a Dire Wraith."
Truth: He either wasn't, or it was a temporary inconvenience; either way, he actually came out on top during his confronation with the Wraith, but let it think otherwise, so that it would then be the victim of Naze's foe, the Adversary, instead of him.

False: "Betsy Braddock's friend and fellow telepath Alison Double is blind."
Truth: Alison wears dark glasses a lot of the time, but she can see since the first time we meet her she is reading a comic.

Incorrect: Karnak of the Inhumans never underwent Terrigenesis - he has no powers, except those he developed via his martial arts training, the ability to divine a structure's weak point which is a mental discipline achieved through training.
But yet, also incorrect: Karnak gained superhuman powers via exposure to the Terrigen Mists.

Truth: Karnak wasn't exposed to the mists, but underwent Terrigenesis anyway, and does possess outright superhuman powers.
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 9:28 am  #7


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Additional historical text from Comixfan/CxPulp:
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:14 PM
And now the posts which cover the evidence for the above.

"Devil Dinosaur is of above average intelligence, at least for a dinosaur."
No, he's not. He's of above average intelligence, period. Don't let his inability to speak (Nextwave clone notwithstanding) fool you. Devil is human level smart, no question. Devil plans ahead. An animal, even a smart one, might remember stuff, it might react to stuff, they might even plan to handle a past problem if they encounter it again (such as storing food for winter), but they don't anticipate potential future events they might one day encounter and then plan for them - that requires the ability to both comprehend the future as a concept and to imagine stuff you haven't personally experienced. The best example (but not the only one) of Devil doing this is in his own series, when he faces flying alien robots. Devil has previously scouted out the valley he lives in, noticed a region of geysers, and filed away that location so that in the off-chance he ever faces a flying opponent who won't come down to ground level to attack and instead attacks from out of Devil's reach, then Devil can lead them to the geysers, make sure his opponent is in position, and then kick a boulder into the blowhole to trigger an eruption at the correct moment (using tools, not taking chances on random eruptions), so that the flying attacker will be struck by a high velocity blast of boiling water. That's forward planning for an unlikely to happen event that he's never seen or experienced, but one Devil nonetheless conceived of.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:15 PM
Wilhelm Lohmer, the original Master Man, isn't German. He's American. This was implied in his original appearances, when he was noted to be a Bundist- generally speaking, Germans weren't Bundists, Americans of German descent were. It was explicitly stated in Captain America: The Medusa Effect, written by Master Man's creator, Roy Thomas.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:17 PM
Isaiah Bradley was a victim of experiments to recreate the Super Soldier Serum, not to create it. It's simply a timeline issue - Steve Rogers was already active as Cap before Pearl Harbor, and had been active with the Invaders from December 1941. Isaiah didn't enlist until February 1942.

Editing to add: I see this still being debated back and forward on some places on the internet, and I see the handbooks being brought into the debate, which is why I feel the need to comment. Despite The Truth itself setting the timeline that makes it impossible for Isaiah to come before Steve, despite the presence of a Captain America comic shown in The Truth that predates the experiments on the Camp Cathcart "volunteers", despite the creators of The Truth quite unequivocaly stating that Steve came first in interviews and The Truth TPB's appendix, there are some people doggedly holding on to the misconception that Marvel's official stance is that Isaiah has been retconned to come before Steve. The stuff quoted below are posts I've seen on various message boards, stuff that was actually said in relation to the handbook coverage of Isaiah and his timeline.

"They've retconned it since The Truth came out, that's why Patriot says Isaiah was the first in early issues of Young Avengers." Nope, Patriot just has the dates wrong, and Steve didn't see the value in correcting an angry young man whose grandfather was horribly mistreated - going "actually, they murdered all those other soldiers and abused your grandfather later than you think" doesn't make what was done any better.

Isaiah's entry, Patriot's entry, and the WWII entry in Blockbusters of the Marvel Universe all say Steve got experimented on before Isaiah. "Oh, the Blockbusters entry on WWII has probably got wrong info they need to correct." "The [handbook] team probably only look at big events and don't catch all the lines of dialogue". Sorry, no, not even close. While we can and do make mistakes now and then, I can say with absolute certainty that we didn't in regards to the timeline here.

So, to make it clear - Steve became Captain America and joined the Invaders before Isaiah even enlisted. They haven't retconned things to shift Isaiah's enlistment and experimentation earlier. They haven't retconned things to shift Steve's experiments later (way too much interaction with other characters and thus too many knock on effects for that). As of April 2011 Marvel's official order of who got experimented on has Steve predating Isaiah by more than a year. This is not my opinion. We didn't guess this when we put it in the handbook. We didn't miss a retcon. This was checked after the newspaper seen in The Crew, and after Patriot's statements in Young Avengers, so both of those were taken into account, and neither of them overrules the timeline as it stood. We specifically asked senior editorial regarding the order of events, and they confirmed the order since seen in multiple handbooks. It hasn't changed since then. And I hate to make a such a big deal out of it, but I don't particularly like people trying to claim the handbooks got it wrong just to win their arguments.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:17 PM
Sunturion isn't wearing armor. Nor is he energy housed inside armor like the LoSH's Wildfire. He's a being of living energy, more like the Living Laser, Monica Rambeau (when she's in light form) or Klaw, and both his human look and his armor look are facades, forms he adopts. There was a Sunturion armor made, which we saw in an issue of Daredevil, but Iron Man Annual #9 clarifies that was created in the hopes of reintegrating the then-dissipated energies of Sunturion; it wasn't the suit he had been wearing, because he isn't wearing a suit.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:18 PM
616 does not come from "the publication date of the first issue of FF #1." Because Alan Moore and Alan Davis have differing accounts, we have conflicting versions of who came up with it and what (if anything) it stands for, but neither one corroborates the FF hypothesis. So please, let that discredited theory die.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:18 PM

  John H. wrote:

How about the Braddock twins as mutants or whatever they are? I thought that they were not mutants. But her association with the X-Men confuses the issue.
But is Jamie Braddock a mutant?]

That one's murky. Prior to joining the X-Men, nobody ever checked Betsy over with a mutant detection device, but she definitely triggered them around the time she was first with the X-Men. Brian, however, isn't a mutant. Jamie is in the 198 Files as a mutant, but I can say outright (since we discussed it amongst the Handbook writers at the time) that his presence there is more down to O*N*E*s assumption that if his sister is a mutant and he has powers then he too must be a mutant - now, they could be right in that assumption, but they could also be wrong. The 198 Files was written as an "in-universe" document, and hence there's a few cases where the info there is deliberately just a little off, because there's information the in-universe scribes wouldn't be privy to.

Is Betsy a mutant? Her powers developed late for a mutant (she was in her 20s), and appear to have been initially triggered by psychic contact with Dr. Synne, an agent of the Mastermind computer. But none of that precludes her being a mutant - Polaris was a similar late developer whose powers required outside stimulation to active. Mastermind later told Betsy and Brian that their powers come from their father being from Otherworld. So, some people assume that means they are hybrids, like Namor, which makes them a kind of mutant. But that too has its problems. There are normal humans on Otherworld, as well as all the mystical races, and James Braddock appeared to be one of them. He's not the same species as Merlyn and Roma, as far as we know, because Merlyn apparently isn't an Otherworld native - he says he "established Otherworld" in Excalibur #50. We've had no signs that there's any other members of Merlyn's species on Otherworld than him and his daughter.

I've seen some people say Betsy has telepathic powers because that's a natural ability on Otherworld. Nope. There's a few telepaths on Otherworld, but it doesn't appear to be that widespread a phenomenon (though James might have been one, though there's no evidence of it).

Where does that leave us?

Brian's powers are magical. We've seen how he got his original powers, and we saw how his body was rebuilt from scratch to give him his later powers and make them innate. Brian does not trigger mutant detection devices. He's not a mutant, and he's the only family member we are reasonably sure about.

Jamie's powers were activated by magic. Nobody has ever scanned him with a mutant detector, afaik, and frankly, given his ability to manipulate reality, it wouldn't matter now, as he could presumably make them detect him even if he's not a mutant, or not detect them even if he is.

Betsy's powers were activated indirectly by a computer built by her father, a computer that has the same manipulative streak as Merlyn and Roma. The first time she checked out on a mutant scanning device was when she was with the X-Men; at that point in time Roma was forging links between the X-Men and the Braddocks because she needed them tied together and for the X-Men, with Betsy among them, to die in order to trigger the formation of Excalibur. Betsy being considered a mutant helped that plan, and Roma is perfectly capable of making Betsy trigger mutant detectors even if she isn't actually a mutant.

And so it comes back to: We don't really know. Our evidence for mutant is inconclusive - Betsy detects as a mutant, but we know Roma has the ability to mess with that and had the motive to do so - but our evidence for non-mutant is effectively circumstantial - Roma has the ability and motive to have engineered it, but we have no actual hard proof she did so. Any assumptions about Jamie hang on Betsy's status. All we can be certain of is that the Braddock siblings had their lives manipulated from the off by some very powerful and devious individuals, which means that even now, anything we think we know about their origins may be subject to revision.
[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:18 PM

  John H. wrote:

Also, is Meggan related to the fairy folk?
She was shown to have a connection to the ancient race the Neuri. But I never thought she was a fairy.

No, she's not a faery as far as we can tell. That's another common mistake people make. She's a mutant. She's not connected to the Neuri as such - she's connected to natural energies, including magical energies, which is what gave her and the Neuri an affinity for one another, but there's no other known connection between the two. The only people who have called her faerie were using it as a descriptor rather than a statement of knowledge (e.g. she looks a bit like a faerie, but they didn't know her genetic/racial background, they were going on looks) and were people who came from magical backgrounds (and thus were likely to tailor their descriptions into the frames of reference they are familiar with). We've had several writers call her a mutant in the text, we've had Meggan identify herself as a mutant, and we've had at least two individuals with scanning capability and knowledge of both mutants and magical beings identify her as a mutant. Chris Claremont even said in his introduction of Meggan to U.S. audiences that those who didn't know better might think she was a faerie, but she was actually a mutant.

  John H. wrote:

I just realized from reading the discussion in this thread, Jamie's powers are pretty formidable. They seem similar in a way to Roma's and Merlin's. Roma made the X-men invisible (to certain kinds of detection) after reviving them in Dallas, whereas Jamie made Betsy invisible after he revived she. And Merlin did the same to Brian in CB&MI:13 (though not invisible).
If Jamie had not gone mad, would he be on a level with Roma?
Was it ever stated how Jamie lost his mind?

  Michael Regan wrote:

Jamie was torchered and drivin insane by the cyborg Doctor Crocodile. He now views the world around him as nothing more than a dream which he does not wake from.

Michael's got it mostly right. Jamie was tortured, though on Doc Croc's orders rather than by Croc himself; Croc's witchwoman did the actual work. And to be fair on Croc, Jamie was both a pretty unpleasant criminal, and Croc's punishment was being done to rehabilitate him, not for any less noble motives. It's just Jamie got broken out mid-process. By his last appearance he did seem to have regained some understanding that the world wasn't all a dream, and even a measure of his original decency (he did, after all, sacrifice himself to save his sister and the human race).

There's a difference between Roma & Merlyn's powers, and those of Jamie, Mad Jim Jaspers, and other reality warpers. Roma and Merlyn are/were powerful mages/scientists, and could use that knowledge to perform some incredible feats. Jamie, Jaspers, etc, can just change the world around them at a whim; they don't need to understand how their powers work, they can just innately do it. J & J's upper power levels are theoretically much higher than Merlyn and Roma, who win out as much because of their devious planning abilities as their raw power.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:19 PM
"Captain Britain is a recovering alcoholic."
No. Brian's been seen to drink heavily maybe three times, all under stressful circumstances, and only been seen to be really drunk once, when he'd literally witnessed his sister's death over and over on television. He did quit drinking, but that was because he realised that when he gets drunk it makes whatever mood he is in much worse (if annoyed, he can get belligerant, if sad he gets maudlin), and Brian dislikes not being in control of himself, both because he's got an overwhelming sense of duty/doing the right thing, and because he recognises someone with his kind of power is dangerous if not in control of themself. He quit without any difficulty, and, tellingly, many years later had an alcoholic drink while rejoining/inflitrating the Hellfire Club, but only had one and went back to being teetotal without any problem. An alcoholic can't have "just one drink."
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:21 PM
"The current Union Jack, Joe Chapman, was originally intended to be gay and the lover of Kenneth Crichton (Spitfire's son)."
This is based on three things in Joe's first appearance - he's an art student, he was in a college wrestling team, and he (or Kenneth) made a comment about the other one being a heavy sleeper. Yes, clearly this means he is artistic (which is automatically a euphemism for being gay), he likes putting his arms round other men, and he and Kenneth must have slept together, which of course can only mean they had sex. There's absolutely no other way anyone could possibly interpret that information. They couldn't just be college roommates, be good at art and yet straight, and the wrestling comment couldn't be there to explain why Joe would subsequently prove a capable hand to hand fighter against Baron Blood.

Yes, I am being sarcastic. In the same first appearance Kenneth identifies a girl to Joe as the woman he is in love with and wants to marry. If the intent was to hint that Kenneth was Joe's boyfriend, that's a funny way to go about it.

There's several characters who are gay (including the Brian Falsworth Union Jack), and yes, more gay characters would not be unwelcome, but there's never been any evidence Joe is gay, and it wasn't hinted at in his early appearances, as some like to claim. And both the story's writer Roy Thomas (http://imwan.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=17498) and artist John Byrne (http://www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/f....asp?TID=21065) have confirmed no intent to suggest he was.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:22 PM
Another one. Mutant Growth Hormone, despite the name, can be derived from non-mutants. In Alias MGH was being made using Mattie Franklin's DNA. Mattie is not a mutant, she's a magical mutate. Hence we have a confirmed example of non-mutant MGH. This has a corollary: the Owl using his own body to produce MGH does not mean the Owl is a mutant, as many online sites have subsequently claimed (conveniently overlooking Mattie, who no one tries to claim is a mutant). The Owl has occasionally been wrongly identified as a mutant, but his origin was clear - he's a mutate who took a formula to get his powers. The Owl is not one of the 198.
 

gorby wrote:

The claim of the Owl being a mutant predates the MGH. He was stated as a mutant in the first OHotMU, but this was corrected in the Deluxe Edition. So, between 64 and 83, Marvel regarded him as a mutant, implying the confusion.

Not from 64 - to start with he wasn't a mutant. The original OHOTMU got it wrong, and the Deluxe corrected it. The recent MGH bit just added to the confusion.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:23 PM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

If memory serves, Christopher Priest (Jim Owlsley at the time) incorrectly treated the Falcon as a mutant in Falcon#1, with the result that this is another thing people keep getting wrong (this was discussed a fair bit on an Avengers listserv I used to belong to).

  Eric J. Moreels wrote:

I think it was because Falcon was attacked by a Sentinel in #2 that people started assuming he was a mutant because of his telepathic link with Redwing (even though IIRC that was created by the cosmic cube?)

Correct. A malfunctioning Sentinel identified Falcon as a mutant, but as Jarvis specifically pointed out in one of the Annuals, that was a malfunctioning Sentinel, and Falcon's only innate power comes from the Cosmic Cube.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:24 PM
Bloodscream's real name is Zachariah Ravenscroft. FALSE. We don't know Bloodscream's real name as of yet.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:24 PM
Richard and Mary Parker, Peter's parents, were SHIELD agents. FALSE. This mostly originates because of a "Minus One" Spidey cover showing the couple with the words "Agents of SHIELD" emblazoned underneath, so at least it is understandable that people got this misimpression. But Tom Brevoort has stated in his blog that (1) he wrote the text for that cover, and (2) that he got it wrong. The actual story within shows the couple as CIA agents, not SHIELD. None of the couple's other appearances suggest them to be SHIELD agents, and indeed, until the recent SHIELD #1 (more on that below), the agency SHIELD didn't get formed until Peter was a teenager (it was formed after the FF got their powers), making it impossible for his parents to have belonged to it. Now, of course, SHIELD #1 has revealed that something calling itself Shield has existed for far longer, though again, it's a precursor to SHIELD (the agency we know). Could it later be revealed that the Parkers belonged to this? Sure, such a retcon is possible. But at the moment, and unless and until someone retcons it, the Parkers were not SHIELD agents.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:25 PM
"The Hulk once lifted a 150 billion ton mountain range." This is a favorite one amongst those readers fond of "battle boarding" / "power gaming", who lock on to any examples of extreme power usage to try and prove this means the character is way more powerful than they are normally considered. But the above, referencing events in Secret Wars, falls down on several levels.

First, before anyone gripes, this is one of Hulk's greatest feats, no disagreement on that. This is the Hulk's equivalent of Spidey being trapped under Doc Ock's machinery in a flooding base; he's going way above and beyond his normal level, pushing himself to the maximum. It's massively impressive. But it's not indicative of his normal level, and he is not lifting 150 billion tons. The mountain range as a whole weighs 150 billion tons; if Hulk could lift it, then the heroes would be in no danger of being crushed. He's not lifting, he's supporting the weight, and there's a huge difference in that. When you jack your car up to replace a tire, is the entire weight of the car on the jack? No. A good percentage of it is on the other tires which are still on the ground. Most of the mountain range is firmly on the ground; that's exactly why the heroes are trapped, because there's no gaps for them to get out through. So most of the range's weight is being supported by the ground around the trapped heroes. If all of it was on the Hulk, even if he could cope with it the ground under his feet couldn't, and the concentrated force would drive Hulk into the ground like a nail into a wall.

The Hulk isn't even lifting up a small bit to form the gap the heroes are in; Iron Man and Hulk smashed that gap as the range fell onto them, creating a small cave directly above them; it's like the old movies of a building front falling down and a character surviving because they are just where the open window was, in the small gap between the heavy walls.

What Hulk is doing is buttressing the roof, to prevent their hastily formed cave from collapsing in on them. He's not taking the whole weight of the range any more than a supporting beam in a mining tunnel is taking the whole weight of the ground above the dig. He's still holding up tons of rock; given his strain he's taking the weight of more than a hundred tons of rock; it's still extremely impressive. But we don't have a quantifiable figure out of it, except to say it is nowhere near 150 billion tons.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:26 PM
"Valeria Richards' intelligence must be because of a mutant power. Marvel Girl, Valeria von Doom, wasn't that smart." Nope. Val is a mutant, like her brother, but her smarts don't necessarily come from mutation. Marvel Girl was smarter than Reed too, she just didn't make it so obvious - but she did solve quantum mechanic problems in her head for fun (FF Annual 2000), and she was smarter than Alyssa Moy, who is on a par with Reed intellectually (FF Vol. 3 #21). And current Val is Marvel Girl, regressed to infancy (FF Vol. 3, #50); it's not certain if she consciously has access to any of Marvel Girl's memories, but even subconscious access would explain some of the speed she's developed her manual dexterity (way above average for a kid her age) and scientific knowledge. So her brains could simply be natural, inherited from her father and paternal grandfather (who was, lets not forget, no slouch either).
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:27 PM
"Psylocke is a telepath because she's half-Otherworlder and everyone on Otherworld is telepathic." With some then using this to form a false corollary as an implication that Brian is "brain-damaged" (or other, less polite terms), because he lacks this "common" power.

There's a whole debate to be had about whether Betsy and Jamie are mutants or not, but that's not what is primarily wrong with the above statement. Most Otherworlders aren't telepaths. We had a lengthy Otherworld saga, and we've met a lot of Otherworlders. Apart from the elf Jackdaw, who was noted as exceptional, few had psychic powers worth speaking of. Where most people get this "Otherworlders are telepathic" meme from is the end of Excalibur's Cross-Time Caper, when they end up at Saturnyne's base, the Omniversal Hub, and Phoenix mentions that there are too many telepaths about, and that telepathy is the standard mode of communication. But the Hub is NOT Otherworld. We saw the Hub at Saturnyne's trial, and Wardog identified it as an alternate Earth, which Otherworld is not. Plus, Saturnyne got transported BACK to the Hub FROM Otherworld after Merlyn's funeral. Otherworld is Roma's home, and Saturnyne is often there, reporting to Roma, but her own "offices" are on the Hub, which is a world full of telepaths.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:28 PM
Quick one, strictly speaking an old rather than new one.

"The Vision is a synthezoid." No, he's not. He is, and always has been, a synthOzoid. It's frequently misspelled, but the very first Index explicitly noted that the E spelling is an error.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:31 PM
Another thing people are always getting wrong. Warrior Woman's civilian name. That's all I'm saying for the moment, but it's blindingly obvious what's wrong, in hindsight. I'll see if anyone can figure it out. Handbook people not allowed to play, as this has already been discussed amongst us, so they know the answer.

  Michael Regan wrote:

Frieda Ratsel, alias Julia Ratsel Lohmer (IIRC)
I believe the German name Frieda equates to "peace" or "joy".
Ratsel is of German origin, possibly from Lower Saxony.

Nope. Julia is her given name - people thought it was an alias because she used it while posing as an English woman in her first appearance, but Master Man died saying her name - he loved her and was married to her, so he ought to know what her given name was, and he called her Julia. Frieda is a middle name. But that's not the common mistake I was referring to - it's much more of a forehead slapping moment when you realise.

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

OK, I'm gonna give it my best shots:
 
1) Last name "Ratsel"; people often called Nazi's rats or ratfinks, so "Ratsel" is a play on words meaning Rat?

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

2) "Krieger Frau" as Hitler named Julia, doesn't translate into "Warrior Woman"?

Nope - talking civilian name.

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

3) Julia Freida Ratsel's last name is NOT Lohmer because the final vows were never said by the potential bride and groom during the wedding, nor the proclamation of "husband and wife" by Hitler who was presiding over the wedding (was he some type of ordained minister?), because the Invaders burst onto the scene during the ceremony disrupting it and thus WW and MM were not fully, truly, legally husband and wife?

Arguably, but that's not something most people don't know. The Lohmer bit isn't the problem.

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Here's my guess: it should be Rätsel rather than Ratsel (I've bolded the difference).

There should indeed be an umlaut in Rätsel. But the umlaut isn't the problem.

  Angelicknight wrote:

I will go with Andy on this one since the Master Man entry in the Handbook list her name under known relatives as Julia Frieda Rätsel Lohmer.

 
Everyone has gotten this wrong, including past handbooks. Master Man's entry has the error too.
 
As in all things, it's always best to return to the information source, the original comics, and to read the reveal of her name more carefully...

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

Hmmm. This is a tough one!!
 
OK, here are my last 2 guesses:
 
1) Julia Freida RatZel: could the "S" in Ratsel have been a "Z" originally? I know people often justapose these two letters around like in the name "EliZabeth" where the "Z" is sometimes replaced with an "S"? I think this is what happened with Psylocke.

Nothing to do with an s vs z, though you are right about Psylocke's name. Reprints for the US inconsistently changed the spelling, leading to a persisting S spelling error that dogged her for a couple of decades.

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

2) Wasn't Julia also known as Madame Mystery or The Mystery Madame? IIRC, I believe she used these names as well. Could they have been left off of the MM's entry (and possibly Julia's upcoming entry)??

 
Madame Mystery is an alias for her, and has been listed as such in the past. Master Man's entry doesn't need to list his spouse's aliases.

  Michael Regan wrote:

Too many Handbook people need they access upgraded
 
Invaders #16, Warrior Woman was simply "Julia".
Invaders #17, she referred to herself as Madame Ratsel or Madame Mystery. After the accident she calls herself Krieger Frau / Warrior Woman.
 
Wait, they were never officially/legally married. The priest was killed before the end of the ceremony and they were pronounced man and wife by Hitler.

It's not her married name and whether it is legal or not that is the issue. The answer is in what you typed, but like everyone else, myself included all bar the last time I read the story, I read but did not truly comprehend...
 
Adding - it helps to take into account her profession prior to becoming Warrior Woman.

  oenglish wrote:

Okay, you made me curious, and it is rather amusing. There's two "errors," in actuality.
 
First, Julia is intended as a fake identity, not her real name. Page 6 of Invaders 17 makes that pretty clear by putting quotes around it: "betrayal from within, as the girl called "Julia" turned out to have been hiding both a German accent and a luger."

This one isn't the case now - it was assumed to be a codename, which is why she got the first name Frieda in the 1980s handbook. But when Master Man died in Cable, he died calling her Julia. Since he (a) wasn't present in London when she was undercover, and (b) should know her real name, she is Julia. A misreading that became canon.

  oenglish wrote:

Second, Madame Ratzel isn't her name, its her code name in German. Page 14 of that issue makes that clear as she says "Do not play innocent with Madame Ratzel, or Madame Mystery, as you would call me!"

And that's the answer. Ratsel is German for Mystery, and if you look at the sentence, you realise she is translating her spy codename, not telling him her real surname. How many people do you know who translate their real name into the language of the person they are meeting?

  oenglish wrote:

Someone took both of those and declared her Julia Ratzel. It's akin to Reed Richards going under the fake name "George" in his first appearance, identifying himself as Mr. Fantastic, and then having someone later note his real name as "George Fantastic."

Now, of course, later use of either/both of those could certainly have changed them from an error to canon. There's no reason you can't use your first name to go undercover, and there's no reason your last name and your codename can't be the same thing. Still - whoever identified her as Julia Ratzel seems to have been reading a little too quickly.
 
Yup - Julia has become canon, but Ratsel is just a misreading that no one spotted for 30 or so years.

  oenglish wrote:

Cute! And nice catch!

Thanks, though it was actually something Roy Thomas said that made me realise it. I'd made the same mistake as everyone else had all these past readings.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:33 PM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Neat! The bit about Julia made me think of a sub-topic: things that were wrong but which have been repeated so often that they've become canon anyway.
 
For example: if you read Man-Thing's first appearance, it seems clear that Ted and Ellen are just dating and don't really know each other that well. But then in the 1980s series Ellen was said to be his wife, and that's been repeated so often that it's now canon.
 
Other ideas?

The misreading that became canon that springs to mind is the health status of Ken Crichton. He let his friend Joe Chapman become Union Jack instead of taking the role himself because Joe was the stronger of the two, and thus had a better chance of surviving fighting Baron Blood. That didn't mean Ken was weak or sickly - indeed, Ken was part of the same university wrestling team Joe was on, and that suggests reasonable health. But people misread "Joe is stronger" as "Ken is weak" and he thus suddenly developed a debilitating anemia that was implied to have dogged his entire life.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:33 PM
Couple of quick new ones. Tangerine of Excalibur and Captain Britain & MI13 appearances - alleged by various places on the internet to have the real name "Tania Reen." Utter codswallop. And Sage, alleged to be Tessa Hartley, Tessa Niles or Tessa Basso, depending on which inaccurate site you read - not only have none of those surnames been used in any legit story, but Tessa isn't Sage's real first name, but an alias. In both Sage and Tangerine's cases, their real names remain unrevealed.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:36 PM
More fake namery on Wiki sites: Venom's symbiote offspring. If you were to trust Wikipedia, you'd believe Venom's offspring included Scream, Lasher, Phage, Riot and Agony. A shout-out to Wikipedia user Crazy Penguin, who explains the truth very well (and so I'll quote and credit him, rather than paraphrasing him):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sy...)#LF_symbiotes

"Scream was never a fan name for the yellow symbiote character. She had an action figure produced in the Spider-Man: Venom: Planet of the Symbiotes toy line from 1996. The slim green symbiote character also had an action figure produced named Lasher. Unlike Scream, Lasher's name has never been used in a Marvel publication, but it still exists on an official Marvel product and so could still be considered his "real" name.
The other three Life Foundation symbiotes did not have action figures. There was an action figure called Riot, but that was a four-armed character who had never appeared in the comics and had a biography on the back of the box that made it clear he was not one of the five Life Foundation symbiotes.
Phage is short for Xenophage, an alien from the Venom comic books that is not a symbiote - it eats symbiotes. The Xenophage action figure was called Phage. I have absolutely no idea why a certain fan chose to use this name in reference to one of the Life Foundation symbiotes, it's a completely separate and unrelated character.
The name Agony comes from nowhere. It was just made up.
Allow me to reiterate, the only two Life Foundation symbiotes officially named were Scream (the yellow one) and Lasher (the green one), both in the action figure line. The only one to have their name carried over into the comic books and publications is Scream.
Officially the others do not have codenames until Marvel tells us otherwise."

Unfortunately Crazy Penguin appears to be outnumbered by the misinformed, as a glance at the history of the various symbiote pages (most of whom are listed under the fake, fan-cruft names) shows that whenever he (or anyone else) has tried to fix the pages, others have rushed to return them to being incorrect.

So, summarising. Scream is an official name. Lasher is not an official name, but, in the absence of an official name, does have some legitimacy for being used to clarify which symbiote is being discussed, based on it being used by the toy line. Riot, Phage and Agony are just plain wrong.

Later edit: And now those names have been used in comics for the new hosts of those symbiotes. However, it is important to note that doesn't retroactively make them canon for the previous hosts - Peter Parker did not gain the alias Venom just because that was the name the symbiote and new host Eddie Brock took for themselves.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:37 PM
Emplate's "Hellion" who utilized "ebon energy" is not called Ebon; that's a fan name, employing the logic that anyone who manipulates a given energy must use that as their codename. Her creator named her Nocturne, and we confirmed that codename in the Handbook entry on Emplate's "Hellions."
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:41 PM

  Eduardo M. wrote:

I see one Wikipedia that some are saying the Hurricane that battled the TBolts in Civil War: the Initiative is Melvin Potter. This despite the fact that the Appendix lists Potter and the TBolts foe Hurricane as seperate people, even going so far as to say Potter and the TBolts Hurricane have nothing to do with one another.
 
what probably doesnt help is that in CiW:I, Hurricane is listed as "Hurricane II". This means either Potter ir Makkari are considered "Hurricane I". I doubt Wild West outlaw Harry Kane would be considered "Hurricane I". If he is, then that makes me wonder about Potter and Makkari

And this is a good example of why numbering is a system the current handbooks dropped for distinguishing between different people using the same codename. It simply doesn't work. Unless everyone is (a) aware of every person who used a given codename, and (b) agrees on the order they are counted in, then the numbering will not match from one list to the next. For the record, though I've been told Wikipedia will allow a post here to count as acceptable evidence apparently, but no, the Hurricane from Civil War: The Initiative is not, absolutely not, Albert Potter. Though we suspected as much considering his different powers and appearance, we made sure to check with editorial at the time, and were told that he was a brand new character. Who the writer of the story thought was Hurricane I is anyone's guess - there's at least 3 others (WWII Makkari, Wild West gunslinger and one of the Dark Riders).
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:41 PM
I believe Debrii may recently have been confirmed as a mutant (can't recall for sure), but Wikipedia listed her as such long before there was any evidence for it.

  Rayeye wrote:

I'd really like to know where this was confirmed. Some wiki sites even say a picture from the Age of X arc confirming this, but all you see is a picture of a black girl (it was just a cameo, no mention of Debrii at all) who could just be anybody.

And you've just shown why people should always double check the comics themselves, something I wasn't able to do in this instance, which is why I couched my comment with "believe" and "may have been" - that said, even with that wording to cover me from stating anything definitively, I should have made sure before writing.
 
I still have not been able to personally check the issue in question, but one of my fellow writers has, and he confirms that while she isn't named, there is a black woman in X-Men Legacy #245 who has Debrii's distinctive haircut, and who is being rounded up by anti-mutant forces. So it may have been Debrii there. However, and this makes the whole confirming her identity point moot, I was also informed that Age of X showed Spider-Man being rounded up too, and he's not a mutant. So if the anti-mutant types were rounding up non-mutants in their mutant purge, then even if it is Debrii in the X-Men Legacy scene, it's not proof that she is a mutant. So the origin of her powers officially remains unconfirmed.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:42 PM
Another common naming error. It is the Casket of Ancient Winters, not the Cask of Ancient Winters. The former is the original name given in the comics, and, more to the point, the item is a box (casket), not a barrel for holding alcohol (cask).
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:44 PM
Another name confusion that seems to be picking up speed on Wiki sites, thanks to them just copying one another without checking the source material for themselves. Sgt. Tork, erstwhile ally of the Black Panther, is not Michael Tork. Michael Tork is Bloke of X-Force (later X-Statix). Sgt. Tork is Francis Bartholomew Tork.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:45 PM
It's K'un-Lun, not K'un-L'un or any other variation. This has been spelled wrong a fair few times, even in past handbooks, so the error is understandable, but in 2004 the handbook writers were asked to gather together information on what spelling had been used where, after which editorial confirmed the original spelling used in Marvel Premiere #15 and many subsequent stories was the correct one. Any other version is a spelling error - stating that for the sake of the likes of those Wikipedians who like to argue that spelling errors are actually the new correct spellings - yes, there are people who claim that, c.f. the debate trying to convince people that Psylocke is Elizabeth, not Elisabeth. If Wikipedia had existed back in the 60s, there'd be some arguing that Spider-Man had been retconned to being Peter Palmer just because Stan Lee got the character's secret identity wrong a couple of times.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:47 PM
"Blackjack of the First Line is a human-looking member of the Deviants."

Unless something has cropped up in an unrelated title (e.g. not the issues he actually appeared in), there's no evidence whatsoever that Blackjack is anything other than a regular human.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:48 PM
I found one Wiki that thought a minor Ultimate Iron Man character was named "Ith Leopold Yankee Thwine". Let's see who is first to spot what is wrong with that. And a Google search confirms this error has spread to at least one additional wiki-style site, because of blind copying/stupidity.

  Michael Regan wrote:

Ah, I think I remember that one. The character had a lisp and stated that "My name ith Leopold, Yankee Twine" translated to non-lisp as "My name is Leopold, Yankee Swine" as he addressed Iron Man.

Correct. His name was Leopold. Not, as some believed, surname Thwine, first name Ith, and middle names Leopold Yankee.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:49 PM

  Rayeye wrote:

Somehow wikipedia listed the mutant Astra's real name as Beth Al-Reraph, but as far as I know her real name was never revealed. So I guess this is just another example of stupid fanmade wikispam.

I think so, but I'll double check with the other Handbook writers.

  Stuart Vandal wrote:

I think so, but I'll double check with the other Handbook writers.

And having conferred with other writers, they concur - Beth Al-Reraph is a fake name, made up by someone online and spread via unchecked wikis.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:49 PM

fesak wrote:

Pretty sure this mutant classification system is fanmade, or has it ever been used in comics aside from omega?
http://www.newsarama.com/comics/x-men-mutant-classifications-120113.html

Utterly fan made.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:50 PM
New one - Wikipedia and other sites would have you believe Turner Scholl, Castlemere and Mercedes were three Inner Circle Hellfire Club members who fought Wolverine during the X-Men: Original Sin story.

Not true. Castlemere was a member and fought Wolverine. Mercedes was a member, but didn't fight Wolverine. Turner was a member, but didn't fight Wolverine. There was a woman who fought Wolverine, but she wasn't Mercedes. And Scholl was a member and fought Wolverine, but his first name wasn't Turner.

Mercedes was a black haired Inner Circle member who showed up in X-Men Legacy #215. The woman who fought Wolverine was white haired and looked remarkably unlike Mercedes.

Similarly, Turner was an Inner Circle member who tried to poison Castlemere in X-Men Legacy #215 at a meeting of Inner Circle members discussing what to do about Sunspot quitting the Club. Castlemere killed him for the attempt, and lest anyone believe the online accounts that Shaw stopped Castlemere after he had merely wounded Turner, there's a panel with Turner's body and head skewered by Castlemere's energy spikes, and Shaw commenting that there are now two vacancies on the Inner Circle (e.g. Sunspot and someone else, seeing as the internet would have you believe Turner was A-OK). Scholl turned up in X-Men Legacy #217, and somehow got conflated to being Turner, despite minor details like (in rising order of importance) (a) Turner trying to kill Castlemere and vice versa while Scholl was allied to Castlemere, (b) Turner being tall and thin while Scholl was short and pudgy, (c) Turner having a full head of hair complete with ponytail while Scholl was totally bald, and (d) Turner being dead.

  Rayeye wrote:

Thanks for the clarification Stuart. I really confused me, especially after trying to find some info about these guys on the internet. By the way, the wiki site says Mercedes is also known as Black Queen, but as far as I know she was never called that.

Correct - she was never called anything except Mercedes. People are leaping to conclusions, based on Mercedes (the one who actually was Mercedes) dressing in a black corset like Selene did when she was Black Queen. Trouble is, Tessa dressed the same way during her time at the club, and she was never Black Queen. I think the most you could reasonably argue is that Mercedes was not the White Queen.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:51 PM

  Monolith wrote:

Here's something I keep seeing: Cordelia Frost is "the Professor X of empaths", and a number of really specific descriptions of her empathic powers, which I've never seen in comics. Very fleshed out on MarvelDatabase and Comicvine, and I've reverted Wikipedia at least four times on her page, asking for citations before someone adds it back.

Since Cordelia's not one of the characters I know well, I've checked with the other handbook writers, and, like yourself, we've not been able to turn up anything to support the Wikipedia claims. It's possible (in theory at least) that Emma may have mentioned something about her sister being an empath in a comic where Cordelia herself is absent, but the lack of specific citation suggests its just fan speculation, something that's all too common on Wiki sites.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:51 PM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

ust noticed another Wiki error: The first appearance of Red Skull (Shmidt) is given as Captain America Comics#7 and of Red Skull (Malik) as #61. Admittedly the Handbook info on Shmidt hasn't been used in-story so that one's a bit of a grey area, but I don't think there's any reason to believe that the Red Skull in #61 is Malik (the Cap Index doesn't mention any Communist ties in the story description).

The confusion on Shmidt's first appearance is at least understandable, as Tales of Suspense #65 revealed a German agent posing as George Maxon while working for Shmidt was the guy who was unmasked as the Skull and killed in Captain America Comics #1. However, editorial was clear on this, I presume because someone higher up wanted to keep the symmetry of Cap and the Skull both debuting together - Maxon is only the Skull out in the field in that issue, while Shmidt is the guy we see in the Nazis' base. As for #61, we don't know his identity; it can't be Shmidt, who was in suspended animation, but Malik wasn't appointed the Red Skull until 1953, so that's not him in 1947 unless time travel or major retcon comes into play. Given the Red Skull in Captain America Comics #61 is working with American crooks in what amounts to a petty larceny scheme, I'd say it is most likely to be an unidentified US crook who just thought to cash in on the Skull's reputation, but that's speculation (and, admittedly, a poor disguise choice, akin to dressing as Ghostface if you live in the fictional reality of the Scream movies - you are asking to be shot on sight by a cop or panicked member of the public).
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:51 PM

  Eduardo M. wrote:

The Harvesters, the superhero group that appeared in Marvel Zombies Supreme, is listed on Wikipedia as being part of the 50-State Initiative. I read the tpb but saw no sign that there part of it. Is this wrong?

An interesting one. The answer is, yes and no. Any site listing them as part of the 50-State Initiative is wrong, because, as you rightly say, there is nothing in the comic that stated they were. I don't see them listed on Wiki, but I do on the Marvel Database and some other sites. Someone clearly looked at them and thought "they'd be appropriate for the Initiative's Kansas team" and just assumed they were.
 
However, the Harvesters are about to be identified as the Initiative's Kansas team in the Softcover 5 update. The difference is, the writer of the entry knew the comic had not identified the Harvesters as being part of the Initiative. Unaware of what Wiki was saying, he likewise thought "they'd be appropriate for the Initiative's Kansas team" and went to editorial for permission to confirm that, a piece of new bit of information.
 
So at the moment, them being listed that way by sites is still wrong - the team were not originally intended as part of the Initiative, nor identified as such. It will become true only once the handbook comes out.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:55 PM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

One more that I previously mentioned in one of the Wiki threads was Yellowjacket and Swordsman remaining among the living after Chaos War, which I wish in YJ's case was true but isn't.

  Zach Kinkead wrote:

Their fate at the end of that mini seemed kind of ambiguous. They didn’t die (again) like the rest of their undead comrades. I’d assume that they went back to being dead like the Chaos King’s army and the undead civilians and heroes if not for that final scene when they fly off*. If Alpha Flight made it back then I see no reason Yellowjacket and Swordsman can’t.

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I agree about the ambiguity as written, but the official word from Tom Brevoort is that they're still dead.
 
http://www.formspring.me/TomBrevoort/q/196977370341607854
Unknown: "So how come Yellowjacket and Swordsman are apparently still dead even though they were alive after Chaos War? Rita especially disappoints me because I think that there's more freedom for someone to do more with her given how little she's been in."
 
Tom Brevoort: "They weren't alive after CHAOS WAR. They returned to the grave along with everybody else who was resurrected."
 
In another post he says he made the command that they stay dead, so this isn't the word of an observer but the actual decision maker.
 
I think it was a mistake to kill off Rita and I agree that Chaos War#5 could have been better written (it's telling that I actually had to go online to figure out their fates, something that should have been clear from the story). And Hercules resurrecting fellow Avengers makes more sense than Hercules resurrecting a team he had minimal encounters with (and I say this as a Canadian myself). But there you have it.

Agreed and updated.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:56 PM
New one. The Morlock Bliss is being identified as Barbara Stacey on a number of sites. This is false info originally added to Wikipedia as far as I can see, and thanks to the Wiki tradition of blind plagiarism it has spread. I've now removed it from Wikipedia. Wiki prides itself on swiftly spotting bad info and getting it removed, so naturally this has been on virtually uncontested since 2008. I say virtually, because someone (I think it might have been me, but I've cleaned dodgy stuff of Wikipedia so often I lose track of all of the edits) removed it in Feb 2011, only for another person to helpfully reinstate it a few months later.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:56 PM

gorby wrote:

Some errors come from comics or handbooks.
 
For example, Moonboy/Moon Boy/Moon-Boy was under Moon Boy in the Update 89 Handbook, but under Moonboy in the Master Edition.
 
You have other cases like Plant-Man/Plantman.

Not disputing that some of the spelling errors either originate or have been perpetuated in handbooks, and ones like those above get repeatedly misspelled in the comics. That's one reason for listing the correct spellings. Many characters have had varied spellings over the years, but, despite what Wikipedia seems to think (I've had arguments with Wikipedians over it), that doesn't make the variations legitimate spellings, any more than it would in the real world - if I kept writing Jak Kirbee instead of Jack Kirby (to pick a semi-random example), nobody would think the former had become a valid spelling of his name, no matter how often I wrote it or how many other people copied my error. Normally first spelling is considered correct - the one exception I can think of off-hand is Moira MacTaggert, who was MacTaggart initially.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 03:57 PM

ToddCam wrote:

You left out the erroneous second Deadly Ernest.
 
Not Marvel related, but I found on Wikipedia that someone had added to the article of Ariel of The Little Mermaid that she had divorced Prince Eric and married a Tom White, who fathered her daughter. Wow.

I was going to say that the decidely dodgy second Deadly Ernest isn't really something people "keep getting wrong" so much as evidence against Wikipedia's hilariously inaccurate claims of being accurate and swiftly catching errors, because I didn't think he'd spread to other sites. But a quick Google search turns up around 30 websites, most but not all purely Wiki mirror sites, which mention him, so I'll add him to the list.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:06 PM
A marginally more understandable error, since it originates from the comics and not the internet, and is one of those errors which falls into "you've only read a part of the story, and so don't know the full facts" category.

There are several sites which claim Captain America is Steven Grant Rogers. He's not - he is simply Steven Rogers. And here's the full explanation why:

In 1978's Captain America #225, Cap sees Professor Mason Harding for help dealing with amnesia about his first 18 or so years of life. Harding's machine breaks through the veil over his memories and he recalls a childhood in Maryland as Steven Grant Rogers, son of diplomat Walter Rogers and with an elder brother Michael whose death at Pearl Harbor subsequently inspired Cap to enlist. However, in time Cap comes to doubt these memories because he was active way before Pearl Harbor (he helped found the Invaders within a day or two of that event) and because he's getting conflicting memory flashes of growing up in New York clashing with the crystal clear, highly detailed memories of his Maryland childhood. So in 1980's Captain America #247 he visits SHIELD, and Dum Dum Dugan tracks down Steve's old army footlocker. In it he finds his old journal, and a note that on Christmas Eve 1941 his army superior, aware Steve was due to go overseas with the Invaders and thus risk being captured, summoned Steve. To prevent him spilling vital secrets should he be captured, they plant false memories to confuse any interrogators. They introduce him to diplomat Walter Rogers, who is NOT related to Steve, but whose two sons, Michael and Grant, both died in Pearl Harbor. Steve spends the next couple of days having false memories plugged into him, using the late Grant Rogers' life as the basis for Steve's fake one. Dr. Harding's memory probe triggered the preprogrammed false memories. And here's Steve's exact quote from Captain America #247, p17, panel 1

"My middle name's not Grant...I never had a middle name!"[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:24 PM
And another one, which I just spotted. Otherworld's human/dragon hybrid Sir Benedict has picked up the surname Englande out of some fan's fevered imagination. He is not Sir Benedict Englande - he is just Sir Benedict, no known surname.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:25 PM
Incorrect: "Jetstream is Haroun ibn Sallah al-Rashid"
Correct: Jetstream is Haroum ibn Sallah al-Rashid. Haroum, not Haroun.

Going by the rule of first version given is correct.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:26 PM
"Bushwacker is a mutant." This originates from him being called a mutant in one of his appearances, but that runs counter to his massively anti-mutant stance in other stories (of course, it's not impossible he could belong to a group while still being bigoted against them), and, more importantly, to what we've seen of his powers in other appearances - noticably, in one story we see him with his cybernetic arm detached, making it clear that it is mechanical and not a biological mutant power. Plus he got kidnapped by Mechadoom, who was collecting cyborgs. So the evidence suggests he is a cyborg, and his claim to be a mutant is simply down to him having a tenuous grip on sanity.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:26 PM

  Angelicknight wrote:

Is American Ace Perry Wade or Perry Webb i have seen it listed as both in several places?

  captainswift wrote:

It's Perry Wade in every single comic appearance. The Handbook incorrectly calls him Perry Webb consistently. I think the incorrect information was originated in the Marvel Mystery Handbook, but I suppose it could have come from an earlier internet source. A very unfortunate mistake, imo.

Yes, it should be Wade. The writer who wrote his original entry was also a frequent contributor to Jess Nevins' site, which may be why the error is there too.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:27 PM
Additional name-related one. Less outright wrong so much as misspelt and incomplete.

Wiki sites list former Iron Man paramour as Bethany Ann Cabe (sometimes noting she was formerly Van Tilburg). She's not. She's Bethany Anne Camilla Cabe van Tilberg.

Taking this piece by piece: It is Anne, not Ann. NB - her handbook entry missed out the Anne because at the time of writing we'd not found it mentioned in comics, and so couldn't be sure that it wasn't just another internet invention, but we subsequently located it, given in a text box in Iron Man #141.

Camilla comes from Iron Man #300 - no reason to believe it is incorrect.

van Tilberg vs Van Tilburg. Her husband was German, and normally the van is small v in such cases. Tilberg is the spelling used when we first learned his name in Iron Man #128; it became Tilburg in Iron Man #152, but it reverted to Tilberg in #208. Thus, even though Update '89 used Tilburg, Tilberg is the correct spelling and Tilburg the anomaly. And it is still her legal surname - she might use Cabe, but she never divorced her husband (she was trying to get him to sign divorce papers but he wasn't co-operating and then he died before they were signed).
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:46 PM
"Kaptain Briton and Sat-Yr-9 (a.k.a. Sat-Yr-Nin) are from Earth-839"
As I noted, while this is now an error, it's an understandable one. In Captain Britain #14 (1986) Captain UK is sent to replace the deceased Kaptain Briton on his world, where she leads the overthrowing of Sat-Yr-Nin. In Excalibur #44 (1991) Captain UK is identified by her fellow Corps members as being the member assigned to Earth-839. Hence Kaptain Briton must have come from Earth-839, right? Except...in Excalibur #56 (by the same writer, Alan Davis), Kaptain Briton is explicitly identified as having originated on Earth-794. So we have a conflict. However, the latter number is explicitly applied to Kaptain Briton, while the former was only confirmed as being Captain UK's assignment at the time of Excalibur #44. It wasn't said to be Kaptain Briton's home. Captain UK had already been reassigned once, from her native 238 to Kaptain Briton's world. There's no reason she could not have been reassigned a second time after completing her mission to overthrow Sat-Yr-Nin. Indeed, given in Sat-Yr-Nin's world had a British-based dictatorship ruling an empire of unconfirmed size (but advanced enough to have interdimensional travel, so ruling the whole world wouldn't be out the question), while 839 is noted by Captain UK as having a "Red Monarch" and "Princess Madonna", I'd argue that's circumstantial evidence against them being the same world. Totalitarian regimes tend not to leave alive things like royal families, who could be used to rally resistance against them (cf Russia following the revolution).

Regardless, there was a definite conflict between 839 and 794. The handbooks had to weigh up the options and decide which was right, and, based on the above reasoning, the handbooks confirmed that Kaptain Briton was from 794, and that Captain UK had, indeed, been reassigned from 794 to a new posting on 839.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:46 PM
In the same vein. "Captain England is from Earth-9 / Earth-9 is also known as the Hub."
This comes from Saturnyne being identified as a native of Earth-9 when she attended Merlyn's funeral, combined with Saturnyne being tried on Captain England's native world, the Hub. However, this assumes Saturnyne worked in the same reality she was born in. Many people do not work in the same town they were born in. Many don't even work in their native country. So if interdimensional travel was readily available, it's not unreasonable to assume people might well find employment away from their native reality. And indeed, now we often see her working from Otherworld, which definitely isn't her native realm.

So, we've established there is no guarantee that the Hub is Earth-9. But is there actual evidence to suggest it isn't?

Yes.

We have how Captain England introduces Captain Albion of Earth-523 - he identifies her as being from the "Earth next door." How do you define "next door"? If it was houses in a street, and she lived in number 523, you'd assume he lived in either 522 or 524. Circumstantial evidence, not absolute proof, but an interesting comment.

Somewhat more tellingly. At the end of Merlyn's funeral, Roma sends Saturnyne "home." Note that "home" does not equal "native reality" - my home is not in my native country, let alone my town of birth. Saturnyne apparently ends up on the Hub, as she visits her successor / usurper Mandragon, who you'd assume would be based there, and she forces him to restore her to power by threatening to release a Mad Jim Jaspers clone "Here. On your world." Notice, "your" not "our" - her wording does not suggest they both hail from the same reality.

So, no reason to assume Earth-9 is the Hub, simply based on Saturnyne originating on the former and working on the latter. Evidence that Saturnyne is not from the same reality as Mandragon, which in turn strengthens the belief that the Omniversal Majestrix/Majestor is not necessarily native to the Hub. Evidence that Saturnyne considers Mandragon's native reality as "home", and the only place she is like to consider home other than her native reality would be the Hub, a fact supported by then-Majestor Mandragon's presence there. And at least a hint that the Hub could be either Earth-522 or 524. Again, the handbooks weighed the options, and confirmed that Captain England was from Earth-522, a.k.a. the Hub.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:47 PM
Incorrect: "The handbooks take big liberties with continuity / make up stuff for no good reason. For example, they made up some stuff about Honey Lemon pulling a second Sunpyre out her purse when there was no reason to believe there was a second Sunpyre."
Truth: The handbooks can and do add new info. That's always been within their remit - just check out the original series to discover lots of names that originated there, relatives, origin information, etc. The newer handbooks still do that, though more sparingly, and we don't make up stuff for the heck of it. Anything beyond getting names (usually to allow easier clarifications between multiple people who share a codename), birth places, education and the like is only done for clarifying continuity conflicts (X was dead, now he's alive with no explanation) or because a writer actively chose to volunteer the information (in which case, it would be rude to ignore it, though it still needs editorial approval to be added).

In the specific example of Sunpyre and Honey Lemon information, when the Big Hero 6 handbook entry was written, the first draft was sent to the editor (Mike Marts) and writer (Scott Lobdell) of the story where the team had appeared for their feedback. Though there was a mystery hanging over Sunpyre being there when she'd seemed to die, no request was made for detailed background information to clarify this (we were expecting "it is the original somehow revived / it is a new one / leave it a mystery for someone else to tackle down the line"). However, the feedback informed us that Honey Lemon pulled another version of Sunpyre from her purse. So, it falls entirely into the category of "anything beyond [basic biographical or continuity clarifying information] tends to have been actively volunteered by the writers of the characters in question" that I mentioned above. And, in regards to "nor had Honey Lemon shown the ability to pull people from her purse" - since Scott was the person who created Honey Lemon, he's the person best placed to decide the limits of her powers and whether or not she is able to pull people from her purse.
 
 
 
 
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 9:37 am  #8


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Additional historical text from Comixfan/CxPulp:
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:48 PM
New one. A large number of sites think this member of the Corps
http://www.psysdomain.com/corps/lordgoldstar.html
is Lord Goldstar. He's not. When he says "Lord Goldstar, rescue our lady." he's not talking in the third person and identifying himself. He's issuing a request to another of the Corps members to get the injured Linda McQuillan to safety.

At least one other site thinks the guy next to him, firing the energy blast from his helmet, is Lord Goldstar. Here's another shot of that guy, this time from the front
http://images.wikia.com/marveldataba...th-7123%29.jpg
However, that's not Lord Goldstar either - that is Flight Leader, previously seen in Uncanny X-Men #462.
http://www.comicvine.com/flight-leader/29-7921/
The helmet is very distinctive.

So who is Lord Goldstar? The only other Corps members visible are the injured Captain UK (the "lady" being rescued), Justicer Bull, Captain Empire and a generic Corps member way in the background. The script is clear - Lord Goldstar was intended to be the Corps member physically pulling Linda to safety. Since Justicer Bull replaced Lord Goldstar in the final version, and since we know that it (a) isn't the guy speaking and (b) isn't the one rescuing Linda nor either of the other two closest members, then it is either the guy at the back of panel, or, more likely, another Corps member off panel who the cyclopean Corps member thought was close behind him (hence tasking him specifically with rescuing Linda).
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:49 PM
Another example of reading but not comprehending. According to some sites (not so many as originally, thanks to some work getting it cleaned up where I could), the time-travelling Doctor's foe Beep the Meep, who debuted in the Marvel Dr. Who Weekly, has a brother Larry. This originated on Wikipedia, where, if you check the history of the Beep the Meep page, you will find a point where two anonymous posters had an edit war, apparently slagging one another off. One changed the page to say "Jennifer is a Meep too" and the other responded by removing that and replacing it with "Larry the Meep is Beep's brother." They went back and forth adding and removing those two sentences for a bit, before finally getting bored and moving on, leaving the latter sentence in place unchallenged for a while. Naturally, people eager to build up their rival Wiki sites, wanting to grow quickly rather than accurately, simply lifted their information from Wikipedia rather than checking the actual comics. And lo, the legend of the non-existent Larry the Meep spread.

It is worth noting that Beep did claim to have a brother at one point. When he was on trial for war crimes, he played innocent and insisted the cops really wanted his twin brother. However, no name was given, and, since Beep was lying about not being the culprit and deception is one of his main tools, he was almost certainly making it up when he claimed to have a sibling, let alone a twin.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:50 PM
False: Battlestar is/was a member of the Garrison.
Truth: Battlestar was never a member of the Garrison.

This goes to the Penance miniseries where we saw the Garrison, which consisted of two of Battlestar's former Intruders teammates, Fin and Man-Eater, alongside non-descript military personnel. One panel after Penance trounced the assembled forces shows a leg with a knee pad that looked like a miscolored Battlestar knee-pad, leading someone to conclude that Battlestar was one of the Garrison. While the evidence (similar knee-pad, former allies of Battlestar) did allow for the possibility, assuming it definitely was him was a major assumption. Battlestar had last been seen opposing the Initiative; it wasn't colored correctly for him; most tellingly, why include him as present yet not bother to show more of him than one leg? Anyway, the handbooks checked with those behind the Penance mini, and it was confirmed that the leg did not belong to Battlestar, and that he was not a member of the Garrison.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:51 PM
False: Wild Child is Scottish.
Truth: Wild Child is Canadian.

Several sites online list Wild Child's place of birth as "somewhere near Ross and Cromarty, Scotland." However, his place of birth in the handbooks, the only place it has been given as far as we can determine, is "somewhere in Canada." It's certainly not impossible that we've missed a reference in a story that says otherwise, but (1) the handbook writer who handled his entries read all the issues he appeared in and should, in theory, have spotted any such mention, and (2) tellingly, "somewhere near Ross and Cromarty, Scotland" is EXACTLY what Wolfsbane's handbook entries give for her PoB. So I suspect that what happened is that an online site copied the original handbook entries onto their site, and mistakenly cut and pasted part of Wolfsbane's entry into Wild Child's, then the internet being the internet, others blindly copy-pasted it and spread it across the web.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:51 PM
False: Nuklo is slow / of below average intelligence.
Truth: Nuklo is of above average intelligence.

This one comes from Nuklo being portrayed as having a childlike mind in his earliest appearances, despite having an adult body. BUT...
when we first meet Nuklo, he was being released from a version of suspended animation that allowed his body to mature but gave his mind no stimuli; he'd been placed in this within hours of his birth. Naturally, he emerged acting like a newborn child. Despite having the world experience of a child less than a day old, he began speaking whole words within hours of being released. If your child begins speaking words, even just mimicing what others are saying without understanding the meaning, the same day they are born, that's not an indicator of below average intelligence.

When he was being held at Project Pegasus, he was seen acting more like a toddler. Again, some readers viewed this as evidence of slow mental development - but given that these stories were set less than two years after his "birth" from suspended animation, Marvel time, being at toddler development is perfectly normal, especially when you consider teaching him was literally hazardous to the health.

He got cured of his excess radiation a little under a year later, Marvel time, by which point he was learning to write - so, at less than three years of development, he's grasping the basics of writing. Now, here we get the most solid "evidence" of a mental issue, as the scientist caring for Nuklo states Nuklo was suffering from autism, which said scientist was trying to "break through". But hang on - (1) said scientist was no expert on child development or how brains work, but instead villainous nuclear scientist Isbisa in disguise. He's not qualified to make such a diagnosis, and he has reason to lie as he's trying to hurt his old foe the Whizzer; (2) autism can't be cured, as Isbisa seemed to be saying, which again puts a black mark against his knowing what he is talking about; (3) if you have an adult male who is still acting like a toddler, you might well assume he is autistic, but it again fails to take into account that while Nuklo's body was adult, his mind had only been active for less than three years, and his mental development is actually noticably ahead of the game for a three year old.

The next time we see Nuklo he's been out of suspended animation for twelve years real world, which equates to somewhere between three and four years Marvel time. By this point he is living on his own and he's passed high school equivalency. Hang on - less than four years old and he's graduated from high school? How does that equate to mentally slow? Emotionally, he's somewhat childlike still, but again, four years old - what should we expect? And, tellingly, Nuklo's first handbook entry states he is of above average intelligence, concurring with the evidence to that point.

In his last few appearances, with the V-Battalion, Nuklo remained a man of few words, but we shouldn't take that as evidence of slow mental processes. A brief text piece in Citizen V and the V-Battalion: Everlasting claims he is slow of mind and has the acuity of a ten year old, but the evidence of past stories trumps that, and the comment seems to be a misconception again overlooking that his body is older than his mind. Even if you took it to be accurate, and overlooked Nuklo having already passed high school equivalency and now operating in a fighting team using advanced tactics, it would still be saying that someone who only entered the world less than seven years ago Marvel time has the mental acuity of a ten year old - which again, is ahead of where he should be.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:52 PM
Incorrect: The real name of Petra of the Deadly Genesis X-Men is Petra Kristensen.
Truth: Petra is her codename. We don't know any part of her real name.

Incorrect: The Kid Who Collects Spider-Man is Tim Hammond.
Truth: The Kid Who Collects Spider-Man is Tim Harrison.

Thanks to Wikipedia for once again starting and perpetuating bad info. Petra's dodgy surname got removed from Wiki after a while, though not before it had spread like a virus across other sites too lazy to read an actual comic. Tim's inaccurate surname has remained unchallenged on Wikipedia for five years, thus debunking Wiki's claims of "we spot and fix errors quickly."
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:53 PM
Another old one, prompted by a few recent queries sent to the handbooks and to some posts I've seen today on other forums.
False: "Hercules once pulled Manhattan Island back into place after it had been shifted from its foundations."
Truth: Pawns of They Who Wield Power attacked Manhattan with a device that was intended to cause earthquakes. Hercules braced the island's foundations with his own body, and thus minimised the damage. He later embellished this tale to claim that the villains, who became dubbed the City-Stealers because of the plot Herc attributed to them, had actually severed Manhattan from its foundations and floated it out to sea intending to hold the island to ransom, but that he, Hercules, had personally and individually pulled the island back into place via two large chains.

The details: This one originates with Marvel Team-Up #28, which does, indeed, depict Hercules pulling Manhattan into place with a pair of chains

However, even within the issue itself, doubt is cast as to whether events really transpired as shown. The final panel includes an editorial note stating that what was shown is what "merry Gerry (Conway)" said happened, and "we're not sure if we believe it, either."

A few years later the story was referenced back to in Incredible Hulk #241 when They Who Wield Power copped to having been behind the City Stealers, and mention the events of Marvel Team-Up.

Prince Rey notes that Hercules braced himself against the foundations of Manhattan and absorbed the shock. Doing this would have meant that Manhattan wasn't ever split away from its foundations as MTU #28 claimed, assuming that had even been the plan to begin with, and Rey further mentions that Hercules has "since boasted of his feat in more grandiose terms."

Now, lest anyone claim (as I've seen at least one person do on a forum online recently) that this panel doesn't specifically identify the Manhattan pulling scene and that Rey doesn't specifically say that was what Hercules was boasting about, and that we don't actually know what the writer was trying to tell us with that dialogue, I've personally asked Roger Stern, writer of the latter comic, to confirm what Rey was on about. This is his reply, word for word:

"Yes, the reference in Incredible Hulk #241 is the explanation for what really happened in Marvel Team-Up #28.

Hercules never towed Manhattan back into place because it had never been torn loose from bedrock. He had, instead, saved the city -- with a little help from Spider-Man's scientific direction -- in the manner revealed in the Hulk story.

Of course, that wasn't dramatic enough for Herc who padded his resume with a wildly exaggerated explanation. (As I recall, there was even a disclaimer to that effect at the end of the Team-Up story.)

There were a lot of problems with that Team-Up story, of course, the main one being that islands don't float. And even if there had been some outlandish explanation given for how it could float -- and there wasn't -- a loose-floating Manhattan would be too wide to fit through the Verrazano Narrows. Also, in the course of the story, Hercules somehow supposedly turned the island around so that he put it back with the NYC Battery facing north towards the Bronx. Mildly amusing, maybe ... but mainly ludicrous.

The whole mess was recounted in the Marvel No-Prize Book.

If anyone believed that Marvel Team-Up #28 was the true story ... well ... both Geology and Geography (not to mention, Physics) says they're wrong."

Sure enough, as Roger notes, the Marvel No-Prize Book does cover this in both the 1982 and 2007 editions:


The Official Marvel Index to Marvel Team-Up also confirms this with a very specific comment stating unequivocally that Hercules never pulled Manhattan as the issue showed, but simply boasted about doing so. Subsequent handbook entries also confirm it, as recently as the They Who Wield Power entry in the hardcovers.
[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:54 PM
False: Archer of the XSE joined X-Factor.
Truth: Archer was an ally of X-Factor's former members after debuting in X-Factor #140, during a period when X-Factor was disbanded. In X-Factor #149, when Havok decided to reform the team, Archer, along with fellow XSE members Greystone and Fixx, was offered membership. However, unlike them, he declined. Hence, not a member of X-Factor, even briefly.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:55 PM
Since I see this is still making the rounds on various sites:

"Psylocke's middle name is Gloriana/Psylocke's full name is Elizabeth Gloriana Braddock."

Nope. In the House of M reality, where Psylocke was a member of the British Royal Family, she did get called Elisabeth (sic) Gloriana Braddock. Gloriana was one of the titles used by Queen Elizabeth I; she'd have been called Elizabeth Gloriana on occasions, despite it not being a surname, so in the same vein there's no certainty Gloriana was even a proper name for Psylocke, but even if it was, it would only apply to House of M Psylocke. As of the moment 616 Betsy has no known middle names. That could, of course, change, especially if a writer does their research by looking at the wrong fan site and unwittingly makes the fan misconception canon, but as of now Gloriana is not one of 616 Psylocke's names.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 04:57 PM
I have another wrong name to add to the list, which I uncovered while checking on this - the second Crimson Commando is not, as some sites claim, Shelley Warkworth. That was fake info added to Wikipedia by the notorious fake namer "Starspangledkiwi", which other plagiarising, don't do their own research, sites simply copied and spread.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 05:02 PM
New one, which falls more into the "people remember the original story and missed the retcon" category rather than people getting stuff outright wrong - in other words, it is still wrong, but was correct, so it is somewhat understandable why people are making the mistake.

"Forge's mentor, the shaman Naze, fell victim to a Dire Wraith that killed him and stole his form, only to be taken over in turn by the Adversary."

What instead proved to be the case is that during the Dire Wraith attack on Forge's Dallas home, Naze, well aware the greater threat of the Adversary was present and that the Adversary was planning to take over Naze's body, let a Wraith assume his form so that the Adversary would get the wrong target. Naze apparently let the Wraith think it had killed him first (he later demonstrated the ability to reform unharmed after being burned to ashes, so he might have let it actually slay his body temporarily, but equally he might just have used illusions to dupe it), so that the Adversary would get that version of events from the Wraith's mind. Naze later turned up alive and well in X-Factor. It might be technically correct that the Wraith killed him, but if so then it was only very temporarily and as part of Naze's plan (he wasn't beaten by it), and it definitely got faked out as far as thinking it had absorbed his mind and soul (Wraiths do absorb the latter, as confirmed in Rom #72).
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 05:04 PM
Spelling errors:
Jaime Braddock - nope, should be Jamie, as in "an informal version of James"

The X-Man Rouge - nope, that's Rogue. Rouge, pronounced more like Rooj, is a shade of red, while Rogue, prounced like Row-g, is a someone who breaks the rules.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 05:08 PM
Wrong: The computer Mastermind killed Hauptmann Englande.
Correct: The computer Mastermind tortured Hauptmann Englande. Tortured him really badly. However, its not certain that Mastermind actually killed him.

Wrong: Albion took over leadership of what was left of the Corps at the end of X-Men: Die By the Sword.
Correct: Saturnyne offered him the role, but he turned her down, as he felt he needed to honour his word to Pete Wisdom and return to 616 to finish off the rest of his prison sentence. Saturnyne promised to get him out of it, but he still left with Excalibur when they went home.

Did Saturnyne later get him out of the sentence? We don't know, but the next time we saw the Corps Captain Britain was back in charge, so if Albion did take over he didn't keep the job for long.
 
Stuart V
12-14-2013, 05:12 PM
And from this point, now that I've reposted all the places where I laid out the various corrections in detail, I'll let Andy take over reposting the rest of the posts.
 
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 11:21 am  #9


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Additional historical text from Comixfan:

Andy E. Nystrom
May 8, 2012, 04:08 pm
One more that I previously mentioned in one of the Wiki threads was Yellowjacket and Swordsman remaining among the living after Chaos War, which I wish in YJ's case was true but isn't. Also, while not actually stated as such (and the Talk section for her entry has it right), her Wiki entry makes her look black.

Zach Kinkead
May 8, 2012, 11:09 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

One more that I previously mentioned in one of the Wiki threads was Yellowjacket and Swordsman remaining among the living after Chaos War, which I wish in YJ's case was true but isn't.

Their fate at the end of that mini seemed kind of ambiguous. They didn’t die (again) like the rest of their undead comrades. I’d assume that they went back to being dead like the Chaos King’s army and the undead civilians and heroes if not for that final scene when they fly off*. If Alpha Flight made it back then I see no reason Yellowjacket and Swordsman can’t.

*Unless you plan on crashing it, you don’t need (or want) to be in a jet when you’re trying to get to the afterlife.


Andy E. Nystrom
May 9, 2012, 03:02 am

  Zach Kinkead wrote:

Their fate at the end of that mini seemed kind of ambiguous. They didn’t die (again) like the rest of their undead comrades. I’d assume that they went back to being dead like the Chaos King’s army and the undead civilians and heroes if not for that final scene when they fly off*. If Alpha Flight made it back then I see no reason Yellowjacket and Swordsman can’t.

I agree about the ambiguity as written, but the official word from Tom Brevoort is that they're still dead.

http://www.formspring.me/TomBrevoort/q/196977370341607854

Unknown: "So how come Yellowjacket and Swordsman are apparently still dead even though they were alive after Chaos War? Rita especially disappoints me because I think that there's more freedom for someone to do more with her given how little she's been in."

Tom Brevoort: "They weren't alive after CHAOS WAR. They returned to the grave along with everybody else who was resurrected."

In another post he says he made the command that they stay dead, so this isn't the word of an observer but the actual decision maker.

I think it was a mistake to kill off Rita and I agree that Chaos War#5 could have been better written (it's telling that I actually had to go online to figure out their fates, something that should have been clear from the story). And Hercules resurrecting fellow Avengers makes more sense than Hercules resurrecting a team he had minimal encounters with (and I say this as a Canadian myself). But there you have it.


Stuart V
May 9, 2012, 04:05 am

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

One more that I previously mentioned in one of the Wiki threads was Yellowjacket and Swordsman remaining among the living after Chaos War, which I wish in YJ's case was true but isn't. Also, while not actually stated as such (and the Talk section for her entry has it right), her Wiki entry makes her look black.

Agreed and updated. I'll leave off about the image, unless it starts to cause the spread of the misconception that she is black.

Additiona: New one. The Morlock Bliss is being identified as Barbara Stacey on a number of sites. This is false info originally added to Wikipedia as far as I can see, and thanks to the Wiki tradition of blind plagiarism it has spread. I've now removed it from Wikipedia. Wiki prides itself on swiftly spotting bad info and getting it removed, so naturally this has been on virtually uncontested since 2008. I say virtually, because someone (I think it might have been me, but I've cleaned dodgy stuff of Wikipedia so often I lose track of all of the edits) removed it in Feb 2011, only for another person to helpfully reinstate it a few months later.

Michael Regan
May 9, 2012, 08:32 am

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Tom Brevoort: "They weren't alive after CHAOS WAR. They returned to the grave along with everybody else who was resurrected."

That is a pretty broad stroke comment. Weren't some characters left alive after Chaos War, like Alpha Flight making his comment inaccurate?

Andy E. Nystrom
May 9, 2012, 12:00 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

That is a pretty broad stroke comment. Weren't some characters left alive after Chaos War, like Alpha Flight making his comment inaccurate?

I think Alpha Flight was the one exception. I understand it from a meta standpoint but I still haven't figured that one out from a story perspective. Regardless, in the specific case of Yellowjacket and Swordsman returning, he also said, "I didn't vote so much as commanded." http://www.formspring.me/TomBrevoort/q/233580705257370249
It wouldn't at all surprise me if at some later point someone came along and say they did survive (either intentionally or because they used Wikipedia as a guide), but we can assume that they're still officially dead at least while Brevoort is in a position at Marvel to make that call.

gorby
May 9, 2012, 06:24 pm
Some errors come from comics or handbooks.

For example, Moonboy/Moon Boy/Moon-Boy was under Moon Boy in the Update 89 Handbook, but under Moonboy in the Master Edition.

You have other cases like Plant-Man/Plantman.

Stuart V
May 9, 2012, 07:00 pm

gorby wrote:

Some errors come from comics or handbooks.

For example, Moonboy/Moon Boy/Moon-Boy was under Moon Boy in the Update 89 Handbook, but under Moonboy in the Master Edition.

You have other cases like Plant-Man/Plantman.

Not disputing that some of the spelling errors either originate or have been perpetuated in handbooks, and ones like those above get repeatedly misspelled in the comics. That's one reason for listing the correct spellings. Many characters have had varied spellings over the years, but, despite what Wikipedia seems to think (I've had arguments with Wikipedians over it), that doesn't make the variations legitimate spellings, any more than it would in the real world - if I kept writing Jak Kirbee instead of Jack Kirby (to pick a semi-random example), nobody would think the former had become a valid spelling of his name, no matter how often I wrote it or how many other people copied my error. Normally first spelling is considered correct - the one exception I can think of off-hand is Moira MacTaggert, who was MacTaggart initially.

ToddCam
May 10, 2012, 06:56 am
You left out the erroneous second Deadly Ernest.

Not Marvel related, but I found on Wikipedia that someone had added to the article of Ariel of The Little Mermaid that she had divorced Prince Eric and married a Tom White, who fathered her daughter. Wow.

Stuart V
May 10, 2012, 07:36 am

ToddCam wrote:

You left out the erroneous second Deadly Ernest.

Not Marvel related, but I found on Wikipedia that someone had added to the article of Ariel of The Little Mermaid that she had divorced Prince Eric and married a Tom White, who fathered her daughter. Wow.

I was going to say that the decidely dodgy second Deadly Ernest isn't really something people "keep getting wrong" so much as evidence against Wikipedia's hilariously inaccurate claims of being accurate and swiftly catching errors, because I didn't think he'd spread to other sites. But a quick Google search turns up around 30 websites, most but not all purely Wiki mirror sites, which mention him, so I'll add him to the list.

Stuart V
May 13, 2012, 01:14 pm
Added note about "Marvel Omniverse", a frequent misnomer.

Stuart V
May 13, 2012, 05:59 pm
A marginally more understandable error, since it originates from the comics and not the internet, and is one of those errors which falls into "you've only read a part of the story, and so don't know the full facts" category.

There are several sites which claim Captain America is Steven Grant Rogers. He's not - he is simply Steven Rogers. And here's the full explanation why:

In 1978's Captain America #225, Cap sees Professor Mason Harding for help dealing with amnesia about his first 18 or so years of life. Harding's machine breaks through the veil over his memories and he recalls a childhood in Maryland as Steven Grant Rogers, son of diplomat Walter Rogers and with an elder brother Michael whose death at Pearl Harbor subsequently inspired Cap to enlist. However, in time Cap comes to doubt these memories because he was active way before Pearl Harbor (he helped found the Invaders within a day or two of that event) and because he's getting conflicting memory flashes of growing up in New York clashing with the crystal clear, highly detailed memories of his Maryland childhood. So in 1980's Captain America #247 he visits SHIELD, and Dum Dum Dugan tracks down Steve's old army footlocker. In it he finds his old journal, and a note that on Christmas Eve 1941 his army superior, aware Steve was due to go overseas with the Invaders and thus risk being captured, summoned Steve. To prevent him spilling vital secrets should he be captured, they plant false memories to confuse any interrogators. They introduce him to diplomat Walter Rogers, who is NOT related to Steve, but whose two sons, Michael and Grant, both died in Pearl Harbor. Steve spends the next couple of days having false memories plugged into him, using the late Grant Rogers' life as the basis for Steve's fake one. Dr. Harding's memory probe triggered the preprogrammed false memories. And here's Steve's exact quote from Captain America #247, p17, panel 1

"My middle name's not Grant...I never had a middle name!"

Edit: And another one, which I just spotted. Otherworld's human/dragon hybrid Sir Benedict has picked up the surname Englande out of some fan's fevered imagination. He is not Sir Benedict Englande - he is just Sir Benedict, no known surname.

Andy E. Nystrom
May 14, 2012, 12:07 am
Found another error, this time not on Wiki. This has also come up in these forums: that Marvel owns human Rom. Here's one source:
http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/archive/index.php/t-43337.html

It would be great if it were true but to my understanding it's not the case.

Michael Regan
May 14, 2012, 08:29 am

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Found another error, this time not on Wiki. This has also come up in these forums: that Marvel owns human Rom. Here's one source:
http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/archive/index.php/t-43337.html

It would be great if it were true but to my understanding it's not the case.

Technically it is true, as long as he is not refered to as Rom as well.

Stuart V
May 16, 2012, 08:34 pm
Incorrect: "Jetstream is Haroun ibn Sallah al-Rashid"
Correct: Jetstream is Haroum ibn Sallah al-Rashid. Haroum, not Haroun.

Angelicknight
May 17, 2012, 05:04 pm
Is American Ace Perry Wade or Perry Webb i have seen it listed as both in several places?

captainswift
May 17, 2012, 05:19 pm

  Angelicknight wrote:

Is American Ace Perry Wade or Perry Webb i have seen it listed as both in several places?

It's Perry Wade in every single comic appearance. The Handbook incorrectly calls him Perry Webb consistently. I think the incorrect information was originated in the Marvel Mystery Handbook, but I suppose it could have come from an earlier internet source. A very unfortunate mistake, imo.

Angelicknight
May 17, 2012, 05:29 pm

  captainswift wrote:

It's Perry Wade in every single comic appearance. The Handbook incorrectly calls him Perry Webb consistently. I think the incorrect information was originated in the Marvel Mystery Handbook, but I suppose it could have come from an earlier internet source. A very unfortunate mistake, imo.

It was originated earlier than the Handbook entry i seen it on Jess Nevins site A Guide To Marvel's Golden Age Characters well before the Handbook entry.

Stuart V
May 17, 2012, 05:48 pm
Yes, it should be Wade. The writer who wrote his original entry was also a frequent contributor to Jess Nevins' site, which may be why the error is there too.

A new one: "Bushwacker is a mutant." This originates from him being called a mutant in one of his appearances, but that runs counter to his massively anti-mutant stance in other stories (of course, it's not impossible he could belong to a group while still being bigoted against them), and, more importantly, to what we've seen of his powers in other appearances - noticably, in one story we see him with his cybernetic arm detached, making it clear that it is mechanical and not a biological mutant power. Plus he got kidnapped by Mechadoom, who was collecting cyborgs. So the evidence suggests he is a cyborg, and his claim to be a mutant is simply down to him having a tenuous grip on sanity.

Stuart V
May 18, 2012, 09:46 am
Additional name-related one. Less outright wrong so much as misspelt and incomplete.

Wiki sites list former Iron Man paramour as Bethany Ann Cabe (sometimes noting she was formerly Van Tilburg). She's not. She's Bethany Anne Camilla Cabe van Tilberg.

Taking this piece by piece: It is Anne, not Ann. NB - her handbook entry missed out the Anne because at the time of writing we'd not found it mentioned in comics, and so couldn't be sure that it wasn't just another internet invention, but we subsequently located it, given in a text box in Iron Man #141.

Camilla comes from Iron Man #300 - no reason to believe it is incorrect.

van Tilberg vs Van Tilburg. Her husband was German, and normally the van is small v in such cases. Tilberg is the spelling used when we first learned his name in Iron Man #128; it became Tilburg in Iron Man #152, but it reverted to Tilberg in #208. Thus, even though Update '89 used Tilburg, Tilberg is the correct spelling and Tilburg the anomaly. And it is still her legal surname - she might use Cabe, but she never divorced her husband (she was trying to get him to sign divorce papers but he wasn't co-operating and then he died before they were signed).

Additional: not so much one people keep getting wrong (they do, but it is semi-understandable), but another example of why numbering characters who share a codename is a bad idea. The "original" Spymaster apparently died in Iron Man #220. A replacement, eventually posthumously identified as Nathan Lemon, debuted in Iron Man #255. After arranging Lemon's demise, Sinclair Abbot became Spymaster. Most sites list them as Spymaster I (the original), Spymaster II (Lemon) and Spymaster III (Abbot).

But then, in Dark Reign: Made Men, we learned that the original never died. The Spymaster slain in Iron Man #220 was one of his agents, now identified as Mark Sharen. Which makes Sharen Spymaster II if you are numbering them, Lemon III and Abbot IV. At least until another retcon reveals yet another predecessor (e.g. the "original's" mentor, for example), at which point all the numbers become wrong again.

Using a number to clarify between characters who share a codename = bad idea.

Eduardo M.
May 18, 2012, 03:14 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

Additional: not so much one people keep getting wrong (they do, but it is semi-understandable), but another example of why numbering characters who share a codename is a bad idea. The "original" Spymaster apparently died in Iron Man #220. A replacement, eventually posthumously identified as Nathan Lemon, debuted in Iron Man #255. After arranging Lemon's demise, Sinclair Abbot became Spymaster. Most sites list them as Spymaster I (the original), Spymaster II (Lemon) and Spymaster III (Abbot).

But then, in Dark Reign: Made Men, we learned that the original never died. The Spymaster slain in Iron Man #220 was one of his agents, now identified as Mark Sharen. Which makes Sharen Spymaster II if you are numbering them, Lemon III and Abbot IV. At least until another retcon reveals yet another predecessor (e.g. the "original's" mentor, for example), at which point all the numbers become wrong again.

Using a number to clarify between characters who share a codename = bad idea.

This is like a repeat of the Hurricane mess. And whats frustrating about that is it started with an actual Marvel Comic, not someone making a guess in a Wiki entry.

Michael Regan
May 18, 2012, 05:19 pm
I typically avoid numbering as well, but numbering follows chronological appearances doesn't it? I think I missed something in the explaination...

Madison Carter
May 18, 2012, 06:01 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

I typically avoid numbering as well, but numbering follows chronological appearances doesn't it? I think I missed something in the explaination...

If you mean chronological in order of actual appearance, no, because otherwise we'd end up with things like T'Challa being Black Panther I and his dad being Black Panther II and HIS dad being Black Panther III...and that's just really not a good idea.

If you mean chronological in order of where they are placed in an in-universe timeline, that gets messy too, especially as more Golden Age and retcon characters are officially brought into the fold. Adrian Toomes was generally considered Vulture I for decades in the original Handbooks...but where does that leave the various Vultures from the Old West and WW2 comics?

And then we get into alt-reality counterparts.

The only time I ever advocated using the numeral system in one of our profiles was with the Scourge of the Underworld piece, simply because we didn't have the luxury of real names or classifiers for several of them, including the most prominent one. Once they got to Dekker, Bloodstain and Caprice, it made it easier, but the first three prominent Scourges...not so much.

Stuart V
May 18, 2012, 06:03 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

I typically avoid numbering as well, but numbering follows chronological appearances doesn't it? I think I missed something in the explaination...

Mark Sharen is the chronologically second Spymaster to have appeared. It's just that we didn't know he wasn't "Spymaster I" until quite recently. So "Spymaster II" and "Spymaster III" are actually the third and fourth Spymasters to appear, chronologically speaking.

Edit: Plus, what Madison said.

Michael Regan
May 18, 2012, 06:28 pm
I always thought it was chronological, regardless of who was really first in their own, in-universe chronology, ignoring other reality counterparts. Regardless, I don't like the numbering concept anyway... unless there is no other way to distinguish between two characters with the same name.

Stuart V
May 18, 2012, 07:23 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

I always thought it was chronological, regardless of who was really first in their own, in-universe chronology, ignoring other reality counterparts.

As I noted, that still wouldn't solve the problem caused by Sharen. He was the second to appear, we just didn't know he wasn't the same guy as number one. So some people would say he was now Spymaster II, while others would say that since we only learned he wasn't Spymaster I after Spymaster III was introduced, then he should be Spymaster IV.

And that's the single biggest problem with numbering - it can only work as a way of clarifying which incarnation you mean if absolutely everyone is on the same page as to how they order characters, and if everyone knows about all versions (because if you don't know about the Golden Age Vultures, for instance, you'll not count them in your numbering).

And just to further illustrate it:
http://www.comixfan.net/forums/showthread.php?t=22600 - identifies T'Challa as Black Panther I, Black Panther II (T'Chaka), Black Panther III (Bashenga) and "Black Panter" (sic) IV (Kasper Cole). But then down the page you have Mesran and Monolith discussing the order and noting that Eric Killmonger used the alias before Kasper, making him IV and Kasper V. Except they all forgot Chanda, who was introduced in FF Unlimited #1, before Killmonger used the name. And Azzari the Wise and S'yan. And arguably some people would count Hellrazor, who impersonated BP, and the Sons of the Serpent Black Panther
http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix2/s...nt.htm#panther
And does Taskmaster's Black Panther robot count?
http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix4Ta...ers.htm#BLACKP
You might not count him, but that only works if absolutely no one else does.

Meanwhile on this site
http://www.uncannyxmen.net/db/issues...p?fldAuto=5543
Shuri is Black Panther III, which makes you wonder what happened to all the others introduced prior to her.
The same site says Killmonger is II
http://www.uncannyxmen.net/db/issues...p?fldAuto=3184
So much for Kasper or any of T'Challa's ancestors.
But whoops, because on the same site
http://www.uncannyxmen.net/db/issues...p?fldAuto=5429
we've got T'Challa listed as II (this isn't a jab at the site, it's simply an observation how hard it is to keep numbers straight even within a single site).

Then here
http://www.maelmill-insi.de/UHBMCC/appb5.htm
we have "Jasper" Kole listed as Black Panther II and T'Chaka as III and Shuri as IV.

Here
http://voicechasers.com/database/sho...hp?prodid=1647
T'Chaka is I and T'Challa is II, so there's not even a consensus that the first one introduced was I.

Even when a real name isn't available, I'd avoid using numbers unless there's absolutely no other option, or unless the number is actually part of the name.

Andy E. Nystrom
May 19, 2012, 01:19 am
Ah, now I'm remembering some issues I ran into when I attempted to do my Roman numeral lists in the 1990s.

At least one person wanted Hobgoblin (Imperial Guard member) removed from the Roman numeral list because he had a different motif than the other Hobgoblins.

Conversely, at least one person wanted the X-Babies included in the different versions of various X-Men member names, even those X-Babies who used a shortened nickname and not the full version of the adult codename.

Michael Regan
May 19, 2012, 09:34 am
Even when a real name isn't available, I'd avoid using numbers unless there's absolutely no other option, or unless the number is actually part of the name.
What other options are there if a real name is not available?

Madison Carter
May 19, 2012, 09:49 am

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

At least one person wanted Hobgoblin (Imperial Guard member) removed from the Roman numeral list because he had a different motif than the other Hobgoblins.

Another good example for that and other reasons. Do Lefty Donovan and Ned Leeds count as Hobgoblins? A lot of places list Kingsley as I and Macendale as II, but for over a decade, Leeds was "officially" I since we didn't know about Kingsley. And does the merged Macendale/Demogoblin version of Hobgoblin count as a separate entity from Macendale alone? And then there's the future reality Hobgoblin that encountered 616ers...where does that go? And if the Imperial Guard one doesn't count because of different motif, how *does* he get clarified in a system that uses numerals?

Another great example is Captain America. A lot of places list about seven "official" Caps - Rogers, Patriot, Spirit of 76, Grand Director, Roscoe, Walker and Barnes. A lot disregard Roscoe. Others include guys like Bob Russo and Scar Turpin. Some include Hawkeye, who was given the suit briefly by Stark, even though officially, he is not considered a former Cap by Marvel. Many others have posed as Cap over the years, and we've learned that in the years between WW2 and Cap's revival (oooh, speaking of, that reminds me of the Acrobat, who showed up as Cap shortly before the real Cap was revived, so where does that put him?) there were numerous government-sponsored "official" (in-story) Caps that served as trainers and morale boosters (and possibly more if any future writer is so inclined). Does Frank Castle count from his attempt to keep Cap's legacy going?

Stuart V
May 19, 2012, 10:29 am

  Michael Regan wrote:

What other options are there if a real name is not available?

You use other descriptors - reality designators for example, or, to go back to the various Black Panthers, you'd simply call the Sons of Serpent one the "Sons of the Serpent Black Panther" or "Black Panther (Sons of the Serpent)". If they used an alias, it can still be used as a descriptor, even though it was not their real name.

Even with these options you will still run into problems from time to time (you suddenly discover there were two SoS BPs, for example, neither one of whom got given a real name), but you hit far fewer.

Eduardo M.
May 19, 2012, 12:03 pm

  Madison Carter wrote:

(oooh, speaking of, that reminds me of the Acrobat, who showed up as Cap shortly before the real Cap was revived, so where does that put him?) Does Frank Castle count from his attempt to keep Cap's legacy going?

Would Acrobat count since he was impersonating Cap for his own nefarious goals and not seriously trying to take up the legacy? And did Castle ever refer to himself as Captain America or did he just take up the mask as a sign of respect?

Stuart V
May 19, 2012, 01:05 pm

  Eduardo M. wrote:

Would Acrobat count since he was impersonating Cap for his own nefarious goals and not seriously trying to take up the legacy? And did Castle ever refer to himself as Captain America or did he just take up the mask as a sign of respect?

With reference to your first question, most people would probably say no, but not some would count him. Again, that's the whole flaw in numbering - it can only work if absolutely everyone agrees who counts and in what order. Some don't count Scar and Russo, but both were genuine attempts to take up the legacy. Do imposters count? Some seem to - I think most would count the members of the Dark Avengers? Or how about Danny Rand - was he legitimately Daredevil for a while? On the other hand, if we count all imposters, then there are dozens of people who were Spider-Man, as a load of fellow heroes donned the costume to help him win a court case. Again, I'm not attempting to argue either way as to whether such imposters should be counted, or what criteria makes some imposters valid for counting but not others. I'm just listing more grey areas where not everyone will have the same opinion, and thus not everyone will be able to get the count the same.

And we're not even looking at Punisher - how many people sought to take up Castle's mantle when he was believed dead? And most within pages of one another in the same issue - which means ordering them chronologically is problematic. Sure, you could take it down to "Punisher II was the one who took up the name on p3, while Punisher III took up the name on p.5" but then you better hope everyone else has the issue in question so they can also know the order, rather than just knowing they all became Punisher in the same issue.

As for Castle and whether he used the name - that's not stopped those who want to count Isaiah Bradley. He wore the costume, but he never adopted the name; despite this, loads of people count him.

Andy E. Nystrom
May 19, 2012, 03:11 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

And we're not even looking at Punisher - how many people sought to take up Castle's mantle when he was believed dead? And most within pages of one another in the same issue - which means ordering them chronologically is problematic. Sure, you could take it down to "Punisher II was the one who took up the name on p3, while Punisher III took up the name on p.5" but then you better hope everyone else has the issue in question so they can also know the order, rather than just knowing they all became Punisher in the same issue.

And with the Punisher, there's also Galactus' Punisher robots. Do we count them? If so, do we treat them as a series or count each robot separately? If the latter and if we're going by in-story chronology and need to determine when each was first called the Punisher by someone who speaks English as opposed to some extra-terrestrial equivalent to Punisher, how do we figure that out?

At the time I made the Roman numeral lists, Hobgoblin was going by Shapeshifter so I think the argument was to sidestep the matter entirely and just call him Shapeshifter. Of course he's now back to Hobgoblin so that doesn't really help in the long run.

Stuart V
May 20, 2012, 07:00 pm
A couple more. Less outright wrong so much as "this is what happens when people only look at part of the evidence." This is something that I see handbook-detractors using all the time - they cite a single story that they feel contradicts what the handbooks say (frequently it is power level related - "feats" - but not always) and then use this to argue the handbooks are horribly inaccurate. But what they fail to take into account is that there are other stories, and what we see in one story may be clarified, expanded, contradicted or outright retconned by other stories they have overlooked. Prime examples of this are the full name of Steve Rogers (mentioned above), and of both Steve and Bucky's parents, whose names are given in one story, but a different story later retconned them (in Bucky's case, the name change came within the last year and supercedes what was in his last handbook entry in the Cap Handbook). On the "feats" front, Mark Gruenwald himself noted "if a particular use of a power in one instance does not make sense, then it may have to be dismissed as erroneous" - so to all those who go "if the comics and handbooks say different things, then the handbooks are automatically wrong", that's not the case - per Gruenwald, the handbooks CAN overrule the comics. Note - not always, and not even often, but they can.

None of the above is meant to disparage anyone who thinks they've spotted an error or omission based on something they've read - the handbooks can and do make mistakes. And if a given power gets used in a specific way multiple times but the handbooks say it doesn't work that way, then what the handbooks say may need to be re-evaluated. It doesn't bother me when people bring a perceived error to our attention, so we can look at the evidence and either agree and correct our mistake or explain why it isn't an error. It does annoy me when people sit on a random forum or website and boast "look at what it says in this one story! The Handbooks are wrong!" because a lot of the time the people who say that are operating on incomplete information, and those people are not providing a chance for us to defend ourselves or correct the mistakes.

Anyway, rambling aside over. Here's the next couple of "frequently wrongs":

"Kaptain Briton and Sat-Yr-9 (a.k.a. Sat-Yr-Nin) are from Earth-839"
As I noted, while this is now an error, it's an understandable one. In Captain Britain #14 (1986) Captain UK is sent to replace the deceased Kaptain Briton on his world, where she leads the overthrowing of Sat-Yr-Nin. In Excalibur #44 (1991) Captain UK is identified by her fellow Corps members as being the member assigned to Earth-839. Hence Kaptain Briton must have come from Earth-839, right? Except...in Excalibur #56 (by the same writer, Alan Davis), Kaptain Briton is explicitly identified as having originated on Earth-794. So we have a conflict. However, the latter number is explicitly applied to Kaptain Briton, while the former was only confirmed as being Captain UK's assignment at the time of Excalibur #44. It wasn't said to be Kaptain Briton's home. Captain UK had already been reassigned once, from her native 238 to Kaptain Briton's world. There's no reason she could not have been reassigned a second time after completing her mission to overthrow Sat-Yr-Nin. Indeed, given in Sat-Yr-Nin's world had a British-based dictatorship ruling an empire of unconfirmed size (but advanced enough to have interdimensional travel, so ruling the whole world wouldn't be out the question), while 839 is noted by Captain UK as having a "Red Monarch" and "Princess Madonna", I'd argue that's circumstantial evidence against them being the same world. Totalitarian regimes tend not to leave alive things like royal families, who could be used to rally resistance against them (cf Russia following the revolution).

Regardless, there was a definite conflict between 839 and 794. The handbooks had to weigh up the options and decide which was right, and, based on the above reasoning, the handbooks confirmed that Kaptain Briton was from 794, and that Captain UK had, indeed, been reassigned from 794 to a new posting on 839.

Second one, in the same vein. "Captain England is from Earth-9 / Earth-9 is also known as the Hub."
This comes from Saturnyne being identified as a native of Earth-9 when she attended Merlyn's funeral, combined with Saturnyne being tried on Captain England's native world, the Hub. However, this assumes Saturnyne worked in the same reality she was born in. Many people do not work in the same town they were born in. Many don't even work in their native country. So if interdimensional travel was readily available, it's not unreasonable to assume people might well find employment away from their native reality. And indeed, now we often see her working from Otherworld, which definitely isn't her native realm.

So, we've established there is no guarantee that the Hub is Earth-9. But is there actual evidence to suggest it isn't?

Yes.

We have how Captain England introduces Captain Albion of Earth-523 - he identifies her as being from the "Earth next door." How do you define "next door"? If it was houses in a street, and she lived in number 523, you'd assume he lived in either 522 or 524. Circumstantial evidence, not absolute proof, but an interesting comment.

Somewhat more tellingly. At the end of Merlyn's funeral, Roma sends Saturnyne "home." Note that "home" does not equal "native reality" - my home is not in my native country, let alone my town of birth. Saturnyne apparently ends up on the Hub, as she visits her successor / usurper Mandragon, who you'd assume would be based there, and she forces him to restore her to power by threatening to release a Mad Jim Jaspers clone "Here. On your world." Notice, "your" not "our" - her wording does not suggest they both hail from the same reality.

So, no reason to assume Earth-9 is the Hub, simply based on Saturnyne originating on the former and working on the latter. Evidence that Saturnyne is not from the same reality as Mandragon, which in turn strengthens the belief that the Omniversal Majestrix/Majestor is not necessarily native to the Hub. Evidence that Saturnyne considers Mandragon's native reality as "home", and the only place she is like to consider home other than her native reality would be the Hub, a fact supported by then-Majestor Mandragon's presence there. And at least a hint that the Hub could be either Earth-522 or 524. Again, the handbooks weighed the options, and confirmed that Captain England was from Earth-522, a.k.a. the Hub.

Rayeye
May 21, 2012, 06:22 pm
Thanks for this nice overview!

I have a few questions connecting the category "Flatscan or Genefreak? Is you is or is you ain’t a mutie?":
I have seen reports on (wiki-like) websites that people claimed that Asp (Cleo Nefertiti), D.O.A., Eden Fesi, Profile, Proton, Puck (Zuzha Yu), Speed and Wiccan are mutants, but as far as I know that hasn't been confirmed yet, has it?

And what about Silhouette and Midnight's Fire? In one of the former OHOTMU issues (I believe it was in All-New OHOTMU 2006) they were described as mystic mutants...

Stuart V
May 21, 2012, 07:23 pm

  Rayeye wrote:

Thanks for this nice overview!

I have a few questions connecting the category "Flatscan or Genefreak? Is you is or is you ain’t a mutie?":
I have seen reports on (wiki-like) websites that people claimed that Asp (Cleo Nefertiti), D.O.A., Eden Fesi, Profile, Proton, Puck (Zuzha Yu), Speed and Wiccan are mutants, but as far as I know that hasn't been confirmed yet, has it?

Without checking I can't be certain, but I believe all of those have, at times, been assumed to be mutants rather than outright confirmed. Proton probably is, as his counterpart in 1610 was, but that's not a guarantee (Exiles' Mimic is a mutant; 616 Mimic is not confirmed as one, another case of "sometimes reported as one, sometime reported as not, jury remains out.") DOA - not all of Emplate's servants were mutants (Gayle Edgerton springs to mind as proof of this), and since Emplate feeds off mutants and apparently ran out of people to feed off post M-Day (either depowered, escaped him or drained to death), yet DOA was still around and seemed hale as ever, it might be considered circumstantial evidence against DOA being a mutant. Since Emplate could travel interdimensionally, that opens up the option that DOA isn't even remotely human.

  Rayeye wrote:

And what about Silhouette and Midnight's Fire? In one of the former OHOTMU issues (I believe it was in All-New OHOTMU 2006) they were described as mystic mutants...

Not sure what the deal is with them - people tend to assume anyone born with powers not native to their species is a mutant, but that's not automatically the case. That said, if regular radiation can cause mutations, no reason mystic radiation couldn't.

Stuart V
Jun 1, 2012, 02:31 pm
Just noting an update to one of the earlier entries, as I've now added the proper names of the cyborg Hellfire Clubber Castlemere's two allies.

Andy E. Nystrom
Jun 1, 2012, 04:14 pm
Another one: the spelling of Jean DeWolff's name. In one thread in another forum I saw people in the comments section spelling it with just one f and with an e instead of the second f (probably because of her Ultimate Earth counterpart).

Rayeye
Jun 2, 2012, 05:05 pm
Just noting an update to one of the earlier entries, as I've now added the proper names of the cyborg Hellfire Clubber Castlemere's two allies.
Thanks Stuart, it's nice you are able to clarify this through the handbooks.

Today I discovered that marvel.wikia.com somehow incorrectly states Black Air's Michele Scicluna using the codename Storm.

Stuart V
Jun 2, 2012, 06:25 pm

  Rayeye wrote:

Thanks Stuart, it's nice you are able to clarify this through the handbooks.

Today I discovered that marvel.wikia.com somehow incorrectly states Black Air's Michele Scicluna using the codename Storm.

Again, marvel.wikia.com is a fan site that likes to make itself look more official than it is, is full of fan speculation passing itself off as fact (I notice they list Mercedes as the Black Queen in her entry, despite there being zero evidence of that), and has some staff who openly advocate illegally downloading comics. When I had the temerity to suggest this was a bad thing, I got publicly abused by the staff member who was promoting downloading comics (which he admitted he could afford to buy but he said he didn't want to pay for), and when I reported the abuse to another more senior staff member I was informed that the first staff member was not going to be disciplined as the senior staff member didn't want to risk upsetting him. So, while those are the kind of people who staff (not just contribute, but actually run) the marvel.wikia.com site, I have zero time for it.

Rayeye
Jun 2, 2012, 06:32 pm
Yeah I know the whole thing and you posts about it earlier.
I just mentioned the error of Michele Scicluna because perhaps other (fanmade) sites will list her as Storm too.
It's too bad because such fan speculations spread like a virus to other sites and in a wink of time a lot of people talk about as it were facts.

Stuart V
Jun 2, 2012, 09:08 pm

  Rayeye wrote:

Yeah I know the whole thing and you posts about it earlier.
I just mentioned the error of Michele Scicluna because perhaps other (fanmade) sites will list her as Storm too.
It's too bad because such fan speculations spread like a virus to other sites and in a wink of time a lot of people talk about as it were facts.

Agreed. What I'd like to know is why anyone applied the name to her at all? Afaik, she didn't impersonate Storm at any time, and she's not used that name as a codename, so, unless I've missed some appearance where she does use the name,for someone to add that name to an entry on her requires either deliberate attempts to spread misinformation or a spectacular level of ineptitude.

Andy E. Nystrom
Jun 4, 2012, 08:38 pm
One more error, probably stemming from the earlier Handbooks: a certain terrorist organization is current considered to be Hydra, not HYDRA (in caps).

Stuart V
Jun 12, 2012, 12:52 pm
One that isn't so much an error in what people believe about specific characters, but rather what some people say about the handbooks. I recently (as in the last day or so) saw a discussion on another forum where people were stating that "the more recent handbooks have taken more liberties with continuity" [than the originals]. I posted in response that, while the current handbooks do fill in blanks, so too do the originals, and that we do so less than the originals; that like the originals our first port of call for new information are the creators involved in the stories in question (who always have the option of "leave it unrevealed, don't fill in the blank"); and that anything new is flagged for editorial to approve or reject.

I added that "the original handbooks were much quicker to fill in blanks in character histories - the current ones only attempt to resolve continuity conflicts, and anything beyond that (origins for example) tends to have been actively volunteered by the writers of the characters in question." In response one of the moderators brought up the origin information regarding the second Sunpyre, who the handbooks revealed was pulled from another dimension to Earth via Honey Lemon's purse, saying this was taking "huge liberties with continuity" and that there was no need for a second Sunpyre, as there was no evidence it wasn't the original nor had Honey Lemon shown the ability to pull people from her purse. The moderator also locked the thread, rendering me unable to respond, on that forum at least, which I feel is a tad unfair - if you want to take a shot at the handbooks' integrity then at least allow the opportunity to respond to the allegations.

Since I've seen this brought up a couple of times other than that particular forum (in forms varying from simply wondering how the information came about to outright outrage at the "temerity" of the handbooks for "making stuff up") I figure it needs added to the list here. So:

Incorrect: "The handbooks take big liberties with continuity / make up stuff for no good reason. For example, they made up some stuff about Honey Lemon pulling a second Sunpyre out her purse when there was no reason to believe there was a second Sunpyre."
Truth: The handbooks can and do add new info. That's always been within their remit - just check out the original series to discover lots of names that originated there, relatives, origin information, etc. The newer handbooks still do that, though more sparingly, and we don't make up stuff for the heck of it. Anything beyond getting names (usually to allow easier clarifications between multiple people who share a codename), birth places, education and the like is only done for clarifying continuity conflicts (X was dead, now he's alive with no explanation) or because a writer actively chose to volunteer the information (in which case, it would be rude to ignore it, though it still needs editorial approval to be added).

In the specific example of Sunpyre and Honey Lemon information, when the Big Hero 6 handbook entry was written, the first draft was sent to the editor (Mike Marts) and writer (Scott Lobdell) of the story where the team had appeared for their feedback. Though there was a mystery hanging over Sunpyre being there when she'd seemed to die, no request was made for detailed background information to clarify this (we were expecting "it is the original somehow revived / it is a new one / leave it a mystery for someone else to tackle down the line"). However, the feedback informed us that Honey Lemon pulled another version of Sunpyre from her purse. So, it falls entirely into the category of "anything beyond [basic biographical or continuity clarifying information] tends to have been actively volunteered by the writers of the characters in question" that I mentioned above. And, in regards to "nor had Honey Lemon shown the ability to pull people from her purse" - since Scott was the person who created Honey Lemon, he's the person best placed to decide the limits of her powers and whether or not she is able to pull people from her purse.

Stuart V
Jun 15, 2012, 08:18 am

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

One more error, probably stemming from the earlier Handbooks: a certain terrorist organization is current considered to be Hydra, not HYDRA (in caps).

Correct. Hydra, not HYDRA. It's not an acronym, but people do frequently, and mistakenly, capitalise the letters because Hydra's counterpart SHIELD is an acronym, and because so many other villainous agencies (AIM for example) are.

Additional: One that's not so much "people keep getting wrong" as "people are starting to get it wrong and it is spreading, so let's try and nip this one in the bud early." The recent female Ghost Rider's real name is not Alejandra Blaze. That surname was mistakenly applied to her in an issue of the Venom: Circle Chase storyline, but is not her official surname. She's Alejandra Jones, no known relation to any other character of that surname bar her father, thus far only known by his surname, which is, unsurprisingly, Jones.

Stuart V
Jun 19, 2012, 10:11 am
New one. A large number of sites think this member of the Corps
http://www.psysdomain.com/corps/lordgoldstar.html
is Lord Goldstar. He's not. When he says "Lord Goldstar, rescue our lady." he's not talking in the third person and identifying himself. He's issuing a request to another of the Corps members to get the injured Linda McQuillan to safety.

At least one other site thinks the guy next to him, firing the energy blast from his helmet, is Lord Goldstar. Here's another shot of that guy, this time from the front
http://images.wikia.com/marveldataba...th-7123%29.jpg
However, that's not Lord Goldstar either - that is Flight Leader, previously seen in Uncanny X-Men #462.
http://www.comicvine.com/flight-leader/29-7921/
The helmet is very distinctive.

So who is Lord Goldstar? The only other Corps members visible are the injured Captain UK (the "lady" being rescued), Justicer Bull, Captain Empire and a generic Corps member way in the background. The script is clear - Lord Goldstar was intended to be the Corps member physically pulling Linda to safety. Since Justicer Bull replaced Lord Goldstar in the final version, and since we know that it (a) isn't the guy speaking and (b) isn't the one rescuing Linda nor either of the other two closest members, then it is either the guy at the back of panel, or, more likely, another Corps member off panel who the cyclopean Corps member thought was close behind him (hence tasking him specifically with rescuing Linda).

Michael Regan
Jun 20, 2012, 08:37 am

  Stuart V wrote:

New one. A large number of sites think this member of the Corps
http://www.psysdomain.com/corps/lordgoldstar.html
is Lord Goldstar. He's not. When he says "Lord Goldstar, rescue our lady." he's not talking in the third person and identifying himself. He's issuing a request to another of the Corps members to get the injured Linda McQuillan to safety.

Ah, for the lack of understanding sentence and grammatical structure. The inclusion of the comma makes it clear, to those who understand, that he is obviously not speaking in the third person. Just as bad as "Ith Leopold Yankee Thwine" which I notice is still the character's "real" name on marvel.wikia... :wall:

Stuart V
Jun 20, 2012, 09:14 am

  Michael Regan wrote:

Ah, for the lack of understanding sentence and grammatical structure. The inclusion of the comma makes it clear, to those who understand, that he is obviously not speaking in the third person. Just as bad as "Ith Leopold Yankee Thwine" which I notice is still the character's "real" name on marvel.wikia... :wall:

The funny thing about Ith Leopold Yankee Thwine is that the page was wrong to begin with, I pointed out the mistake (before realising just how unethical some of the marvel.wikia.com moderators were) and got the page moved to the correct name, and then someone has come back to the page and made it wrong again. That moves that mistake up to a whole new level of cluelessness.

Michael Regan
Jun 20, 2012, 10:25 am
Interesting how many simply originate from an individual or individuals not taking the time to correctly read something or misinterpreting provided text. These are somewhe more forgivable, or understandable, than instances of flat misrepresentation or construction of missing facts.

captainswift
Jun 20, 2012, 03:40 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

The funny thing about Ith Leopold Yankee Thwine is that the page was wrong to begin with, I pointed out the mistake (before realising just how unethical some of the marvel.wikia.com moderators were) and got the page moved to the correct name, and then someone has come back to the page and made it wrong again. That moves that mistake up to a whole new level of cluelessness.

Is it possible that, just as many profiles for the Impossible Man repeat the line from his first appearance ("Poppuppians don't have names; we know who we are") that this person or persons editing are knowingly filling in the Real Name spot with "It's Leopold, Yankee Swine!" with the lisp retained?

Yeah, probably not.

Zach Kinkead
Jun 20, 2012, 04:19 pm
I haven’t read the “Leopold” story so I don’t know how it reads in context but – after seeing it here OUT of context – it’s pretty easy to see how it was an honest mistake that was cut and pasted through dozens of online character profiles to the point where they’re referencing each other to support its validity. I know I didn’t really see the “joke” until it was spelled out. Before that I figured it was just a crazy made-up alien/alternate reality name.

Incidentally, when are you going to update Genis-Vell’s aliases to include “Ohwhutagoosiam” ?

Michael Regan
Jun 21, 2012, 10:05 am
Not recognising the "lisp spelling" is understandable, but mistake corrected when it is pointed out is an honest mistake. A mistake continued regardless of repeated attempts correcting and/or explaining is ignorance.

Stuart V
Jul 11, 2012, 09:09 am
Another example of reading but not comprehending. According to some sites (not so many as originally, thanks to some work getting it cleaned up where I could), the time-travelling Doctor's foe Beep the Meep, who debuted in the Marvel Dr. Who Weekly, has a brother Larry. This originated on Wikipedia, where, if you check the history of the Beep the Meep page, you will find a point where two anonymous posters had an edit war, apparently slagging one another off. One changed the page to say "Jennifer is a Meep too" and the other responded by removing that and replacing it with "Larry the Meep is Beep's brother." They went back and forth adding and removing those two sentences for a bit, before finally getting bored and moving on, leaving the latter sentence in place unchallenged for a while. Naturally, people eager to build up their rival Wiki sites, wanting to grow quickly rather than accurately, simply lifted their information from Wikipedia rather than checking the actual comics. And lo, the legend of the non-existent Larry the Meep spread.

It is worth noting that Beep did claim to have a brother at one point. When he was on trial for war crimes, he played innocent and insisted the cops really wanted his twin brother. However, no name was given, and, since Beep was lying about not being the culprit and deception is one of his main tools, he was almost certainly making it up when he claimed to have a sibling, let alone a twin.

Angelicknight
Jul 29, 2012, 01:25 pm
Is the character Greenwich Guardian/Black Death that Gravity encountered suppose to be the same as the Greenwich Avenger (Hank Walden) from the Secret Invasion: Home Invasion comic? I have seen it online that they are one and the same but to my knowledge it has never been stated in the comics are Handbooks they are that i'm aware of.

Michael Regan
Jul 29, 2012, 08:06 pm
I'm not sure if this was mentioned yet, but in the latest Moon Knight series, Moon Knight asks for various items to go with his latest personalities of Spider-Man (web shooters), Wolverine (claws), and Captain America (shield). Captain America's shield is mentioned as having been contructed from vibranium and adamantium.

Rayeye
Aug 1, 2012, 01:01 pm
Another wikicrap... on comicvine (http://www.comicvine.com/blackout/29-41820/) Blackout is listed as and called a mutant. He is a demon and a descendant of Lilith, not a mutant.

Stuart V
Aug 1, 2012, 01:49 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

I'm not sure if this was mentioned yet, but in the latest Moon Knight series, Moon Knight asks for various items to go with his latest personalities of Spider-Man (web shooters), Wolverine (claws), and Captain America (shield). Captain America's shield is mentioned as having been contructed from vibranium and adamantium.

Aargh. One of the errors that originated from the original OHOTMU, and one that is very much debunked. But now, I am sure, some will latch on to this latest mistake and insist Marvel has retconned things, just like they latch on to spelling and naming errors made in the comics.

  Rayeye wrote:

Another wikicrap... on comicvine (http://www.comicvine.com/blackout/29-41820/) Blackout is listed as and called a mutant. He is a demon and a descendant of Lilith, not a mutant.

Fixed it, but well spotted.

  Angelicknight wrote:

Is the character Greenwich Guardian/Black Death that Gravity encountered suppose to be the same as the Greenwich Avenger (Hank Walden) from the Secret Invasion: Home Invasion comic? I have seen it online that they are one and the same but to my knowledge it has never been stated in the comics are Handbooks they are that i'm aware of.

Still checking on this one.

Zach Kinkead
Aug 7, 2012, 11:23 pm
Since it’s been coming up a lot here and elsewhere lately …

“[Insert Character Here] is an Omega mutant even though they’ve never actually said so in the comics”

Newsarama isn’t helping …

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/x-me...-120113-1.html

(I’m pretty sure a lot of their classifications are made up too)

And Marvel is making it worse …

http://marvel.wikia.com/Category[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]mega_Level_Mutants

Stuart V
Aug 8, 2012, 07:01 am

  Zach Kinkead wrote:

Since it’s been coming up a lot here and elsewhere lately …

“[Insert Character Here] is an Omega mutant even though they’ve never actually said so in the comics”

Newsarama isn’t helping …

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/x-me...-120113-1.html

(I’m pretty sure a lot of their classifications are made up too)
Yes, those are made up, presumably by someone at Newsarama. They are in no way official.
And Marvel is making it worse …

http://marvel.wikia.com/Category[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]mega_Level_Mutants  

No, Marvel isn't. That's a fan site, completely and utterly unofficial and unaffiliated with Marvel. However, they don't make that clear at all in their site (there's a single note on a single page that admits as much, and even that isn't as clear as it should be), as they use Marvel's official logo, nabbed a webname as similar to Marvel as possible, and don't include any copyright disclaimers (because said disclaimers would then have to include mention that they aren't Marvel). Unfortunately, they also include a fair bit of duff info (many of the "things people keep getting wrong" listed here are wrong on that site), so this misleading appearance of being official is made all the worse, as people assume they are Marvel's site, just like you did, and use them on other Wikis and forums to support specious arguments.

Michael Regan
Aug 8, 2012, 04:08 pm
Remember, any wiki (wikia) site is a fan/open conglomeration, great for casual reference but potentially filled with errors to the the very open nature of the displayed content. Some wiki sites are far better than others, tardis.wikia.com and memory-alpha.org are examples of good ones, but marvel.wikia.com is a pretty bad one overall.

Eduardo M.
Aug 8, 2012, 04:57 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

Remember, any wiki (wikia) site is a fan/open conglomeration, great for casual reference but potentially filled with errors to the the very open nature of the displayed content. Some wiki sites are far better than others, tardis.wikia.com and memory-alpha.org are examples of good ones, but marvel.wikia.com is a pretty bad one overall.

TFWiki.net is another good one. I also like that they can be humorous about things.

DeadpoolRP
Aug 9, 2012, 04:21 pm
Stuart:

I'd love some more team membership editions of "Things people keep getting wrong," particularly regarding the X-teams since we won't be getting updated team rosters now that the softcover handbooks have been discontinued.

For example, you could address certain people who think that not liking Pip or Doop is reason enough to automatically disqualify them from being X-Factor or X-Men members (respectively). I mean, maybe they're not official members (even though Pip's on the X-Factor recap page every month and all of the rest of the Jean Grey Institute staff are X-Men), but "No way are they a member, because I think they're done" isn't much of a reasoning process, right?

And any clarification you could somehow get us regarding membership statuses for characters like Blink, Krakoa, Random, the Lights, etc., would be appreciated. Any new handbooks coming up we can look forward to getting this kind of info in? I know I've discussed these kinds of membership questions elsewhere on the forums here in detail, so let me know if you'd like me to hunt those discussions down.

I was really looking forward to the rest of those updated softcovers, even at $24.99.

~Drew, away too long

Stuart V
Aug 13, 2012, 03:33 am

  DeadpoolRP wrote:

Stuart:

I'd love some more team membership editions of "Things people keep getting wrong," particularly regarding the X-teams since we won't be getting updated team rosters now that the softcover handbooks have been discontinued.

We might be able to provide them on a case by case basis, but not as often as before. Editorial tends to be pretty busy, so we've always tried to only ask them for their confirmation on stuff as and when it was required for an entry - with no new entries for the time being, we don't have as much requirement to ask for such clarifications. That said, there are still occasions where we can and do get confirmation outwith entries (such as confirming that Alejandra's surname was not Blaze - and on that, I notice some people online acknowledging her correct surname, Jones, and then adding Blaze as an alias - NO IT ISN'T. It was an error. It's not an alias any more than Peter Palmer is an alias of Peter Parker).

  DeadpoolRP wrote:

For example, you could address certain people who think that not liking Pip or Doop is reason enough to automatically disqualify them from being X-Factor or X-Men members (respectively).

Disliking a character certainly isn't a valid reason for disqualifying them for membership purposes.

  DeadpoolRP wrote:

I mean, maybe they're not official members (even though Pip's on the X-Factor recap page every month and all of the rest of the Jean Grey Institute staff are X-Men), but "No way are they a member, because I think they're done" isn't much of a reasoning process, right?

Absolutely. Without having personally studied the specific stories in question recently, I can't say whether or not they are members, but what you've quoted isn't a reasonable debating stance.

  DeadpoolRP wrote:

And any clarification you could somehow get us regarding membership statuses for characters like Blink, Krakoa, Random, the Lights, etc., would be appreciated. Any new handbooks coming up we can look forward to getting this kind of info in?

Not at the moment.

  DeadpoolRP wrote:

I know I've discussed these kinds of membership questions elsewhere on the forums here in detail, so let me know if you'd like me to hunt those discussions down.

Please do. While I haven't studied the details on these myself, other handbook writers will have done so, and may also have already clarified current membership requirements / statuses with editorial.


 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 11:46 am  #10


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Additional text from Comixfan:
Monolith
Aug 13, 2012, 01:12 pm
Yes, those are made up, presumably by someone at Newsarama. They are in no way official.
I snooped around the internet after that Newsarama list came out, and it seems to be based on this webpage: http://www.angelfire.com/usx-men/Classifications.html

Note at the top it specifically states the classifications were made up for the purposes of RPGing, and non-canon.
Stuart:

I'd love some more team membership editions of "Things people keep getting wrong," particularly regarding the X-teams since we won't be getting updated team rosters now that the softcover handbooks have been discontinued.

For example, you could address certain people who think that not liking Pip or Doop is reason enough to automatically disqualify them from being X-Factor or X-Men members (respectively). I mean, maybe they're not official members (even though Pip's on the X-Factor recap page every month and all of the rest of the Jean Grey Institute staff are X-Men), but "No way are they a member, because I think they're done" isn't much of a reasoning process, right?

And any clarification you could somehow get us regarding membership statuses for characters like Blink, Krakoa, Random, the Lights, etc., would be appreciated. Any new handbooks coming up we can look forward to getting this kind of info in? I know I've discussed these kinds of membership questions elsewhere on the forums here in detail, so let me know if you'd like me to hunt those discussions down.

I was really looking forward to the rest of those updated softcovers, even at $24.99.

~Drew, away too long
I think this is less of a "Things people keep getting wrong" question, and more of a "Things people have no good answer for" question.

The X-Men roster has long abandoned the strict definitions like "Blue/Gold Strike Force". Ever since Manifest Destiny, the definition of an X-Man seemed to be "Anyone willing to take orders from Cyclops", at least up until Schism. Not everyone on Utopia was automatically an X-Man...Rogue asked Toad if he wanted to be deputized as an X-Man during Second Coming, and he declined. Avalanche specifically stated he was helping out without being an official X-Man during Fear Itself.

Going off of the core of Cyclops and Wolverine's debate in Schism, one could assume Cyclops considered all the students on Utopia to be X-Men...deputy members, reservists, or whatever. If that's true, then its equally reasonable to assume that the Jean Grey School's students are NOT considered active X-Men by Wolverine...characters like Kid Omega, Krakoa, Kid Gladiator, Broo, Genesis, etc. are therefore not X-Men.

But where is the line between "cast member" and "X-Men member" in Wolverine and the X-Men? If "Anyone working / living at the School for Gifted Youngsters" equals an X-Man, then yes, Doop, Toad, and Deathlok Prime are all X-Men. But that wasn't always the case, since characters like Binary, Lilandra, Moira MacTaggert, and Tom Corsi have "Worked / lived at the School for Gifted Youngsters" in the past without being considered X-Men. So do the guys in charge (Wolverine, Beast, Kitty) consider all their staff active X-Men? The answer to that question is the answer to yours about membership.

Hey, easy answer though...YES, Pip is a member of X-Factor. He is employed and/or working with X-Factor Investigations. He may have "hired himself", but heck so did Layla.


Stuart V
Aug 13, 2012, 01:22 pm
Another one. This was widespread, but most of the Wikis have corrected this and kept it corrected; however, I notice that Marvel Database is maintaining it's high rate of inaccuracy as one of the few sites still keeping this (and most of the other "things people keep getting wrong") on their site.

False: Battlestar is/was a member of the Garrison.
Truth: Battlestar was never a member of the Garrison.

This goes to the Penance miniseries where we saw the Garrison, which consisted of two of Battlestar's former Intruders teammates, Fin and Man-Eater, alongside non-descript military personnel. One panel after Penance trounced the assembled forces shows a leg with a knee pad that looked like a miscolored Battlestar knee-pad, leading someone to conclude that Battlestar was one of the Garrison. While the evidence (similar knee-pad, former allies of Battlestar) did allow for the possibility, assuming it definitely was him was a major assumption. Battlestar had last been seen opposing the Initiative; it wasn't colored correctly for him; most tellingly, why include him as present yet not bother to show more of him than one leg? Anyway, the handbooks checked with those behind the Penance mini, and it was confirmed that the leg did not belong to Battlestar, and that he was not a member of the Garrison.

Stuart V
Aug 14, 2012, 02:53 pm
False: Wild Child is Scottish.
Truth: Wild Child is Canadian.

Several sites online list Wild Child's place of birth as "somewhere near Ross and Cromarty, Scotland." However, his place of birth in the handbooks, the only place it has been given as far as we can determine, is "somewhere in Canada." It's certainly not impossible that we've missed a reference in a story that says otherwise, but (1) the handbook writer who handled his entries read all the issues he appeared in and should, in theory, have spotted any such mention, and (2) tellingly, "somewhere near Ross and Cromarty, Scotland" is EXACTLY what Wolfsbane's handbook entries give for her PoB. So I suspect that what happened is that an online site copied the original handbook entries onto their site, and mistakenly cut and pasted part of Wolfsbane's entry into Wild Child's, then the internet being the internet, others blindly copy-pasted it and spread it across the web.

Eduardo M.
Aug 14, 2012, 04:49 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

False: Wild Child is Scottish.
Truth: Wild Child is Canadian.

Several sites online list Wild Child's place of birth as "somewhere near Ross and Cromarty, Scotland." However, his place of birth in the handbooks, the only place it has been given as far as we can determine, is "somewhere in Canada." It's certainly not impossible that we've missed a reference in a story that says otherwise, but (1) the handbook writer who handled his entries read all the issues he appeared in and should, in theory, have spotted any such mention, and (2) tellingly, "somewhere near Ross and Cromarty, Scotland" is EXACTLY what Wolfsbane's handbook entries give for her PoB. So I suspect that what happened is that an online site copied the original handbook entries onto their site, and mistakenly cut and pasted part of Wolfsbane's entry into Wild Child's, then the internet being the internet, others blindly copy-pasted it and spread it across the web.

huh. I would never pegged Wild Child as being Scottish. While I havent read as many appearances as others may have, there was nothing I saw from dialogue that would've given me that conclusion

Stuart V
Aug 19, 2012, 10:03 pm
False: Nuklo is slow / of below average intelligence.
Truth: Nuklo is of above average intelligence.

This one comes from Nuklo being portrayed as having a childlike mind in his earliest appearances, despite having an adult body. BUT...
when we first meet Nuklo, he was being released from a version of suspended animation that allowed his body to mature but gave his mind no stimuli; he'd been placed in this within hours of his birth. Naturally, he emerged acting like a newborn child. Despite having the world experience of a child less than a day old, he began speaking whole words within hours of being released. If your child begins speaking words, even just mimicing what others are saying without understanding the meaning, the same day they are born, that's not an indicator of below average intelligence.

When he was being held at Project Pegasus, he was seen acting more like a toddler. Again, some readers viewed this as evidence of slow mental development - but given that these stories were set less than two years after his "birth" from suspended animation, Marvel time, being at toddler development is perfectly normal, especially when you consider teaching him was literally hazardous to the health.

He got cured of his excess radiation a little under a year later, Marvel time, by which point he was learning to write - so, at less than three years of development, he's grasping the basics of writing. Now, here we get the most solid "evidence" of a mental issue, as the scientist caring for Nuklo states Nuklo was suffering from autism, which said scientist was trying to "break through". But hang on - (1) said scientist was no expert on child development or how brains work, but instead villainous nuclear scientist Isbisa in disguise. He's not qualified to make such a diagnosis, and he has reason to lie as he's trying to hurt his old foe the Whizzer; (2) autism can't be cured, as Isbisa seemed to be saying, which again puts a black mark against his knowing what he is talking about; (3) if you have an adult male who is still acting like a toddler, you might well assume he is autistic, but it again fails to take into account that while Nuklo's body was adult, his mind had only been active for less than three years, and his mental development is actually noticably ahead of the game for a three year old.

The next time we see Nuklo he's been out of suspended animation for twelve years real world, which equates to somewhere between three and four years Marvel time. By this point he is living on his own and he's passed high school equivalency. Hang on - less than four years old and he's graduated from high school? How does that equate to mentally slow? Emotionally, he's somewhat childlike still, but again, four years old - what should we expect? And, tellingly, Nuklo's first handbook entry states he is of above average intelligence, concurring with the evidence to that point.

In his last few appearances, with the V-Battalion, Nuklo remained a man of few words, but we shouldn't take that as evidence of slow mental processes. A brief text piece in Citizen V and the V-Battalion: Everlasting claims he is slow of mind and has the acuity of a ten year old, but the evidence of past stories trumps that, and the comment seems to be a misconception again overlooking that his body is older than his mind. Even if you took it to be accurate, and overlooked Nuklo having already passed high school equivalency and now operating in a fighting team using advanced tactics, it would still be saying that someone who only entered the world less than seven years ago Marvel time has the mental acuity of a ten year old - which again, is ahead of where he should be.
mal32
Aug 20, 2012, 08:07 am
Dear Stuart (and everybody else reading here, of course), your details are very interesting and I thank you very much for them.

May I ask you a thing about Sharon Ventura aka Ms. Marvel or She-Thing?

In her official entry on the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Hardcover #12 her power grid shows a normal intelligence but while Ventura was part of the Ben Grimm's Fantastic Four, in her She-Thing form, she has proven to be very intelligent solving lot of complicated situations with her ​​intuition and cunning [for example in Fantastic Four volume 1 # 324 (1989)] saving the Fantastic Four like Reed Richards did many times before (and after). Is it possible that this increased intelligence was a side effect of exposure to cosmic rays?
What do you think about this? (I told this also in the wikipedias entries )


mal32
Aug 21, 2012, 05:07 am
About Sharon Ventura's intelligence, after I wrote the above post I remembered that in Fantastic Four v1 #307 (1987), before she became "She-Thing", she already showed to have an intelligence above the normal, so, maybe, the cosmic rays increased her intelligence as well as her physical attributes.
However I think, in my opinion, that in her power grid she deserves to have more than 2 as intelligence, or not?

Monolith
Sep 17, 2012, 11:19 pm
Graymalkin or Greymalkin?

I've seen Greymalkin Lane, Graymalkin the space station and, recently, Jonas Graymalkin and both Graymalkin and Greymalkin Industries in San Francisco.

What's the original spelling?

Stuart V
Sep 18, 2012, 04:21 pm

  Monolith wrote:

Graymalkin or Greymalkin?

I've seen Greymalkin Lane, Graymalkin the space station and, recently, Jonas Graymalkin and both Graymalkin and Greymalkin Industries in San Francisco.

What's the original spelling?

I'd have to do some research to confirm the original spelling, but I can confirm the official spelling (which might be the same as the original) quickly enough - editorial confirmed it should be with an A some time back.

jephyork
Sep 20, 2012, 05:20 am
Research no further than the Uncanny X-Men Index!

The X-Mansion's street address was originally given as "1407 Greymalkin Drive, Scarsdale" in X-Men #99. It was changed to "1407 Graymalkin Lane, Salem Center" in X-Men #123.

-Jeph!

mal32
Sep 20, 2012, 12:07 pm
Nothing about my question about the Sharon Ventura's intelligence?

mal32
Sep 24, 2012, 04:14 am
Have I offended anyone? if so ask forgiveness

Michael Regan
Sep 24, 2012, 09:45 am

mal32 wrote:

Have I offended anyone? if so ask forgiveness

With the coming of autumn it is likely everyone is otherwise busy and will likely do their best to reply when they can.

Madison Carter
Sep 24, 2012, 02:49 pm

mal32 wrote:

Nothing about my question about the Sharon Ventura's intelligence?

We'd really need more precise examples, but my understanding from the discussion we've had regarding what's been presented is that she's smart, but still "average" smart, not enough to bump up to a whole new level. She catches on quickly and can use what she learned in new situations, but isn't of the level where she can really come up with higher-level intelligence results.

mal32
Sep 25, 2012, 02:10 pm
GASP!!! I wrote: "Have I offended anyone? if so ask forgiveness" but I forget to add "I" because I only wanted to write: "Have I offended anyone? if so I ask forgiveness"... I am Italian and the English is not my first language but I think my first phrase could seem a menace... I am so sorry...

captainswift
Sep 25, 2012, 04:05 pm

mal32 wrote:

GASP!!! I wrote: "Have I offended anyone? if so ask forgiveness" but I forget to add "I" because I only wanted to write: "Have I offended anyone? if so I ask forgiveness"... I am Italian and the English is not my first language but I think my first phrase could seem a menace... I am so sorry...

It's all good, Mal. We knew what you meant.

The problem with the Power Grids is that so much is subjective and the wording of the key is awkward, sometimes too vague, sometimes too precise. For instance:

Mano, a character from DC's Legion of Super-Heroes, has the power to explode things by touching them. He once blew apart his entire home planet. However, by the Power Grid, he projects a single energy type, and he has to touch an object to affect it. Thus, this massively powerful planet-breaker has an Energy Projection of 1 (discharges energy on contact).

Sharon may be sharp, but it's only a 7-point scale ranging from slow to all-knowing. You can be pretty danged smart without moving beyond "Average" on the scale.

mal32
Oct 2, 2012, 09:32 am
I thank everybody for the kind answers and I will try to reply soon.

For now I have another question:
I remember that years ago Werewolf (Jack Russell) has bitten Marc Spector Moon Knight, this gave temporary super-strenght to the last one, increasing during the nights with full moon...
but I did not find mention of this neither in the Moon Knight's entry nor in the Werewolf (by Night)'s entry... why?

The strange thing is that I checked all the first meetings of the two super-beings and I did not find the moment of the bite... I am a little confused now.

Thanks a lot.

Michael Regan
Oct 2, 2012, 01:05 pm
I was under the impresstion that Moon Knight was given his moon based powers by Khonshu, but going back on his history I believe you are correct.

I think this occured with his first appearance in Werewolf by Night #32 but I'll see if I can confirm.

mal32
Oct 2, 2012, 05:18 pm
Yesterday I checked very careful both Werewolf by Night 32 and 33 where the two fought very hard but the eventual bite was never shown.

It seems that the authors decided that Moon Knight had super-strenght after the Werewolf's bite, that the bite was offstage and that the Khonshu's influence is a retcon but I am not sure now...

Because normally the OHotMU entries are very detailed telling everything important about a character's history (I really admire the OHotMU's writers!!!) I thinked it was strange that this was not told

Michael Regan
Oct 2, 2012, 05:49 pm
Yes, I just finished reviewing the issues as well and came to the conclusion that it is either a ret-con presented elsewhere, or solidly something "people keep getting wrong" which included me at this time. Likely something that was talked about to the point that it became "fact" even when it was not.

Update: I just took a look at wikipedia out of curiosity, and they indicate the power was achieved from a bite from Jack... nothing like keeping up the consistant inaccuracies. Just how long does it take to confirm these facts? Didn't take me long at all, but wikipedia folk just don't have that kinda time I guess.

Andy E. Nystrom
Oct 5, 2012, 12:46 am
Stuart: are you interested in listing meta inaccuracies? A prime example (one that's most frequently perpetuated by Stan Lee) is that Amazing Fantasy was already cancelled when #15 came out. However, info within that issue, as well as the fact that initial Spider-Man stories in Amazing Spider-Man were shorter pretty much leads to the conclusion that Amazing Fantasy was probably cancelled after #15 went to press (but most likely before the sales figures became clear).

I don't mean any disrespect to Stan Lee by pointing his out, but his tendency to try to fill in memory gaps does lead to erroneous info being spread.

Interestingly Wikipedia has this wrong for Spider-Man but its entry on Amazing Fantasy correctly notes this discrepancy

Andy E. Nystrom
Nov 18, 2012, 10:37 pm
A couple more:

Bucky Barnes (as Winter Soldier?) killed Hitler: this originated with an unfortunate New Avengers gag. In actuality, the 616 Hitler was killed by the original Human Torch.

The next one requires spoiler tags because it relats to the first issue of the new Fantastic Four series (I haven't read it, but numerous websites are mentioning this error:
The Fantastic Four got their powers from unstable molecules. In actuality it's cosmic rays.
 
Michael Regan
Nov 19, 2012, 07:35 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Bucky Barnes (as Winter Soldier?) killed Hitler: this originated with an unfortunate New Avengers gag. In actuality, the 616 Hitler was killed by the original Human Torch.

Do you remember which issues that was in? I can't remeber the incident at all.

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

The next one requires spoiler tags because it relats to the first issue of the new Fantastic Four series (I haven't read it, but numerous websites are mentioning this error:
The Fantastic Four got their powers from unstable molecules. In actuality it's cosmic rays.

Great, has Marvel lost their editors?

Back to this one for a moment:

  Stuart V wrote:

  Michael Regan wrote:

I'm not sure if this was mentioned yet, but in the latest Moon Knight series, Moon Knight asks for various items to go with his latest personalities of Spider-Man (web shooters), Wolverine (claws), and Captain America (shield). Captain America's shield is mentioned as having been contructed from vibranium and adamantium.

Aargh. One of the errors that originated from the original OHOTMU, and one that is very much debunked. But now, I am sure, some will latch on to this latest mistake and insist Marvel has retconned things, just like they latch on to spelling and naming errors made in the comics.

Considering the data was delivered in a conversation between Spector and Buck Lime, I'm comfortably believing that one of them made an incorrect statement (can't remember which), and perhaps they simply read the old, incorrect handbook

Andy E. Nystrom
Nov 19, 2012, 09:15 pm


  Michael Regan wrote:

Do you remember which issues that was in? I can't remeber the incident at all.

Just did a check and I got the title wrong: It was Dark Reign: The List - Avengers #1, not New Avengers. Lots of jpgs online because it's caused a lot of debate whether it was Barnes or Hammond. Some people insist it has to be Barnes because it's more "in character" for him despite the amount of evident to the contrary (Barnes makes the claim but we don't actually see it. However, the Human Torch has before and since been depicted on panel as killing Hitler). Tom Brevoort more or less has stated it's still the Torch (he directed people to The Torch#7, which shows the Torch doing it).

Also, anyone who's seen Alex Schomberg's old covers knows that while the Torch isn't going to go around killing everyone during peacetime, in WW2 he wasn't quite the pacifist that some think of him is.

Re: FF#1: Agreed that the editing quality has gone downhill. The Marvel Universe is a big place so the occasional return from the dead in error because the writer and editor didn't know about the death is somewhat understandable (though becoming less so with all the online resources), but that FF 1 is a fairly major oops.

Zach Kinkead
Nov 19, 2012, 09:53 pm
I remember listening to an interview where Brubaker was talking about how Hammond killed Hitler in an issue of What If and it somehow became canon. I can’t remember which issue of What If or which comic made that particular story “official”

Andy E. Nystrom
Nov 19, 2012, 10:11 pm

  Zach Kinkead wrote:

I remember listening to an interview where Brubaker was talking about how Hammond killed Hitler in an issue of What If and it somehow became canon. I can’t remember which issue of What If or which comic made that particular story “official”

Mostly false, but with a grain of truth. The Human Torch was depicted killed Hitler in What If?#4 which was if not immediately intended to be canon became so almost immediately after (a note at end of the story hinted even at the time as possibly being "real"). That was the story that explained Captain America appearance after Steve's disappearance. I'm pretty sure that it was a subsequent letters page that declared it officially canon. I believe that it wound up in What If? simply because Thomas had no other place to put the story at the time, this being before Invaders.

However, that wasn't the first time the Torch was depicted as killing Hitler. That honour goes to Young Men#53. In fairness things still aren't entirely cut and dry: now pre-Fantastic Four#1 stories are considered canon unless stated otherwise but back in the 1970s the reverse was closer to the truth. Even so, that aspect of the What If? story probably was Roy Thomas' attempt to make that Young Men story canon. Probably not the best title to do that in but it's too late to change that now.

Stuart V
Nov 25, 2012, 04:41 am
Incorrect: The real name of Petra of the Deadly Genesis X-Men is Petra Kristensen.
Truth: Petra is her codename. We don't know any part of her real name.

Incorrect: The Kid Who Collects Spider-Man is Tim Hammond.
Truth: The Kid Who Collects Spider-Man is Tim Harrison.

Thanks to Wikipedia for once again starting and perpetuating bad info. Petra's dodgy surname got removed from Wiki after a while, though not before it had spread like a virus across other sites too lazy to read an actual comic. Tim's inaccurate surname has remained unchallenged on Wikipedia for five years, thus debunking Wiki's claims of "we spot and fix errors quickly."


Michael Regan
Dec 2, 2012, 04:32 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

The next one requires spoiler tags because it relats to the first issue of the new Fantastic Four series (I haven't read it, but numerous websites are mentioning this error:
The Fantastic Four got their powers from unstable molecules. In actuality it's cosmic rays.

I finally read the issue, and re-read it and I believe you have missread the entry.  The Fantastic Four got their powers from unstable molecules. In actuality it's cosmic rays.

Andy E. Nystrom
Dec 2, 2012, 08:38 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

I finally read the issue, and re-read it and I believe you have missread the entry. The Fantastic Four got their powers from unstable molecules. In actuality it's cosmic rays.

I added spoiler tags because the issue (the latest Fantastic Four#1) is still quite new.

I'm not sure what you mean by the entry. As indicated above I was going by the comic news reports and the comments therein, not having read the issue; I've never claimed my comments were gospel, just something reported on a sufficient number of sites that I gave it credence. So if you thought I had read the issue that you misread my post and thought I had misread something I hadn't read.

Having said that, my understanding from what I've read in the past is that unstable molecules is strictly a matter of their costumes. I can't even recall if they were retconned into the spacesuits or if they were only cited as an explanation for the blue costumes that came later. So the only sense where it may be correct in saying there were unstable molecules in their make-up would be in the sense that any make-up Sue wears turns invisible when she does and whatever Johnny puts in his hair to impress the ladies remains when he flames up. Unstable molecules aren't meant to be part of their genetic make-up as I've always understood them.

jephyork
Dec 3, 2012, 05:40 pm

The phrase "unstable molecules" doesn't always have to refer to "Unstable Molecules(TM)", the things Reed invented and put into the team's costumes. It could just mean "molecules which are unstable."

-Jeph!

Michael Regan
Dec 3, 2012, 05:54 pm

jephyork wrote:

The phrase "unstable molecules" doesn't always have to refer to "Unstable Molecules(TM)", the things Reed invented and put into the team's costumes. It could just mean "molecules which are unstable."

-Jeph!

Beat me to it, Jeff. Exactly right.

I can quote the issue directly if anyone would like...

Andy E. Nystrom
Dec 4, 2012, 12:02 am

I suspect that it was still done in error since the term usually has a very specific meaning in the Marvel Universe and using it another way is probably no-prize territory, i.e. explaining why a mistake isn't really a mistake. If not in error, it's still a bad idea to use that term beyond the costume bit because it does muddy things unnecessarily. Or to put it another way, if you were just starting out with reading Marvel comics and learned unstable molecules and Unstable Molecules were separate terms in stories written in all caps, how likely is it you'd continue reading them?

Michael Regan
Dec 4, 2012, 11:49 am
I'll get the actual quote from the issue this evening. I thought it was clear enough but can understand where the confusion lies.

stay tuned...

Andy E. Nystrom
Dec 4, 2012, 01:02 pm
Just found a fair use version of the scene (only three panels) here
http://everydayislikewednesday.blogs...obot-6_15.html

I still think it probably was a chronicler's error (the bold italics suggests it's meant to actually be the commonly used Marvel Universe term). But not being a mind reader I am also open to it being a poor choice of words on Fraction's part. On the plus side so many comic news sites are reporting that scene that it's not as likely as the "Bucky killed Hitler" bit to stick in reader's minds as "canon" for lack of a better word.

Michael Regan
Dec 4, 2012, 05:48 pm
Can we also assume the intro page was written by Fraction?

A brilliant scientist - his best friend - the woman he loves - and her fiery-tempered kid brother! Together, they braved the unknown terrors of outer space and were changed by cosmic rays into something more than merely human!

If he cannot be blammed for a poor choice of words (which could be the letterer actually), he can certain be charged with writing incomplete sentences.

Andy E. Nystrom
Jan 13, 2013, 02:38 pm
I just noticed that what is probably the most misspelled name of all, even more so than Shmidt's, is absent: Norman and Harry's surname is Osborn, not Osborne or Osbourne.

Stuart V
Jan 13, 2013, 06:22 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I just noticed that what is probably the most misspelled name of all, even more so than Shmidt's, is absent: Norman and Harry's surname is Osborn, not Osborne or Osbourne.

Good catch!

Andy E. Nystrom
Mar 8, 2013, 12:51 am
I *think* I spotted another Wiki error but I'm not as certain on this one. The entry for Shocker claims that he survived encounters Scourge and Punisher. I know in Lethal Foes of Spider-Man he encountered a Scourge imposter, but am I right in thinking he never encountered an actual member of the Scourge organization? I don't recall the Punisher one either but I'm thinking that with Scourge he only encountered the imposter?

Sidney Osinga
Mar 8, 2013, 01:17 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I don't recall the Punisher one either

I'm pretty sure that's a reference to Punisher War Journal #4, when the Punisher blow up the bar where Stiltman's wake was being held.

Andy E. Nystrom
Mar 8, 2013, 06:02 pm

Sidney Osinga wrote:

I'm pretty sure that's a reference to Punisher War Journal #4, when the Punisher blow up the bar where Stiltman's wake was being held.

Thank you, I recall that one now. That one I was more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to. It's more the bit of him actually encountering a Scourge that I'm doubting.

Stuart V
Mar 8, 2013, 06:42 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I *think* I spotted another Wiki error but I'm not as certain on this one. The entry for Shocker claims that he survived encounters Scourge and Punisher. I know in Lethal Foes of Spider-Man he encountered a Scourge imposter, but am I right in thinking he never encountered an actual member of the Scourge organization? I don't recall the Punisher one either but I'm thinking that with Scourge he only encountered the imposter?

Per the Scourge of the Underworld handbook entry, the Shocker ran into one of the Scourges who worked for the Red Skull, so it depends on whether you count them as genuine or imposters.

Stuart V
Mar 10, 2013, 02:40 pm
Another old one, prompted by a few recent queries sent to the handbooks and to some posts I've seen today on other forums.
False: "Hercules once pulled Manhattan Island back into place after it had been shifted from its foundations."
Truth: Pawns of They Who Wield Power attacked Manhattan with a device that was intended to cause earthquakes. Hercules braced the island's foundations with his own body, and thus minimised the damage. He later embellished this tale to claim that the villains, who became dubbed the City-Stealers because of the plot Herc attributed to them, had actually severed Manhattan from its foundations and floated it out to sea intending to hold the island to ransom, but that he, Hercules, had personally and individually pulled the island back into place via two large chains.

The details: This one originates with Marvel Team-Up #28, which does, indeed, depict Hercules pulling Manhattan into place with a pair of chains
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/e...sManhattan.jpg
However, even within the issue itself, doubt is cast as to whether events really transpired as shown. The final panel includes an editorial note stating that what was shown is what "merry Gerry (Conway)" said happened, and "we're not sure if we believe it, either."
http://www.supermegamonkey.net/chron...U28_Ending.JPG
A few years later the story was referenced back to in Incredible Hulk #241 when They Who Wield Power copped to having been behind the City Stealers, and mention the events of Marvel Team-Up.
http://www.supermegamonkey.net/chron..._TheyChess.JPG
Prince Rey notes that Hercules braced himself against the foundations of Manhattan and absorbed the shock. Doing this would have meant that Manhattan wasn't ever split away from its foundations as MTU #28 claimed, assuming that had even been the plan to begin with, and Rey further mentions that Hercules has "since boasted of his feat in more grandiose terms."

Now, lest anyone claim (as I've seen at least one person do on a forum online recently) that this panel doesn't specifically identify the Manhattan pulling scene and that Rey doesn't specifically say that was what Hercules was boasting about, and that we don't actually know what the writer was trying to tell us with that dialogue, I've personally asked Roger Stern, writer of the latter comic, to confirm what Rey was on about. This is his reply, word for word:

"Yes, the reference in Incredible Hulk #241 is the explanation for what really happened in Marvel Team-Up #28.

Hercules never towed Manhattan back into place because it had never been torn loose from bedrock. He had, instead, saved the city -- with a little help from Spider-Man's scientific direction -- in the manner revealed in the Hulk story.

Of course, that wasn't dramatic enough for Herc who padded his resume with a wildly exaggerated explanation. (As I recall, there was even a disclaimer to that effect at the end of the Team-Up story.)

There were a lot of problems with that Team-Up story, of course, the main one being that islands don't float. And even if there had been some outlandish explanation given for how it could float -- and there wasn't -- a loose-floating Manhattan would be too wide to fit through the Verrazano Narrows. Also, in the course of the story, Hercules somehow supposedly turned the island around so that he put it back with the NYC Battery facing north towards the Bronx. Mildly amusing, maybe ... but mainly ludicrous.

The whole mess was recounted in the Marvel No-Prize Book.

If anyone believed that Marvel Team-Up #28 was the true story ... well ... both Geology and Geography (not to mention, Physics) says they're wrong."

Sure enough, as Roger notes, the Marvel No-Prize Book does cover this in both the 1982 and 2007 editions:
http://blogintomystery.files.wordpre.../noprize1c.jpg

The Official Marvel Index to Marvel Team-Up also confirms this with a very specific comment stating unequivocally that Hercules never pulled Manhattan as the issue showed, but simply boasted about doing so. Subsequent handbook entries also confirm it, as recently as the They Who Wield Power entry in the hardcovers.

Monolith
Mar 12, 2013, 03:08 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I *think* I spotted another Wiki error but I'm not as certain on this one. The entry for Shocker claims that he survived encounters Scourge and Punisher. I know in Lethal Foes of Spider-Man he encountered a Scourge imposter, but am I right in thinking he never encountered an actual member of the Scourge organization? I don't recall the Punisher one either but I'm thinking that with Scourge he only encountered the imposter?

From Captain America #394, when the Red Skull was meeting with his lieutenants, addressing Scourge:

Scourge: I stalked and killed Black Abbott, Lionfang, and the Wrench.

Red Skull: And what about Shocker, Gamecock, and Steel Wind?

Scourge: They eluded me, sir.

The Skull then killed him for his failures.

Andy E. Nystrom
Mar 12, 2013, 08:27 pm

  Monolith wrote:

From Captain America #394, when the Red Skull was meeting with his lieutenants, addressing Scourge:

Scourge: I stalked and killed Black Abbott, Lionfang, and the Wrench.

Red Skull: And what about Shocker, Gamecock, and Steel Wind?

Scourge: They eluded me, sir.

The Skull then killed him for his failures.

Thank you for that. It wouldn't surprise me if the Skull was thinking, "I might have been willing to forgive Shocker and Steel Wind, but this idiot let Gamecock elude him."

Stuart V
Mar 17, 2013, 11:25 am
Another membership error which appears on various sites.

False: Archer of the XSE joined X-Factor.
Truth: Archer was an ally of X-Factor's former members after debuting in X-Factor #140, during a period when X-Factor was disbanded. In X-Factor #149, when Havok decided to reform the team, Archer, along with fellow XSE members Greystone and Fixx, was offered membership. However, unlike them, he declined. Hence, not a member of X-Factor, even briefly.

Michael Regan
Mar 17, 2013, 12:16 pm
I've noticed that is a common false assumption with many team books where random team-ups are suddenly included in membership rosters.

Andy E. Nystrom
Mar 30, 2013, 04:00 pm
Brian Cronin's latest Comic Book Legends has a relevant feature: Was Sam Wilson a pimp? The answer he gives is no but in the Comments a few people insist he was. I'm going with no myself. Cap can forgive former criminals but someone who used women to profit from sex is probably beyond what Cap would accept from a teammate.

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources...evealed-412/2/

Michael Regan
Mar 30, 2013, 06:47 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Brian Cronin's latest Comic Book Legends has a relevant feature: Was Sam Wilson a pimp? The answer he gives is no but in the Comments a few people insist he was. I'm going with no myself. Cap can forgive former criminals but someone who used women to profit from sex is probably beyond what Cap would accept from a teammate.

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources...evealed-412/2/

Looking at the Wikipedia page which makes mention of this, I have gone ahead and checked the sources referenced following the disputed entry. It appears to be another great example of the failures to be found on Wikipedia as the two comics referenced have nothing to do with the lines noted.

I do not remember anything about Sam pimping, but perhaps it was an identity he created, much like Matches Malone in Batman, who had a reputation which has no actual basis in fact. Easily confirmed if the correct issues are actually noted obviously.

Stuart V
Mar 31, 2013, 02:07 pm

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Brian Cronin's latest Comic Book Legends has a relevant feature: Was Sam Wilson a pimp? The answer he gives is no but in the Comments a few people insist he was. I'm going with no myself. Cap can forgive former criminals but someone who used women to profit from sex is probably beyond what Cap would accept from a teammate.

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources...evealed-412/2/

The issue that revealed his criminal past certainly didn't identify him as a pimp. The clothing he was depicted in does fit the stereotype many now have of African American pimps, which doesn't help, but we're looking at that clothing through a modern lens, and in the 1970s it may well have represented a slightly different stereotype, that of an African American crook - in other words, drawing a conclusion from it that he was a pimp would be like concluding that the Gay Ghost is homosexual based on his name. Meanings change. Whether crook or pimp, the clothing is still an unfortunate stereotype though.

It is possible that later stories have extrapolated from that image that he was a pimp and stated as much; if so, it'd be another example of what might be called "Kenneth Crichton syndrome", where what one story depicts is misrecollected by a later writer who then unwittingly brings their interpretation into canon because erroneously believe it already is canon. Without checking a lot of issues though it is hard to say for sure.

  Michael Regan wrote:

Looking at the Wikipedia page which makes mention of this, I have gone ahead and checked the sources referenced following the disputed entry. It appears to be another great example of the failures to be found on Wikipedia as the two comics referenced have nothing to do with the lines noted.

Woah! Wikipedia is inaccurate!?! :jaw:Colour me shocked. :rofl:

  Michael Regan wrote:

I do not remember anything about Sam pimping, but perhaps it was an identity he created, much like Matches Malone in Batman, who had a reputation which has no actual basis in fact. Easily confirmed if the correct issues are actually noted obviously.

No, Sam was a criminal for a while. Exactly what crimes he committed are another matter.

Andy E. Nystrom
Mar 31, 2013, 02:22 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

It is possible that later stories have extrapolated from that image that he was a pimp and stated as much; if so, it'd be another example of what might be called "Kenneth Falsworth syndrome", where what one story depicts is misrecollected by a later writer who then unwittingly brings their interpretation into canon because erroneously believe it already is canon. Without checking a lot of issues though it is hard to say for sure.

I'm wondering if a "changed premises" thread might be in order. I'm particularly interested in stuff that I don't think was ever explained away but rather the premise just suddenly changed and the change stuck. Other examples: Ted Sallis being married instead of just dating. Thanos and Mentor being connected to the Eternals instead of the Greek gods might count too (I just read Essential Captain Marvel v2 and the latter was definitely the case at first; I don't know if the discrepancy was ever explained or just ignored; in this instance I suspect the change was more out of convenience than confusion).

Monolith
Apr 1, 2013, 11:21 am

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I'm wondering if a "changed premises" thread might be in order. I'm particularly interested in stuff that I don't think was ever explained away but rather the premise just suddenly changed and the change stuck. Other examples: Ted Sallis being married instead of just dating. Thanos and Mentor being connected to the Eternals instead of the Greek gods might count too (I just read Essential Captain Marvel v2 and the latter was definitely the case at first; I don't know if the discrepancy was ever explained or just ignored; in this instance I suspect the change was more out of convenience than confusion).

I recently re-read the 2004 Thanos series written by Starlin. In #1, Thanos point blank says "I am descendant from the Olympian Gods of Earth" to Adam Warlock.

Stuart V
Jun 17, 2013, 05:31 pm
A newish one, but not one I'm adding to the main list, for the following reasons: (1) it's not actually related to Marvel; (2) I'm not sure if it has spread beyond a single site. But, having stumbled across it, I felt this was worth sharing as another example of the flaws of Wikis letting just anyone edit.

On the Tick Wiki, there's a page for Cloris:
http://tick.wikia.com/wiki/Cloris
which says this:
"Cloris was a monster made entirely from the mildew scraped from the armpits of former United States Vice Presidential candidates, with Harry S. Truman being the largest known contributor. Interestingly, Sarah Palin is the one whose fungal growth gave the creature sentience, if you can call it that. Cloris now does her best to live up to the expectations of her peers and progenitors. She is largely successful. When the Tick ran for president, Arthur was nearly made to donate his armpit mildew to cloris, but in Season 4 Ep 12, The Tick vs. the Mildew Monster, the duo was able to successfully fillibuster their way to victory."

Now, Cloris is actually the Tick's ex-wife (assuming the not entirely sane Tick's memories can be trusted, as she was only seen in flashback in The Tick: Luny Bin miniseries afaik). However, even if you didn't know that, anyone with an ounce of knowledge about the Tick should spot suspect bits in the above info which would then, in turn, lead you to double check and discover all of it is false info posted by another of the fake info peddlers common on Wikis. Anyone care to take a stab at identifying the clues to the above being dubious?

Michael Regan
Jun 17, 2013, 07:15 pm
Well, considering Sarah Palin was only the Mayor of Wasala when the episode aired she would be far below the interest of the writers. She only became Governor in 2006.

The Tick only ran for 3 seasons as well.

Stuart V
Jun 18, 2013, 11:57 am

  Michael Regan wrote:

Well, considering Sarah Palin was only the Mayor of Wasala when the episode aired she would be far below the interest of the writers. She only became Governor in 2006.

The Tick only ran for 3 seasons as well.

Exactly. The Tick ran for three seasons, and it ended in the 1990s, well before anyone outside of Alaska had ever heard of Sarah Palin.

Stuart V
Jun 24, 2013, 05:05 pm
Since I see this is still making the rounds on various sites:

"Psylocke's middle name is Gloriana/Psylocke's full name is Elizabeth Gloriana Braddock."

Nope. In the House of M reality, where Psylocke was a member of the British Royal Family, she did get called Elisabeth (sic) Gloriana Braddock. Gloriana was one of the titles used by Queen Elizabeth I; she'd have been called Elizabeth Gloriana on occasions, despite it not being a surname, so in the same vein there's no certainty Gloriana was even a proper name for Psylocke, but even if it was, it would only apply to House of M Psylocke. As of the moment 616 Betsy has no known middle names. That could, of course, change, especially if a writer does their research by looking at the wrong fan site and unwittingly makes the fan misconception canon, but as of now Gloriana is not one of 616 Psylocke's names.

Melou
Jul 30, 2013, 10:26 am
Hi!
I've a lot of questions about the mutants. I've looked for answers on many wiki and sites without finding any clear answer:

1) Among the Brotherhood of the eponymous series, many characters weren't named, but are stated to be fan-named. Did you know what were the real names/alias of:
*"Explosa": Colombian pyrokinetic, (2nd issue)
* A redhead with mustache: "Phisherman"/"Phishy McPhish" in reference (for an unknown reason) to the music band Phish (7th issue)
* Malformed mutant ("Spud"), a scaly mutant ("Scales"/"Scaly Man"), a reptilian mutant ("Slaughter"/Cap'n happy") (9th issue)

Also are stated to be officially named two other mutants. Are those name real or fan-named?:
*A tri-eyed/optic blaster mutant: "Trois" (also fan-named Triocula) (9th issue)
*A lobster-handed mutant: "Chela" (also fan-named Claws) (9th issue)

2) About the Civil War Battle Damage Report
Milton Peterson, aka Obituary, ex-member of the O-Force (X-Statix 1 to 3), Firebolt (Powerman & Iron Fist 108), Marvel Boy (David Bank) were stated as a potential Initiative trainees.

Are they still powered (if they are indeed mutants and it isn't a mistake), or it just their training/past who is seen as valuable for the Initiative, as Aguila or Brass, confirmed depowered (or the depowered mutants assembled by Night Trasher)?

3) Asylum(s) of the Psionex:
-Henrique Gallante used his powers in New Thunderbolt series, around the time of the M-Day. Was the story happening before or after the M-Day (Confirmed to be powered or not)
-Was it Henrique Gallante or the unknown woman who participated to the Siege ?

4) I've seen Night Trasher (Donyell Taylor) listed as a mutant. Is that true ? If yes, is he still powered ? (I never read an issue where he issued those powers, before or after M-Day)

Sorry for the massive amount of questions.

Stuart V
Jul 30, 2013, 10:58 am

Melou wrote:

Hi!
I've a lot of questions about the mutants. I've looked for answers on many wiki and sites without finding any clear answer:

1) Among the Brotherhood of the eponymous series, many characters weren't named, but are stated to be fan-named. Did you know what were the real names/alias of:
*"Explosa": Colombian pyrokinetic, (2nd issue)
* A redhead with mustache: "Phisherman"/"Phishy McPhish" in reference (for an unknown reason) to the music band Phish (7th issue)
* Malformed mutant ("Spud"), a scaly mutant ("Scales"/"Scaly Man"), a reptilian mutant ("Slaughter"/Cap'n happy") (9th issue)

Explosa, Phisherman, Spud and Cap'n Happy are joke names / place fillers which were first used in the Marvel Appendix entry for the Brotherhood - they are unofficial and not intended to be seen as anything except unofficial, which is why they are clearly marked as such in the entry. Naturally, some wiki plagiarists, happy to steal info rather than do their own research and not able to give proper credit, transferred these to Wikipedia and listed them as official names. The others are pure fanwank.

Melou wrote:

Also are stated to be officially named two other mutants. Are those name real or fan-named?:
*A tri-eyed/optic blaster mutant: "Trois" (also fan-named Triocula) (9th issue)
*A lobster-handed mutant: "Chela" (also fan-named Claws) (9th issue)

Chela and Trios are official, given in the Brotherhood entry for OHOTMU HC #2. The others are fancruft.

And I have another wrong name to add to the list, which I uncovered while checking on this - the second Crimson Commando is not, as some sites claim, Shelley Warkworth. That was fake info added to Wikipedia by the notorious fake namer "Starspangledkiwi", which other plagiarising, don't do their own research, sites simply copied and spread.

Melou wrote:

2) About the Civil War Battle Damage Report
Milton Peterson, aka Obituary, ex-member of the O-Force (X-Statix 1 to 3), Firebolt (Powerman & Iron Fist 108), Marvel Boy (David Bank) were stated as a potential Initiative trainees.

Are they still powered (if they are indeed mutants and it isn't a mistake), or it just their training/past who is seen as valuable for the Initiative, as Aguila or Brass, confirmed depowered (or the depowered mutants assembled by Night Trasher)?

Given their listings, the government presumably thinks they are all alive and powered. Whether that is genuinely the case is another matter. None of them had skills that would make them worth recruiting otherwise, unlike Aguila and Brass.

Melou wrote:

3) Asylum(s) of the Psionex:
-Henrique Gallante used his powers in New Thunderbolt series, around the time of the M-Day. Was the story happening before or after the M-Day (Confirmed to be powered or not)
-Was it Henrique Gallante or the unknown woman who participated to the Siege ?

Not sure and unrevealed. I'll check.

Melou wrote:

4) I've seen Night Trasher (Donyell Taylor) listed as a mutant. Is that true ? If yes, is he still powered ? (I never read an issue where he issued those powers, before or after M-Day)

Yes, he was a mutant, but he was depowered on M-Day. He used to be able to channel bioelectric blasts from his hands.

Melou
Jul 30, 2013, 01:50 pm
Wow, that was quick, thanks a lot.

Well, I have always more questions:

1) The Atlantean Mutants
-Is Llyra still mutant-powered (is she even a mutant)? Her mutations (Mutate) via the Serpent Crown makes things unclear
-Are the two Cell-13 members, allies of Kamar and Krakos, mutants ? (In Sub-Mariner Vol 2)
-Attuma is stated (by Namora) to be a mutant in Exiles, but his version on 616 is he a mutant ? (And is that Namora an hybrid or a pure Atlantean?)
-Eel, Sharkskin and Undertow (New mutants Annual 5)

2) And one I had forgot for a long time: Who is that pyrokinesist mutant seen in Wolverine Vol.2 #309: He look like Match (powers and uniform), but can revert to a human skin, and Match wasn't a Cyclops' student after Schism (or I've made a mistake).

3) Tsu-Zana/Ultra-Girl is she a Kree Mutant or a Human mutant/Kree hybrid ? Youth in Revolt seems to state (for the first time I think), that she is half-human, but not clearly explain her origins. It could even be "half-human" in the way "cultural human".

4) Is Manifold a mutant ? I keep seeing people state that, sometimes because he is affiliated to Gateaway, who have similar powers, but I have never seen any proof or reference.

5) Same question for Romulus and Remus (Wolverine foes).

6) What happened to the Chameleon-like Artificial Mutant in Astonishing X-Men Vol.3 arc Ghost Boxes ? He wasn't seen at Wundagore, neither in the X-Brig.

7) I looked close without seeing at any time Heather Cameron (Lifeguard) on-panel, after being stated to be part of the Street Team of Cyclops' X-Men after Schism.

8) What about Vertigo? She was always stated to be a savage land mutate (except for her version in Age of X), but people keep thinking she is/might be a mutant, because of her affiliation with Sinister.

9) Cloud Nine have been stated to be a mutant. Is that true ?

10) Same for Cloak and Dagger, although it has been reconfirmed during Utopia and Heroic Age that they were confirmed to not be mutants.

I think that's all for now. Thanks again.

Michael Regan
Jul 30, 2013, 03:53 pm
As a quick one-off, Cloak and Dagger are mutates, not mutants, as indicated in their original origin story.

Melou
Jul 30, 2013, 04:17 pm
That's what I though, but people have kept swearing about a recent issue, without even giving a reference.

Others states this issue: "Cloak and Dagger Vol 3 #19", but I don't have it, so I can't be sure of anything. (and it is a pretty old story compared to recent statements)

Rayeye
Jul 30, 2013, 05:44 pm

Melou wrote:

Wow, that was quick, thanks a lot.

Well, I have always more questions:

1) The Atlantean Mutants
-Is Llyra still mutant-powered (is she even a mutant)? Her mutations (Mutate) via the Serpent Crown makes things unclear
-Are the two Cell-13 members, allies of Kamar and Krakos, mutants ? (In Sub-Mariner Vol 2)
-Attuma is stated (by Namora) to be a mutant in Exiles, but his version on 616 is he a mutant ? (And is that Namora an hybrid or a pure Atlantean?)
-Eel, Sharkskin and Undertow (New mutants Annual 5)

2) And one I had forgot for a long time: Who is that pyrokinesist mutant seen in Wolverine Vol.2 #309: He look like Match (powers and uniform), but can revert to a human skin, and Match wasn't a Cyclops' student after Schism (or I've made a mistake).

3) Tsu-Zana/Ultra-Girl is she a Kree Mutant or a Human mutant/Kree hybrid ? Youth in Revolt seems to state (for the first time I think), that she is half-human, but not clearly explain her origins. It could even be "half-human" in the way "cultural human".

4) Is Manifold a mutant ? I keep seeing people state that, sometimes because he is affiliated to Gateaway, who have similar powers, but I have never seen any proof or reference.

5) Same question for Romulus and Remus (Wolverine foes).

6) What happened to the Chameleon-like Artificial Mutant in Astonishing X-Men Vol.3 arc Ghost Boxes ? He wasn't seen at Wundagore, neither in the X-Brig.

7) I looked close without seeing at any time Heather Cameron (Lifeguard) on-panel, after being stated to be part of the Street Team of Cyclops' X-Men after Schism.

8) What about Vertigo? She was always stated to be a savage land mutate (except for her version in Age of X), but people keep thinking she is/might be a mutant, because of her affiliation with Sinister.

9) Cloud Nine have been stated to be a mutant. Is that true ?

10) Same for Cloak and Dagger, although it has been reconfirmed during Utopia and Heroic Age that they were confirmed to not be mutants.

I think that's all for now. Thanks again.

The things I know:
1) Eel, Sharkskin and Undertow are mutant Atlanteans. But it is unrevealed if they are still mutants since M-Day.

2) That must be Ethan Warren. He had a profile in the Wolverine: Weapon X Files.

4) As far as I know it hasn't been revealed yet weither Manifold is a mutant or not.

7) Lifeguard was indeed listed as a member of the so-called street team in the roster preview, but was never seen in action after that or as part of the team in a comic.

8) Vertigo is a mutate. Although she has been cloned multiple times by Sinister, explaining why she's part of the Marauders en Savage Land Mutates, her origins are among the Savage Land Mutates.

9) First time I heard of it. As far as I know her source/origins of powers hasn't been revealed yet.

10) Cloak & Dagger are not mutants, which has been clarified in the recent Cloak & Dagger oneshot. So that's the most recent information about their power origin, but of course another writer could undone this all.

Michael Regan
Jul 30, 2013, 05:57 pm
I guess a writer could try to make Cloak and Dagger mutants, but since their powers were unerringly the result of experimental drugs...

Andy E. Nystrom
Jul 30, 2013, 10:02 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

I guess a writer could try to make Cloak and Dagger mutants, but since their powers were unerringly the result of experimental drugs...

It's appropriate that this is being covered in the "getting wrong" thread and not the general questions one.

Probably a lot of the confusion with them is that in the 1990s they had a series that arbitrarily called them mutants probably for no other reason than to try to make the series sell. It was called The Mutant Misadventures of Cloak and Dagger.

So yes, for a time they were considered to be mutants even though by Marvel's definition of the term it didn't make any sense for them to be mutants. Wrong information, but perpetuated by Marvel itself for a time.

captainswift
Jul 31, 2013, 01:18 am

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

It's appropriate that this is being covered in the "getting wrong" thread and not the general questions one.

Probably a lot of the confusion with them is that in the 1990s they had a series that arbitrarily called them mutants probably for no other reason than to try to make the series sell. It was called The Mutant Misadventures of Cloak and Dagger.

So yes, for a time they were considered to be mutants even though by Marvel's definition of the term it didn't make any sense for them to be mutants. Wrong information, but perpetuated by Marvel itself for a time.

I believe the explanation at the time was, "They must have been mutants because the drugs that gave them their powers didn't kill them." Which, of course, would seem to make the case that anybody who got their powers via a means that should have killed them (i.e. nearly everybody) should also be a mutant.

Michael Regan
Jul 31, 2013, 08:29 am

  captainswift wrote:

I believe the explanation at the time was, "They must have been mutants because the drugs that gave them their powers didn't kill them." Which, of course, would seem to make the case that anybody who got their powers via a means that should have killed them (i.e. nearly everybody) should also be a mutant.

Absolutely correct, therefore using this failed logic Spider-Man was a powerless mutant until bitten by the radioactive spider, Bruce Banner was a mutant until bombarded by gamma radiation, etc.

The reverse logic here was attempted at one point (I cannot remember where) which suggested that mutant powers were not only inherent but could also be determined by a specific stimulus which directed the type of power the mutant displayed. A very brief, and rather flawed, suggestion for the variety of mutant powers seen over the years.

Andy E. Nystrom
Jul 31, 2013, 10:05 am

  Michael Regan wrote:

Absolutely correct, therefore using this failed logic Spider-Man was a powerless mutant until bitten by the radioactive spider, Bruce Banner was a mutant until bombarded by gamma radiation, etc.

Ironically during roughly the same time period as Mutant Misadventures of Cloak and Dagger was being published, the covers of Spider-Man's books were specifically promoting him as the non-mutant superhero. I'm pretty sure one source (Marvel Age or maybe a Bullpen or letters page) at the time specifically stated that Cloak and Dagger were mutants and Spider-Man was not, though they were vague as to why. In any event the title was renamed Cloak & Dagger after #14 and the title was cancelled after #19, which would seem to suggest that most people's reactions could be politely described as "nice try".

Michael Regan
Jul 31, 2013, 10:25 am
It also had to do with the "Big Two" compartmentalizing their titles. Marvel had (has?) Spider-Man titles, X-Men titles, Avengers titles... everything needed (needs?) a parent folder.

Melou
Jul 31, 2013, 10:33 am
10) is the worst question. It keep changing everytime.

9) Well, it's maybe in Avengers Assemble (I've seen a handbook entry pic somewhere, but without references..), and I haven't that one.

8) The doubt is also present because of her being killed by a Predator X (who allegedly target only mutants). I personally think she was killed in the rush of the actions (or an error of the writer, who can be explained that way)

2) I had already check Ethan (pyrokinesist mutants), but he doesn't fit. It's a young mutant, blond mutant with flames coming from his head and back, with Paragons' uniform (like Match), trained with Cyclops, but seemingly with less skills in controlling his powers.

And new questions related to possible errors:
11) Does the Beast (Hank McCoy) (Earth-9142) who visit the Guthries in X-Factor Vol 3 #24 (Endangered species) is really named "Professor B" ? (this Beast is wheel-chaired)

12) Does the Beast (Earth-3112) is a dog mutant, as for the Rex-Dogs (X-Men Millenial Visions), or just a different evolution of the human Beast ? (X-Factor Vol 3 #24; Endangered species)

13) Does the Initiative recruits were kidnapped and replaced by skrulls before or after their recruitment:
A question quite global, but I will stick on certain characters: Razorback (Buford Hollis), Equinox and Skyhawk (Earth Force)

14) Does the Chicago Initiative Spaceknights are Galadorians ?

(And I also start to think I derive from the "Errors" to "Questions". Does there is an equivalent topic on this forum with such quality and speed response ? (or can I stay here for questions?)

William Keogh
Jul 31, 2013, 10:44 am
I think this area of the forums is best in that regard.



 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 12:24 pm  #11


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Additional text from Comixfan:
 
Stuart V
Aug 1, 2013, 08:41 am

Melou wrote:

1) The Atlantean Mutants
-Is Llyra still mutant-powered (is she even a mutant)? Her mutations (Mutate) via the Serpent Crown makes things unclear

Yes, she is / was a mutant. No way to easily tell if she is still one, as Set has magically altered her.

Melou wrote:

-Are the two Cell-13 members, allies of Kamar and Krakos, mutants ? (In Sub-Mariner Vol 2)

As Namor's son, Kamar likely is, but it is unconfirmed. Krakos probably isn't - he used technology to breathe on land, and the source of his increased strength is unrevealed; as such, he might be a mutant, but he's just as likely to be a mutate or technologically enhanced.

Melou wrote:

-Attuma is stated (by Namora) to be a mutant in Exiles, but his version on 616 is he a mutant ? (And is that Namora an hybrid or a pure Atlantean?)

Fairly sure 616 Attuma is not a mutant. Exiles Namora probably still is, blue skin notwithstanding, simply because the Exiles were, for the most part, mutants.

Melou wrote:

-Eel, Sharkskin and Undertow (New mutants Annual 5)

All definitely mutants, current status post-M-Day unconfirmed.

Melou wrote:

2) And one I had forgot for a long time: Who is that pyrokinesist mutant seen in Wolverine Vol.2 #309: He look like Match (powers and uniform), but can revert to a human skin, and Match wasn't a Cyclops' student after Schism (or I've made a mistake).

The story in question was set before Schism. It's not clear who he is - I would think Match is likely, and the human look is either an art error or indicates him trying to really work on minimising his flames.

Melou wrote:

3) Tsu-Zana/Ultra-Girl is she a Kree Mutant or a Human mutant/Kree hybrid ? Youth in Revolt seems to state (for the first time I think), that she is half-human, but not clearly explain her origins. It could even be "half-human" in the way "cultural human".

She was, to start with, apparently a white Kree raised by humans and mutated by unknown means. She might be a hybrid, but Kree/human hybrids aren't automatically mutants.

Melou wrote:

4) Is Manifold a mutant ? I keep seeing people state that, sometimes because he is affiliated to Gateaway, who have similar powers, but I have never seen any proof or reference.

I don't think it has been confirmed either way.

Melou wrote:

5) Same question for Romulus and Remus (Wolverine foes).

Ditto. When Romulus was claiming he and others like him were a different species from humanity and descended from wolves, it seemed likely he wasn't a mutant. Since Remus has confirmed that Romulus is a delusional liar, it is all back up in the air. I'd say they probably are, but it remains unconfirmed.

Melou wrote:

6) What happened to the Chameleon-like Artificial Mutant in Astonishing X-Men Vol.3 arc Ghost Boxes ? He wasn't seen at Wundagore, neither in the X-Brig.

Idk, but can check - but a specific issue will help.

Melou wrote:

8) What about Vertigo? She was always stated to be a savage land mutate (except for her version in Age of X), but people keep thinking she is/might be a mutant, because of her affiliation with Sinister.

Nope, she's a mutate. Sinister doesn't limit himself to only using mutants.

Melou wrote:

9) Cloud Nine have been stated to be a mutant. Is that true ?

Nothing to suggest that she is, beyond us not knowing how she got her powers.

Melou wrote:

10) Same for Cloak and Dagger, although it has been reconfirmed during Utopia and Heroic Age that they were confirmed to not be mutants.

Keeps going back and forth - currently not believed to be mutants.

Melou wrote:

2) That must be Ethan Warren. He had a profile in the Wolverine: Weapon X Files.

No, it is definitely not Ethan Warren. The character in question is a kid.

Melou wrote:

That's what I though, but people have kept swearing about a recent issue, without even giving a reference.

Unless people can identify a specific issue, take it with a pinch of salt.

Melou wrote:

Others states this issue: "Cloak and Dagger Vol 3 #19", but I don't have it, so I can't be sure of anything. (and it is a pretty old story compared to recent statements)

In that issue D'Spayre claimed he created Cloak and Dagger, and that they would have had each others powers if he hadn't interfered. But he's a lying demon who feeds off making people feel despair, so that story could easily be false.

Melou
Aug 1, 2013, 10:06 am
2) The issue is clearly post-Schism, stated in the resume, also by the summers/wolvie dialogue, and by the fact wolvie has a school.

3) It was stated she was a mutant by a sentinel in her series.

6) Astonishing X-Men Vol. 3 28 to 29 + mention in 30

9) The entry I have seen might be from the handbook Avengers Assemble

Also:
11) Does the Beast (Hank McCoy) (Earth-9142) who visit the Guthries in X-Factor Vol 3 #24 (Endangered species) is really named "Professor B" ? (this Beast is wheel-chaired)

12) Does the Beast (Earth-3112) is a dog mutant, as for the Rex-Dogs (X-Men Millenial Visions), or just a different evolution of the human Beast ? (X-Factor Vol 3 #24; Endangered species)

13) Does the Initiative recruits were kidnapped and replaced by skrulls before or after their recruitment:
A question quite global, but I will stick on certain characters: Razorback (Buford Hollis), Equinox and Skyhawk (Earth Force)

14) Does the Chicago Initiative Spaceknights are Galadorians ?

Stuart V
Aug 1, 2013, 11:20 am

Melou wrote:

2) The issue is clearly post-Schism, stated in the resume, also by the summers/wolvie dialogue, and by the fact wolvie has a school.

Nope, the story in question is pre-Schism. From the blurb on the Marvel site:
"An untold tale of the Wolverine! Wolverine takes Elixir under his wing After M-Day, not all depowered mutants found their way in the world, and one of them comes back for Wolverine "
From the text (resume) on the inside cover "Wolverine has time to reflect on on student he couldn't save" - note "reflect" and the past tense. The story is Wolverine recalling events from the past. That's why his opening monologue is in the past tense. Why would he go to ask Cyclops for a day off AFTER Schism? By that point he's the boss, and he doesn't answer to Cyclops in any way.

Melou wrote:

3) It was stated she was a mutant by a sentinel in her series.

Then presumably she is a mutant. Sentinels can and have got it wrong beforehand, but as a rule of thumb, if they identify someone as a mutant, then they probably are.

Melou wrote:

9) The entry I have seen might be from the handbook Avengers Assemble

Nope. Her handbook entry doesn't mention the word mutant.

Melou wrote:

Also:
11) Does the Beast (Hank McCoy) (Earth-9142) who visit the Guthries in X-Factor Vol 3 #24 (Endangered species) is really named "Professor B" ? (this Beast is wheel-chaired)

He's not named. "Professor B" is, at best, speculation.

Melou wrote:

12) Does the Beast (Earth-3112) is a dog mutant, as for the Rex-Dogs (X-Men Millenial Visions), or just a different evolution of the human Beast ? (X-Factor Vol 3 #24; Endangered species)

The latter, given the human-looking Bishop he is with. Though he might not be canine - he still looks feline to me.

Melou wrote:

13) Does the Initiative recruits were kidnapped and replaced by skrulls before or after their recruitment:
A question quite global, but I will stick on certain characters: Razorback (Buford Hollis), Equinox and Skyhawk (Earth Force)

Unknown, though I'd guess they were replaced after the Initiative being recruited. I can't imagine these guys would have been high on the "kidnap and replace" list otherwise.

Melou wrote:

14) Does the Chicago Initiative Spaceknights are Galadorians ?

Unrevealed, but almost certainly not. They might, however, be utilizing Galadorian-derived tech, as you've had some of that technology left lying around on Earth for humans to potentially study - Firefall's armour, for instance. But that's just me speculating.

Monolith
Aug 1, 2013, 01:26 pm

For Cloak and Dagger, MMOC&D #19 had D'Spayre re-write their origins. Supposedly, Tyrone and Tandy were both latent mutants whose powers would have been manifested when they first met, due to the unique dark and light nature of their abilities. D'Spayre deliberately suppressed their power manifestation, however, until after Simon Marshall's experiments left them (and their abilities) tainted by drugs. He then secretly implanted each of them with demonic entities, a Darksoul and a Lightsoul, which warped their powers and soaked up their negative emotions and despair for years until D'Spayre chose to retrieve the "souls" for his own enjoyment.

According to this story, Tyrone was originally a mutant with light-powers, while Tandy was a mutant with Darkforce powers. D'Spayre's influence led to their abilities being switched, tainted, and symbiotically linked. After casting off his influence in #19, Cloak and Dagger's abilities were modified slightly (Cloak no longer absorbing lifeforce, Dagger could produce more traditional energy bolts or shields, Cloak could not teleport without Dagger, etc). This version of C&D showed up in issues of Web of Spider-Man and the Maximum Carnage crossover a few years later, where they specifically referred to their "drug-tainted mutant abilities" again.

That is, until Dr. Nemesis and the X-men ran tests on the duo after they joined the crew on Utopia, and determined they weren't mutants. So D'spayre was clearly lying about some, if not all, of the backstory in #19. (Of course, some writer could come along in a few years and claim D'Spayre manipulated the X-Men's test results to disguise their X-genes, so that C&D would feel compelled to leave and be alone and vulnerable again, but I digress.)

Michael Regan
Aug 1, 2013, 02:54 pm
Wow, thanks Monolith, I really did not remember that story. It makes some sense, in an indirect fasion.

The overall question then is, can someone be a mutant without a mutation? I do not believe so, and as soon as the powers are triggered by an external force they are mutates.

Perhaps they actually had been mutants but now due to manipulation they no longer have the mutant gene.

Stuart V
Aug 1, 2013, 03:37 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

as soon as the powers are triggered by an external force they are mutates.

Usually, but not always. Latent mutants can be triggered by external forces later in life.

Though it is by no means a hard and fast rule, you can probably spot the difference this way, a lot of the time: if an external force gives you powers that in some way tie to said force, then you are likely to be a mutate, rather than a mutant. If your powers don't relate to your external force, then it could go either way - in particular, radiation and drug exposure tend to be generic catch-alls and there's no real pattern to the kind of powers they give (except in the real world, where massive organ failure and death tend to follow sufficiently large exposures).

So, for example: Peter Parker got spider powers after being bitten by a spider. Mutate. Sandman gained the power to turn into sand after being exposed to nuclear radiation while on a beach full of sand. Mutate. Electro gained electrical powers after being struck by lightning. Mutate. Spitfire gets bitten by a vampire and transfused with artificial android blood and gains superspeed - mutant. Whizzer gets a mongoose blood transfusion and gains superspeed - mutant.

Melou
Aug 1, 2013, 03:55 pm

3) It's more her kree/human who interest me. (who change a lot concerning her mutant status: A kree mutant isn't an usual thing. Also if you know about kree mutants, or any unusual mutants)

9) The entry seems to be Marvel Avengers: The Ultimate Character Guide #1

12) Definitively a dog. Don't know much about dog races so I can't tell you which dog is mimicked by Beast.

14) Okay; I had initially thought about fans of the Galadorians, but during the Secret Invasion, there is a reference to them "man, they really hate shape changing aliens" or something like that, a reference to the Dire Wraiths. But still it could be fans.

New question:
15) Vertigo was in Age of X during the time of the manipulation (not flashbacks), but no mention was made of a Vertigo present in Utopia (and it was stated that Fortress X inhabitants were only people present on Utopia + Legion's personalities). What about that ?

Michael Regan
Aug 1, 2013, 04:23 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

Usually, but not always. Latent mutants can be triggered by external forces later in life.

Though it is by no means a hard and fast rule, you can probably spot the difference this way, a lot of the time: if an external force gives you powers that in some way tie to said force, then you are likely to be a mutate, rather than a mutant. If your powers don't relate to your external force, then it could go either way - in particular, radiation and drug exposure tend to be generic catch-alls and there's no real pattern to the kind of powers they give (except in the real world, where massive organ failure and death tend to follow sufficiently large exposures).

So, for example: Peter Parker got spider powers after being bitten by a spider. Mutate. Sandman gained the power to turn into sand after being exposed to nuclear radiation while on a beach full of sand. Mutate. Electro gained electrical powers after being struck by lightning. Mutate. Spitfire gets bitten by a vampire and transfused with artificial android blood and gains superspeed - mutant. Whizzer gets a mongoose blood transfusion and gains superspeed - mutant.

I forgot about the origins for Spitfire and Whizzer, whom I would have originally classified as mutates.

Phoenixx9
Aug 1, 2013, 04:53 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

Usually, but not always. Latent mutants can be triggered by external forces later in life.

Though it is by no means a hard and fast rule, you can probably spot the difference this way, a lot of the time: if an external force gives you powers that in some way tie to said force, then you are likely to be a mutate, rather than a mutant. If your powers don't relate to your external force, then it could go either way - in particular, radiation and drug exposure tend to be generic catch-alls and there's no real pattern to the kind of powers they give (except in the real world, where massive organ failure and death tend to follow sufficiently large exposures).

Good points.

So my question is: are there 2 classifications of Marvel Mutants like those who had an external stimuli (like Polaris) versus those who do not require/have external stimuli (like Magneto)? However, I do believe that at various times much later after manifestion of his powers, Magneto did indeed need external stimuli to boost his failing powers.

  Michael Regan wrote:

I forgot about the origins for Spitfire and Whizzer, whom I would have originally classified as mutates.

So Spitfire and Whizzer (WWII version) had external stimuli. How do they compare to Quicksilver, a speedster (and who at one time was thought to be that Whizzer's own son) who did not require this external stimuli? Does having an external stimuli make a mutant stronger, faster, etc over those who do not need them?

I remember a very old Avengers story where both Wanda and Pietro's powers waned and they needed to go back to their homeland in the Balkans. Would that count as the external stimuli needed to re-spark their powers?

Stuart V
Aug 1, 2013, 04:57 pm

Melou wrote:

3) It's more her kree/human who interest me. (who change a lot concerning her mutant status: A kree mutant isn't an usual thing. Also if you know about kree mutants, or any unusual mutants)

I don't know if we've had her true parentage revealed - she could be a hybrid.

Melou wrote:

9) The entry seems to be Marvel Avengers: The Ultimate Character Guide #1

Not an official source, so don't take it as gospel. Again, without knowing how she gained her powers, we can't really say either way.

Melou wrote:

12) Definitively a dog. Don't know much about dog races so I can't tell you which dog is mimicked by Beast.

Regardless, he's probably a Beast who was human-looking originally, from a world of humans, who ended up looking like that through self-mutation. Like most Beasts.

Melou wrote:

14) Okay; I had initially thought about fans of the Galadorians, but during the Secret Invasion, there is a reference to them "man, they really hate shape changing aliens" or something like that, a reference to the Dire Wraiths. But still it could be fans.

We've never seen them, so it is impossible to be sure. They could, in theory, be Galadorians who ended up on Earth after the end of the original Rom series. It seems more likely they are simply namesakes.

Melou wrote:

New question:
15) Vertigo was in Age of X during the time of the manipulation (not flashbacks), but no mention was made of a Vertigo present in Utopia (and it was stated that Fortress X inhabitants were only people present on Utopia + Legion's personalities). What about that ?

If that was specifically stated and was accurate, and only people already on Utopia ended up in Fortress X in the altered timeline, then presumably Vertigo must have been on Utopia (perhaps in a cell, or even one of her clones in the morgue). However, I'd need to re-read the story to check for sure. It could be that the statement about who ended up there was inaccurate, and Legion reproduced an ersatz copy of Vertigo for some reason.

Melou
Aug 1, 2013, 05:20 pm


12) I meant "he is a human mutant who looks like a dog, not a feline", and not "he is a dog", sorry.
Spitfire a mutant ? First time I heard that. Also she was accepted in the meeting room with the Aqiria president, when Meggan was sent out of the room because she was a mutant. (X-Men: Legacy Vol 2 13)


@Phoenixx9: I don't think there is to classify the mutants on that parameter.
From what I've understand: The X-Gene is present, as a state latent or active, among some humans, and several triggers who can activate that X-Gene:
*Puberty (most of them), stress (inferno babies), pain
or
*Chemicals, ionic radiations (Dragoness born at Hiroshima)

Also the Changelings are possibly just an early activation without stimulations. In the other hand, in the case of Rhapsody, her mutation appeared later than the puberty because a meningitis case. Other never developed their latent gene.

Stuart V
Aug 1, 2013, 06:08 pm

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

Good points.

So my question is: are there 2 classifications of Marvel Mutants like those who had an external stimuli (like Polaris) versus those who do not require/have external stimuli (like Magneto)? However, I do believe that at various times much later after manifestion of his powers, Magneto did indeed need external stimuli to boost his failing powers.

No, all mutants had their powers activated by stimuli - it's just that in most cases, that stimuli was puberty.

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

So Spitfire and Whizzer (WWII version) had external stimuli. How do they compare to Quicksilver, a speedster (and who at one time was thought to be that Whizzer's own son) who did not require this external stimuli? Does having an external stimuli make a mutant stronger, faster, etc over those who do not need them?

There's no practical difference. It is just a case of what activated their powers being different.

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

I remember a very old Avengers story where both Wanda and Pietro's powers waned and they needed to go back to their homeland in the Balkans. Would that count as the external stimuli needed to re-spark their powers?

Not really - that was Chthon messing them round to ensure he could keep his hooks into Wanda.

Melou wrote:

12) I meant "he is a human mutant who looks like a dog, not a feline", and not "he is a dog", sorry.

Yes, I got that - but yes, human mutant, regardless of which species he ended up resembling.

Melou wrote:

Spitfire a mutant ?

According to Selene.

Melou wrote:

First time I heard that. Also she was accepted in the meeting room with the Aqiria president, when Meggan was sent out of the room because she was a mutant. (X-Men: Legacy Vol 2 13)

Yes, I know - most people don't realise her powers are, in part, down to being a mutant, hence her being allowed in when other mutants were not.

Melou wrote:

@Phoenixx9: I don't think there is to classify the mutants on that parameter.
From what I've understand: The X-Gene is present, as a state latent or active, among some humans, and several triggers who can activate that X-Gene:
*Puberty (most of them), stress (inferno babies), pain
or
*Chemicals, ionic radiations (Dragoness born at Hiroshima)

Correct.

Melou wrote:

Also the Changelings are possibly just an early activation without stimulations. In the other hand, in the case of Rhapsody, her mutation appeared later than the puberty because a meningitis case. Other never developed their latent gene.

Correct again.

captainswift
Aug 1, 2013, 06:14 pm
I dunno, I've looked at that picture of Beast-3112 a couple of times, and compared, and I'm pretty sure he's supposed to look like the leonine form of Beast-616, only without the fur.

Michael Regan
Aug 1, 2013, 08:48 pm
I think there are other minor mutant activations which I cannot remember specifically. Instances like a character almost freezing to death and gaining ice powers or a character getting caught in a burning building and gaining flame powers. These could qualify as external stimuli specifically due to the type of powers gained.

Phoenixx9
Aug 2, 2013, 01:29 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

I remember a very old Avengers story where both Wanda and Pietro's powers waned and they needed to go back to their homeland in the Balkans. Would that count as the external stimuli needed to re-spark their powers?

Not really - that was Chthon messing them round to ensure he could keep his hooks into Wanda.

:unsure: Hmmm. I thought that only applied to the second and third time Wanda's powers quit, it was due to Chthon? Pietro's powers were fine at those times. (Chthon never imbued Pietro with any power.) That was the time Wanda and Pietro and Toad trampled through Europe in old castles and Wanda even picked up and read some old sorcery tomes, although I don't believe she used any spells.

I know it was all a recon nowadays, but I thought the Chthon interferring in the Hope of getting Wanda to turn to sorcery did not include the first time, since:

a) Both Wanda and Pietro were affected

b) Wanda did not know, think about or have any ideas about turning to sorcery at that time or have any way of learing about it in this small town.

c) The twins were only gone a short while (like 8-10 issues). They met with the townfolk and interacted with them, even meeting the buergomeister meisterberger. Then their powers mysteriously returned just in time as the alien space ship landed and abducted them.

I thought the in-comic statements as well as Wanda's and Pietro's were something about their native land influencing their powers? Am I mistaken? It has been way too long since I first read all those old stories! :stars:

Stuart V
Aug 2, 2013, 01:57 pm

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

:unsure: Hmmm. I thought that only applied to the second and third time Wanda's powers quit, it was due to Chthon? Pietro's powers were fine at those times. (Chthon never imbued Pietro with any power.) That was the time Wanda and Pietro and Toad trampled through Europe in old castles and Wanda even picked up and read some old sorcery tomes, although I don't believe she used any spells.

I know it was all a recon nowadays, but I thought the Chthon interferring in the Hope of getting Wanda to turn to sorcery did not include the first time, since:

a) Both Wanda and Pietro were affected

b) Wanda did not know, think about or have any ideas about turning to sorcery at that time or have any way of learing about it in this small town.

c) The twins were only gone a short while (like 8-10 issues). They met with the townfolk and interacted with them, even meeting the buergomeister meisterberger. Then their powers mysteriously returned just in time as the alien space ship landed and abducted them.

I thought the in-comic statements as well as Wanda's and Pietro's were something about their native land influencing their powers? Am I mistaken? It has been way too long since I first read all those old stories! :stars:

The original time that comment was used, yes - but then during the Chthon story circa Avengers #186-187, we learned that the land's mysterious properties are all down to Chthon, and Chthon states that he reduced Wandas powers "several times" - twice doesn't count as "several" (neither does three really, but, hey, whattcha gonna do?) So while not explicit, Chthon does look to be to blame for all the instances of Wanda's powers waning prior to this. As for Pietro and his power waning? No official explanation that I know of, but you could argue psychosomatic (they are twins, maybe he was subconsciously mirroring her), or her subconsciously weakening his powers with her own so that he wouldn't argue against going home, or Chthon reaching out to weaken him for the same reason (he might not have imbued Pietro with latent magic like he did Wanda, but Pietro was born within his sphere of influence to).

Phoenixx9
Aug 2, 2013, 02:48 pm
Ah, my thanks for the clarification, Stuart. That makes sense and ties things together.

My next question has to do with the speed of Spitfire, Whizzer (Bob Frank) and Quicksilver in relation to their stimuli that started their powers.

Originally, none were all that fast: 50, 100 and 175 mph, but I know that recent profiles have shown them to run hundreds if not thousands of miles-per-second.

Are these enhancements due to the different stimuli acting on their powers over time?

Angelicknight
Aug 2, 2013, 02:49 pm
Do the Generation X Novels Crossroads (1998) and Genegoths (2000) take place in 616 continuity? Genegoths references events that took Place in the Spider-Man/X-Factor: Shadowgames limited series an involves Project: Homegrown from the limited series. I know some novels do while others do not.

captainswift
Aug 2, 2013, 03:01 pm

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

Ah, my thanks for the clarification, Stuart. That makes sense and ties things together.

My next question has to do with the speed of Spitfire, Whizzer (Bob Frank) and Quicksilver in relation to their stimuli that started their powers.

Originally, none were all that fast: 50, 100 and 175 mph, but I know that recent profiles have shown them to run hundreds if not thousands of miles-per-second.

Are these enhancements due to the different stimuli acting on their powers over time?

I think the earlier Handbook profiles just short-shrifted the speedsters. While strong guys really got a boost (early Marvel stories sometimes showed heavy hitters like Hulk and Thing struggling to throw tanks or rip apart steel doors, but the HBs put them into significant tonnage for their lift capacities), speedsters kinda got the shaft. Quicksilver was doing feats in the Stan Lee days that clearly required him being faster than a racing stockcar, and yet he was defined as running less than 200 mph. I think the newer handbooks are just more accurate, than actually reflecting an actual boost to power.

(Although, most characters have become significantly more powerful than 60s portrayals, where one solid use of flame put Johnny out, and Scarlet Witch would pass out after wiggling her fingers once.)

Stuart V
Aug 2, 2013, 08:47 pm
Sigh.

And now I have to waste a few minutes of my time that could be better spent.

It seems someone who reads these pages decided to pass on what I'd said to the Marvel Database (a.k.a. Marvel.wikia.com), who, in turn, have taken the criticisms very personally, leading to a few posters there deciding to launch into personal attacks on me. Go find them if you want to read them - I can't be bothered dignifying them by posting links. But, in the interests of accuracy:

1) I have no problem with the person who brought up this thread with them. That person seems to have simply been trying to address the issues I raised vis a vis errors on their site.

2) They seem to think that this entire thread is about their site, some sort of personal attack on them, but then note how wrongheaded I am because some of the things I cite as errors aren't wrong on their site. Which, of course, is because this thread is about errors that are all over the internet, not just one site. Their site had several of the relevant errors, but not all by any means. This thread was never an attack on their site.

3) They declaim me for listing the errors here - why complain about them (as a way of allegedly deriding their site) when I could just fix them myself? Anyone who has read this thread should know the answer to that - I have corrected and continue to correct open access sites when I spot these errors. But (a) they keep getting restored ("Ith Leopold Yankee Thwine" ring any bells?), and (b) I can't find them all. So I post them here too, in the hope that gradually these errors will get weeded out across the internet. I haven't tried to edit them from the Marvel Database because I have no desire to be involved with that site any more (and I'll come to that below), but I am glad that they are now starting to address these mistakes.

4) They don't like me saying that they are misleading people into thinking they are an official site. Okay. Then they need to stop doing it. Judge for yourself whether that criticism is valid - go to their site and have a look across as many pages as you like. Let me know the first time you spot anything that states they are unofficial, a fan site, copyright belongs to Marvel and not them, etc. Compare that to other fan sites like the Appendix, Spiderfan, Uncannyxmen.net, Leaders Lair, etc. As I've previously said, they do have a disclaimer, but its on a single page that most people won't see and would have a hard time finding without actively looking for it. Maybe they didn't realise they were misleading in the way they present themselves - but in that case, once it has been pointed out, they should correct the problem.

5) I hesitate to bother with this one, since it isn't part of the remit of "things people keep getting wrong" about Marvel characters. But since they raise it, I'll broach it.

I was happy enough to contribute to and help the Database when it began; I'm a fan too, and am happy to help fan endeavours. I disagreed with some other posters at the time over them plagiarising things; apparently I am arrogant because I deleted plagiarised work and, in cases where I'd already asked someone to stop plagiarising and they'd ignored me (I was an admin on the site at the time), I'd warn them to stop instead of asking them politely again. When the site owner made it clear he was happy for people to take images from other sites without asking, I decided to leave, because I wasn't (I feel it is rude, even if legally there's nothing to say you can't).

A few years later I returned to contributing to the Database. I was led to believe things had changed, in particular the whole lifting of images policy that had triggered my departure. I registered under a new name, lokiofmidgaard, quite simply because I couldn't recall my old posting name's password. I wasn't trying to hide who I was (as someone on the Database seems to think) - I post most places as loki or, if that's not available, lokiofmidgaard (I used to do so here, and only had it changed because this is the handbook's official forum). Contradicting that last accusation, it's also suggested I tried to throw my weight round by saying I worked for Marvel. If you check my posts on other sites, I rarely mention that I've worked on the handbooks, but I also don't hide or deny it. I won't bring it up when I get into a debate with someone about character info, specifically because I want the debate decided based on evidence taken from the comics, but I still don't deny it if asked.

Anyway, I returned for a while. Then I disagreed with a poster who was openly boasting about downloading comics, specifically Golden Age ones which were readily available in Masterworks. I don't want to have this thread devolve into a debate over the rights and wrongs of downloading, so Ill try to keep this to a minimum. I replied, pointing out that reprinting stuff costs Marvel money, that downloading stuff that is legally available to buy cuts into the sales, and that in turn endangers further reprints - and yes, I did bring up working for Marvel in this instance, in response to a different poster saying they didn't believe it cost Marvel much money to reprint stuff in Masterworks; it wasn't throwing my weight around, but simply trying to make it clear that I knew for a fact, not a guess, that it costs Marvel a lot of money to produce Golden Age Masterworks. The downloader launched into a personal diatribe in which he called me a variety of names (he later edited them out, while keeping the rest of the diatribe). Rather than turn it into a flame war, I asked an admin to intervene, and the admin told me he didn't want to offend the downloader. So I decided to again stop working on their site.

Apart from today, when I became aware of their discussions about me, I've barely thought about their site since. I've discussed errors made by a variety of sites, theirs included. I've pointed them out as being unofficial and fan run on the occasions when others have mistakenly identified them as Marvel's own site. And I've said I won't contribute to their site because of how I dislike the way some of their staff act, though, until now, I've not stated the details. But beyond that? With this posting, I've spent more time thinking about them tonight than I have in the two or so years since I left combined, and written more about them in this one post than I have in all my other posts about them combined.

Michael Regan
Aug 2, 2013, 08:51 pm
The worst wiki out there. I've actually made corrections on the main Wikipedia without incident, but on the marvel.wikia (quite some time ago... years) corrections I made were reverted without explanation.

It is unfortunate that so many problem can be found in their facts, and facts about their lack of maintaining valid content.

Angelicknight
Aug 2, 2013, 09:14 pm
I have posted to Marvel Database, usually real names to characters that have appeared in the Hardcovers and other Handbooks and always reference where i got the info and never had a problem. However if that is their Policy towards plagiarism, downloading illegally and attacking others that don't agree with their policy i have contributed my last to the site. You and the other Handbook writers would be a valuable asset and if they can not recognize that it's their loss!

Stuart V
Aug 2, 2013, 09:43 pm

  Angelicknight wrote:

I have posted to Marvel Database, usually real names to characters that have appeared in the Hardcovers and other Handbooks and always reference where i got the info and never had a problem. However if that is their Policy towards plagiarism, downloading illegally and attacking others that don't agree with their policy i have contributed my last to the site. You and the other Handbook writers would be a valuable asset and if they can not recognize that it's their loss!

To be fair, they have corrected their plagiarism policy, though I still had disagreements with people who either felt that plagiarised material should be left up until someone could replace it (failing to see that if it wasn't remove you were still supporting the plagiarism and that no one was likely to feel the need to fill in the blanks if they thought the work had already been done), or that it wasn't plagiarism if you reworded it a bit (but it still is plagiarism, just better disguised).

As for the personal attacks, it doesn't and shouldn't matter that I am a handbook writer. The poster who attacked me thinks I was upset because I am egotistical and thought I was due respect just because of that. I wasn't - it shouldn't matter who I am or he is, no poster should get away with calling another poster stuff like "douchebag" (one of his choice of insults) without getting disciplined by the admins. Instead, the admin openly admitted they didn't want to tell the downloader off in case they upset him. It's not that he attacked me, or that I think that being a handbook writer somehow makes me more important than the average person (it doesn't, and I've never been so self-deluded). It's that he attacked anyone and then the admin effectively gave him a free pass to do so.

Sidney Osinga
Aug 2, 2013, 11:42 pm
Do the Generation X Novels Crossroads (1998) and Genegoths (2000) take place in 616 continuity? Genegoths references events that took Place in the Spider-Man/X-Factor: Shadowgames limited series an involves Project: Homegrown from the limited series. I know some novels do while others do not.
I do know Crossroadswas referenced on the Appendix Site http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix2/a...rp.htm#monster

Angelicknight
Aug 2, 2013, 11:52 pm

Sidney Osinga wrote:

I do know Crossroadswas referenced on the Appendix Site http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix2/a...rp.htm#monster

I guess since Smoke and Mirrors is referenced as well all 3 novels are possibly 616.

Michael Regan
Aug 3, 2013, 10:51 am

Sidney Osinga wrote:

I do know Crossroadswas referenced on the Appendix Site http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix2/a...rp.htm#monster

I believe that in many cases, as with the general history of all Marvel Comics, that novels are part of the 616 reality unless stated otherwise or there is a solid confliction within the story which would have it removed from main continuity.

Andy E. Nystrom
Aug 3, 2013, 12:10 pm
Stuart, I just wanted to say that your work to try to stop misinformation has not gone unnoticed, and I feel you have gone above and beyond the duty in that regard.

One thing that the Internet has really made clear is that people will believe what they want to believe. Some people want to believe the truth (or in this case as close to the truth as works of fiction allow), even if it goes against their biases. I think most people who come here fall into this category, likely most lurkers included. Others prefer to believe (and often seek out) stuff that reflects their bias and ignore stuff that doesn't reflect it. And unfortunately some people's coping strategies to protect what they believe is hostility to the person who has a different point of view (this is true even if they happen to be on solid ground factually in a particular instance). The good news is, in the eyes of lurkers, the people who debate rationally are likely to be seen as credible while the people who constantly resort to personal attacks tend to come across as raving lunatics.

Thank you again for helping to make this a place of intelligent, rational discourse where everyone focuses on the facts of the case and respects each other even when the disagree.

Eduardo M.
Aug 3, 2013, 08:12 pm
Gotta agree with Andy. Your efforst Stuart are much appreciated. In fact, everytime I have an arguement with friends over comics facts, I always err on the side of whats in the Handbook and what you and yours have verified in this space

William Keogh
Aug 5, 2013, 10:48 am
Sounds like a good portion of Marvel wiki needs to be smacked upside the head.

Forty or fifty thousand times.

Michael Regan
Aug 6, 2013, 08:21 am
Stuart, not to single anyone out, but have you informed the individual of their faux pas in this matter?

Stuart V
Aug 6, 2013, 12:17 pm
Apologies for slow responses. I'm away from home and haven't been checking online as much as normal.

  Michael Regan wrote:

I believe that in many cases, as with the general history of all Marvel Comics, that novels are part of the 616 reality unless stated otherwise or there is a solid confliction within the story which would have it removed from main continuity.

Pretty much.

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Stuart, I just wanted to say that your work to try to stop misinformation has not gone unnoticed, and I feel you have gone above and beyond the duty in that regard.

Thanks.

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

One thing that the Internet has really made clear is that people will believe what they want to believe. Some people want to believe the truth (or in this case as close to the truth as works of fiction allow), even if it goes against their biases. I think most people who come here fall into this category, likely most lurkers included. Others prefer to believe (and often seek out) stuff that reflects their bias and ignore stuff that doesn't reflect it. And unfortunately some people's coping strategies to protect what they believe is hostility to the person who has a different point of view (this is true even if they happen to be on solid ground factually in a particular instance).

Yeah, I'd go with that analysis.

  Eduardo M. wrote:

Gotta agree with Andy. Your efforst Stuart are much appreciated. In fact, everytime I have an arguement with friends over comics facts, I always err on the side of whats in the Handbook and what you and yours have verified in this space

Thanks. That said, never be afraid to challenge what the handbooks (or I) say - just do so using facts, reason and manners, which is how any debate or discussion should be handled.

  William Keogh wrote:

Sounds like a good portion of Marvel wiki needs to be smacked upside the head.

Forty or fifty thousand times.

Truthfully, only a few on Marvel wiki are responsible for what I've described. A lot of others are either blissfully unaware, or are just going along with what they've been told. Here's the thing, for anyone who actually cares - you can go to the Database and find my old member's page, allowing you to check my posting history, including all the discussions I had. Feel free to read anything I posted and any debates I got into, including ones with those who are now decrying me. Do not take my word or their's. Just like any debate, look at the evidence and judge for yourself. And if you do find places where you feel I was in the wrong with something I said or did, you can raise it here publicly with me; I am willing to either explain myself or admit it if I have been a jerk at any point.

  Michael Regan wrote:

Stuart, not to single anyone out, but have you informed the individual of their faux pas in this matter?

Which individual?

The person who informed the Database of this thread and my comments? No, because I don't consider them to have done anything wrong; I wasn't hiding anything I said here, or I wouldn't have said it on a forum where anyone can read it. Plus, I', not sure of exactly who the reposter is.

The admin who refused to admonish the downloader for his attack on me? Yes, he knows. He either doesn't care or he genuinely doesn't get what the problem is.

The downloader? Yes, he knows, and is utterly convinced he is in the right.

Michael Regan
Aug 6, 2013, 01:57 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

Which individual?

Sorry, I meant here. True that there really was no error made here as it was an attempt at being helpful, and at this point whomever may have contacted marvel.wiki already knows of the issue and will likely not repeat themselves.

Rayeye
Aug 7, 2013, 06:39 pm

  Eduardo M. wrote:

Gotta agree with Andy. Your efforst Stuart are much appreciated. In fact, everytime I have an arguement with friends over comics facts, I always err on the side of whats in the Handbook and what you and yours have verified in this space

Totally agree with you guys and I stand with Stuart in this. Years ago I made an account for marvel.wikia.com, and added and edited a few things, but I lost interest eventually. And the fan madeup information token as facts (like real names of characters etc) always annoyed me.
Now reading how the admins threated you Stuart, proves again for me I'm done with that site.
Though the site can sometimes be helpful to check general Marvel things, I never rely much on it, but rather use the Official Handbooks, marvunapp.com or, of course, this forum for reliable information.

Melou
Aug 18, 2013, 05:51 pm
I haven't really time to check the other answers but I have here a question who have popped and I don't want to loose it:

Does the War-Skrulls with mutant or inhuman gifts truly possess the genetic settings (X-Gene; Inhuman genome + terrigenesis) or does they replicate the powers via an other way ?

I'm basically asking if a X-Men Warskrull (those with Cyclops/Nightcrawler/Colossus/Wolverine powers combination), the Savage Land Beast, Emma Frost and Phoenix, or the Devil Dinosaur Skrull are mutant skrulls (in an other way than the Cadre K of course)

Thanks.

Stuart V
Aug 18, 2013, 07:32 pm

Melou wrote:

I haven't really time to check the other answers but I have here a question who have popped and I don't want to loose it:

Does the War-Skrulls with mutant or inhuman gifts truly possess the genetic settings (X-Gene; Inhuman genome + terrigenesis) or does they replicate the powers via an other way ?

I'm basically asking if a X-Men Warskrull (those with Cyclops/Nightcrawler/Colossus/Wolverine powers combination), the Savage Land Beast, Emma Frost and Phoenix, or the Devil Dinosaur Skrull are mutant skrulls (in an other way than the Cadre K of course)

Thanks.

Presumably the powers are reproduced through other methods. Mutant Skrulls aren't exactly welcomed by other Skrulls, plus there's too many Super-Skrulls with too specific sets of powers to be mutants - you'd expect more randomness with mutant powers or exposure to Terrigen. So we're presumably looking at a bit of genetic engineering / directed mutation, perhaps enhanced by bionics.

Stuart V
Aug 18, 2013, 09:24 pm
New one, which falls more into the "people remember the original story and missed the retcon" category rather than people getting stuff outright wrong - in other words, it is still wrong, but was correct, so it is somewhat understandable why people are making the mistake.

"Forge's mentor, the shaman Naze, fell victim to a Dire Wraith that killed him and stole his form, only to be taken over in turn by the Adversary."

What instead proved to be the case is that during the Dire Wraith attack on Forge's Dallas home, Naze, well aware the greater threat of the Adversary was present and that the Adversary was planning to take over Naze's body, let a Wraith assume his form so that the Adversary would get the wrong target. Naze apparently let the Wraith think it had killed him first (he later demonstrated the ability to reform unharmed after being burned to ashes, so he might have let it actually slay his body temporarily, but equally he might just have used illusions to dupe it), so that the Adversary would get that version of events from the Wraith's mind. Naze later turned up alive and well in X-Factor. It might be technically correct that the Wraith killed him, but if so then it was only very temporarily and as part of Naze's plan (he wasn't beaten by it), and it definitely got faked out as far as thinking it had absorbed his mind and soul (Wraiths do absorb the latter, as confirmed in Rom #72).

Michael Regan
Aug 19, 2013, 09:34 am
A more difficult retcon to wrap your head around is when something is more drastically changed from the original story. Somewhat more forgivable, but still wrong.

Nothing huge comes to mind, but the first meeting between Sue Storm and Reed Richards was mentioned in Fantastic Four letters pages. This meeting has been portrayed at least three different ways over the years.

Melou
Aug 19, 2013, 06:01 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

Presumably the powers are reproduced through other methods. Mutant Skrulls aren't exactly welcomed by other Skrulls, plus there's too many Super-Skrulls with too specific sets of powers to be mutants - you'd expect more randomness with mutant powers or exposure to Terrigen. So we're presumably looking at a bit of genetic engineering / directed mutation, perhaps enhanced by bionics.

Natural Mutant Skrulls (K-Deviant class Skrulls?) aren't welcome, but indoctrinated War-Skrulls with an X-Gene aren't the same stuff. But yeah, the powers replication without using Terrigenesis or X-Genes seems correct.

Melou
Aug 20, 2013, 06:20 pm
Hi! Few more questions (still have to check the previous answers)

1) Was Paradigm killed by Kaga's forces before or after M-Day ? (Astonishing X-Men Vol.3 33-34)

2) I think this question come often but I can't find it back here: Is the Orphan-Maker a latent mutant with no expressed powers (basically not a post-m-day mutant), or is he a post-m-day mutant ?

3) Does Terraformer (Force of Nature) is truly killed in Siege (by Heimdall) (Avengers The Initiative #32)

4) Who the Devil Dinosaur Skrull was replacing ? (Secret Invasion; Command/Florida Initiative team)

5) Does Lightbright (Obax Majid) arrest told in Civil War Battle Damage was seen in an actual comic ? She is told to have been apprehended by Spider and Stark, but I haven't seen that scene anywhere (but it can be behind the scenes). And is she really the black girl behind Wiccan during Civil War #6 final panels (when the prisoners are freed) ?

Still no clue for the Asylum (Psionex) questions ? I looked for answer, but this character seems to be too much secret for much people.

Angelicknight
Aug 20, 2013, 07:24 pm
Lightbright along with Lectronn, Phone Ranger and Wildstreak was taken into custody in Civil War: Front Line #5.

Melou
Aug 20, 2013, 07:36 pm
I will check that issue, thanks a lot !

(@Stuart: I tried to sent you a message, but your messages box seems to be full...)

Melou
Aug 20, 2013, 08:02 pm
The scenes in Civil War Front Line 5 is quite unclear, and I don't think we see her during the final battle in Manhattan although she was present (Civil War 7), but as the Civil War Battle Damage Report doesn't state anything, can we confirm her as a powered mutant ?

Also the Front Line 5 is strange: The heroes seems to be apprehended by the NYPD, and rebelling only when Spidey and Iron Man come. And Spider seems to protect Phone Ranger from Iron Man

Monolith
Aug 21, 2013, 09:24 am

Melou wrote:

Hi! Few more questions (still have to check the previous answers)

1) Was Paradigm killed by Kaga's forces before or after M-Day ? (Astonishing X-Men Vol.3 33-34)

2) I think this question come often but I can't find it back here: Is the Orphan-Maker a latent mutant with no expressed powers (basically not a post-m-day mutant), or is he a post-m-day mutant ?

3) Does Terraformer (Force of Nature) is truly killed in Siege (by Heimdall) (Avengers The Initiative #32)

4) Who the Devil Dinosaur Skrull was replacing ? (Secret Invasion; Command/Florida Initiative team)

5) Does Lightbright (Obax Majid) arrest told in Civil War Battle Damage was seen in an actual comic ? She is told to have been apprehended by Spider and Stark, but I haven't seen that scene anywhere (but it can be behind the scenes). And is she really the black girl behind Wiccan during Civil War #6 final panels (when the prisoners are freed) ?

Still no clue for the Asylum (Psionex) questions ? I looked for answer, but this character seems to be too much secret for much people.

1) Wasn't confirmed, but it probably wouldn't matter. We know from Necrosha that even dead mutants lost their powers on M-Day, so if whatever Kaga was doing relied on Paradigm's mutation, it wouldn't have worked post-M-Day. On the other hand, if Kaga was just relying on Paradigm's integrated techno-organics, those would still be operable.

2) Logically speaking, Orphan Maker should be an active mutant. Nanny activated the latent powers of all her other kids from X-Factor #35, so it stands to reason she would have activated her favorite little boy's powers (whatever they may be). But then, if we have no idea what his powers are, how can we even be sure he still has them post-M-Day?

3) Don't believe it until you see the bodybag. Self-animating plant lifeforms should be able to recover from most anything.

4) It was a new Conquistador (allegedly), replacing the one killed in Marvel Zombies 3.

Stuart V
Aug 21, 2013, 11:43 am

Melou wrote:

Hi! Few more questions (still have to check the previous answers)

1) Was Paradigm killed by Kaga's forces before or after M-Day ? (Astonishing X-Men Vol.3 33-34)

Nothing has been confirmed either way, but as Monolith notes, it wouldn't make a difference to whether or not he got depowered.

Melou wrote:

2) I think this question come often but I can't find it back here: Is the Orphan-Maker a latent mutant with no expressed powers (basically not a post-m-day mutant), or is he a post-m-day mutant ?

I concur with Monolith on this one. Nanny would have activated his powers, but we don't know what they were, since we never saw him out of armor, and so can't tell which are his technological abilities and which are his mutant ones.

Melou wrote:

3) Does Terraformer (Force of Nature) is truly killed in Siege (by Heimdall) (Avengers The Initiative #32)

Monolith is again correct; plants are pretty durable. Besides, virtually no one seems to be truly dead in comics.

Melou wrote:

4) Who the Devil Dinosaur Skrull was replacing ? (Secret Invasion; Command/Florida Initiative team)

Conquistador.

Melou wrote:

Still no clue for the Asylum (Psionex) questions ? I looked for answer, but this character seems to be too much secret for much people.

From one of my fellow handbookers who is more up to speed on Asylum than I am: "The Initiative's Asylum's identity was listed as unknown. We don't know if it was Gallante or his predecessor or a completely new version. Last time we saw Gallante in New Thunderbolts#16 he didn't look fit enough to tie his own shoes. Seems like it was either the original female version or a successor to both, Gallante and her."

So, it is uncertain, and we don't tend to ask editorial for confirmation unless and until we have relevant profile that needs the info, but it seems less likely to be Gallante.

Melou wrote:

 (@Stuart: I tried to sent you a message, but your messages box seems to be full...)

I've cleared some space, and will try to find time to respond to the message you've sent as soon as I can.

Melou wrote:

The scenes in Civil War Front Line 5 is quite unclear, and I don't think we see her during the final battle in Manhattan although she was present (Civil War 7), but as the Civil War Battle Damage Report doesn't state anything, can we confirm her as a powered mutant ?

Unlike Aguila or Brass she doesn't have a skill set that would let her be a superhero without her powers, so it seems likely she remains powered. However, it might also be that she found a way to replicate her powers, like some of X-Cell did. So we can't say for certain.

  Monolith wrote:

4) It was a new Conquistador (allegedly), replacing the one killed in Marvel Zombies 3.

No allegedly in this case. From the Command's first appearance we asked editorial regarding the Conquistador's identity, as we had a relevant profile (Jennifer Kale) coming up, and there are a number of Conquistadors to choose from. Editorial confirmed that this was one of the Conquistadors from la Hacienda, and another one from the same place replaced him on the team (only to be replaced in turn by a Skrull).

Sidney Osinga
Aug 22, 2013, 04:00 am
I have a question, and I think this is the best thread for me to ask it on.

The young X-Man Hellion had his arms amputated. Exactly where was that done?

This question may have been asked before but I can't find it. It has been depicted at his wrists to almost his shoulders, depending on the artist. The reason I ask is that in the letter column for X-Men #4, someone commented that in an earlier issue, it showed the amputation to stop at the wrist while the person claims it should have been above the elbow. The editor confirmed he was right, but I'm not 100% on it.

neith
Aug 22, 2013, 06:30 am

Sidney Osinga wrote:

I have a question, and I think this is the best thread for me to ask it on.

The young X-Man Hellion had his arms amputated. Exactly where was that done?

This question may have been asked before but I can't find it. It has been depicted at his wrists to almost his shoulders, depending on the artist. The reason I ask is that in the letter column for X-Men #4, someone commented that in an earlier issue, it showed the amputation to stop at the wrist while the person claims it should have been above the elbow. The editor confirmed he was right, but I'm not 100% on it.

If I recall correctly, he lost his arms in a issue of X-force, during Second Coming, fighting against bastion and his troops. About the height of the amputation, I've seen all kinds of pcitures, too, but at least in X-men Legacy, just after Second Coming, he seemed to have lost his arms and part of his lower arms too

Monolith
Aug 22, 2013, 02:46 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

No allegedly in this case. From the Command's first appearance we asked editorial regarding the Conquistador's identity, as we had a relevant profile (Jennifer Kale) coming up, and there are a number of Conquistadors to choose from. Editorial confirmed that this was one of the Conquistadors from la Hacienda, and another one from the same place replaced him on the team (only to be replaced in turn by a Skrull).

Right. I meant the super-Skrull was allegedly another Conquistador, not that it has only been alleged that another Conquistador was the Command member replaced.

(Man, that was a hard distinction to even write down...)

Eduardo M.
Aug 22, 2013, 07:53 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

Monolith is again correct; plants are pretty durable. Besides, virtually no one seems to be truly dead in comics.

If Groot can come back from burning, Terraformer can come back from being split in half. Warbow, on the other hand, may need some serious medical help after getting cut down by a hail of arrows

Stuart V
Aug 22, 2013, 09:10 pm

  Eduardo M. wrote:

If Groot can come back from burning, Terraformer can come back from being split in half. Warbow, on the other hand, may need some serious medical help after getting cut down by a hail of arrows

'Tis but a scratch. He's had worse. It's only a flesh wound.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4

Stuart V
Aug 23, 2013, 06:11 am

These are widespread and there's no reason for it apart from some people just failing to read what the comics actually say:

Spelling errors:
Jaime Braddock - nope, should be Jamie, as in "an informal version of James"

The X-Man Rouge - nope, that's Rogue. Rouge, pronounced more like Rooj, is a shade of red, while Rogue, prounced like Row-g, is a someone who breaks the rules.

Phoenixx9
Aug 23, 2013, 12:32 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

These are widespread and there's no reason for it apart from some people just failing to read what the comics actually say:

Rouge, pronounced more like Rooj, is a shade of red, while Rogue, prounced like Row-g, is a someone who breaks the rules.

Also, rouge (rooj) is a cosmetics that women (used to?) wear on their cheeks to give them color, red, as you mentioned.

I always laugh when someone writes, "I love Rouge. She is my favorite character!" Makes me think they love their make-up!

Michael Regan
Aug 23, 2013, 12:55 pm
The fall of civilization will occur when the majority of the population cannot spell correctly or form a sentence in a reasonable grammatical structure.

Sidney Osinga
Aug 24, 2013, 01:32 pm

  Phoenixx9 wrote:

Also, rouge (rooj) is a cosmetics that women (used to?) wear on their cheeks to give them color, red, as you mentioned.

I always laugh when someone writes, "I love Rouge. She is my favorite character!" Makes me think they love their make-up!

Are you sure they're not talking about the Sonic character?

Michael Regan
Aug 24, 2013, 08:58 pm

Sidney Osinga wrote:

Are you sure they're not talking about the Sonic character?

There is also a Doom Patrol villain named Rouge.

Phoenixx9
Aug 25, 2013, 10:56 am

Sidney Osinga wrote:

Are you sure they're not talking about the Sonic character?

Yep, I am sure. The posts I mention I saw were from an X-Men or Rogue (Marvel Comics) forum---they may even have been on Comixfan!

That's why I thought they were in love with their cosmetic products, because otherwise, if one "loved" a character, they would certainly know how to spell the name.

Perhaps it is just laziness, a lack of attention to detail, poor spelling skills or a lack of caring if others notice?

Michael Regan
Aug 25, 2013, 02:42 pm
That error is rampant and I attribute it to an overall spelling problem.

Melou
Aug 28, 2013, 12:35 pm
So here we go, an other load of questions, including old one

On the mutants/possible mutants
1) The possibly mutant atlantean I was talking are not Krakos and Namor's son, but their henchmen, but I can't recall their names. The wikia states "Arath" and another one. ( http://marvel.wikia.com/Arath_%28Earth-616%29 )

2) Concerning Cloud 9 mutation/not mutation, why is the Marvel Avengers: The Ultimate Character Guide an unofficial source ? (I thought it was edited by Marvel)

3) Paradigm's time of death has an importance to me, as I list the post-M-Day according to several characters, including the status at the M-Day.

4) So the Initiative's Asylum is unprecised for now. But was Henrique Gallante's last appearance (Thunderbolts) post-M-Day ? And was he dragged into the Thunderbolts, for one or another use ? Neither the issue or the things found on the internet were clear.

Noh-Varr's stuff
5) Noh-Varr's team (Diplomatic Kree Gestalt)
5.1) Just checking for my guesses: Is it correct that Star-Splendor is his mother, Captain Glory his father, and Merree is his girl-friend, the red-head of the kree team ?

5.2) What are the name of the two lady unnamed (one fairy-like, other human torch-like) ?

5.3) Is that guy http://marvel.wikia.com/Rogue_Fantas...arth-200080%29 trully named "Rogue Fantastic" ? It is stated here on the marvunnap, but I couldn't find the issue. http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix4/p...lligencemb.htm

5.4) What are Cpatain Glory's full real name and Star-Splendor's real name ?

6) Contrary to Dr. Midas who moved name (to Midas), is Oubliette Midas the real name of the Exterminatrix ?

7) Is the statue in the world full of Exterminatrixes (Young Avengers Vol 2 8) representing Noh-Varr or Captain Glory ?

8) There is a lot of discussions about Noh-Varr's statement about Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell), and their possible interpretation: Does Mar-Vell have a counterpart in Noh-Varr's reality ? (some consider Captain Glory as an equivalent or a distant counterpart)

Secret Invasion/Initiative:
9)
Unknown, though I'd guess they were replaced after the Initiative being recruited. I can't imagine these guys would have been high on the "kidnap and replace" list otherwise.
Well, it's not that clear, as they could have kidnapped people, THEN made them join. Well, I will consider that every of them joined and then was replaced

10) Were Magnitude, Revolutionary, Blacksmith and Grasshopper replacing some people (powered or not, and then replaced by powered skrulls), or were they created from "nothing".

11) Except for Skyhawk (and/or only his skrull replacement), does anyone else has joined the Initiative's Earth Force ?

12) Except for Cybermancer (Suzi Endo), was any other members of the Force Works (Initiative) revealed ?

13) So, to resume: Conquistador (Orlando) was killed by zombies, replaced by another Conquistador (not Orlando), replaced by the Devil Dinosaur Skrull ?

14) Who was the Heavy Hitter Skrull impersonating ?

15) Is the clear reformation of the New Warriors from the Counter Force and Night Trasher depicted somewhere ?

Ultimate/Children of Tomorrow
16) Was Captain Spain killed along others Captains when Captain Britain was saved from the Children of Tomorrow by Thor (Ultimate Comics Ultimates #4)

17) Who were the other Captains dead ?

18) Who is the fourth member of the First Council of the Children of Tomorrow ? (Except for the First Builder, Fourth Manager and the First Judge) Looking to his equipment, he could be some Dynamo but nothing's sure.

Waow, that's was a lot.

 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 12:57 pm  #12


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Additional text from Comixfan:
Eduardo M.
Aug 28, 2013, 08:19 pm

Melou wrote:

10) Were Magnitude, Revolutionary, Blacksmith and Grasshopper replacing some people (powered or not, and then replaced by powered skrulls), or were they created from "nothing".

the Skrull Revolutionary did replace an existing hero. The real Revolutionary can be glimpsed at the support group for Skrull Abductees in Avengers:the Initiative #20


Angelicknight
Aug 28, 2013, 08:49 pm

  Eduardo M. wrote:

the Skrull Revolutionary did replace an existing hero. The real Revolutionary can be glimpsed at the support group for Skrull Abductees in Avengers:the Initiative #20

One that may be Magnitude is seen with the group as well. I tend to believe they were replaced by Skrulls but the Hardcover or Softcover Handbook Initiative profile states that Revolutionary, Blacksmith and Magnitude were all Skrull created identities. Grasshopper was like the fourth using that identity so he was likely replaced.

Stuart V
Aug 28, 2013, 09:23 pm

Melou wrote:

So here we go, an other load of questions, including old one

Some of these I'll need to either research or go to the other handbookers for their input.

Melou wrote:

On the mutants/possible mutants
1) The possibly mutant atlantean I was talking are not Krakos and Namor's son, but their henchmen, but I can't recall their names. The wikia states "Arath" and another one. ( http://marvel.wikia.com/Arath_%28Earth-616%29 )

If you are going to link to Arath, I'd rather you link to a site that references where the info comes from:
http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix4/arathsubby.htm
I notice that the equipment info on the Database is word for word the same as the one on the Appendix, which I do not believe is coincidental. There's lots of ways that info might have been worded, but the exact same? It might only be a single sentence, but that isn't winning me over on the "not plagiarising other sites anymore" when I see stuff like that.
As for the others, Kamar and Zoran displayed no powers beyond normal Atlanteans, so they are unlikely to be mutants, while there's nothing to indicate the source of Arath's unusual powers. As such, he could be a mutant, but could as easily be a mutate or any number of other explanations.

Melou wrote:

2) Concerning Cloud 9 mutation/not mutation, why is the Marvel Avengers: The Ultimate Character Guide an unofficial source ? (I thought it was edited by Marvel)

You thought wrong. It isn't edited or published by Marvel, hence it being unofficial.

Melou wrote:

3) Paradigm's time of death has an importance to me, as I list the post-M-Day according to several characters, including the status at the M-Day.

Unfortunately, we simply don't know when he died.

Melou wrote:

4) So the Initiative's Asylum is unprecised for now. But was Henrique Gallante's last appearance (Thunderbolts) post-M-Day ? And was he dragged into the Thunderbolts, for one or another use ? Neither the issue or the things found on the internet were clear.

New Thunderbolts #16 is set post M-Day. The issue is fairly clear on what happens - he's in an asylum (appropriately enough), and his powers are clearly still working, so he's not depowered.

Melou wrote:

Noh-Varr's stuff
5) Noh-Varr's team (Diplomatic Kree Gestalt)
5.1) Just checking for my guesses: Is it correct that Star-Splendor is his mother, Captain Glory his father, and Merree is his girl-friend, the red-head of the kree team ?

As far as I know, barring recent revelations or retcons, we don't know who any of Noh-Varr's family are.

Melou wrote:

5.2) What are the name of the two lady unnamed (one fairy-like, other human torch-like) ?

In what comics, specifically?

Melou wrote:

5.3) Is that guy http://marvel.wikia.com/Rogue_Fantas...arth-200080%29 trully named "Rogue Fantastic" ? It is stated here on the marvunnap, but I couldn't find the issue.

http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix4/p...lligencemb.htm
Yes, he is. As you note, it is stated on the Marvel Appendix. The name isn't in quotes, meaning it isn't a name the Appendix has given them for ease of reference, and the entry you cite even specifies which comic it comes from. "The name Rogue Fantastic comes from the Marvel Knights/Marvel Boy Genesis Edition#1."

Melou wrote:

5.4) What are Cpatain Glory's full real name and Star-Splendor's real name ?

I'm not sure either of those have ever been revealed.

Melou wrote:

6) Contrary to Dr. Midas who moved name (to Midas), is Oubliette Midas the real name of the Exterminatrix ?

Yes.

Melou wrote:

7) Is the statue in the world full of Exterminatrixes (Young Avengers Vol 2 8) representing Noh-Varr or Captain Glory ?

I have no idea.

Melou wrote:

8) There is a lot of discussions about Noh-Varr's statement about Captain Marvel (Mar-Vell), and their possible interpretation: Does Mar-Vell have a counterpart in Noh-Varr's reality ? (some consider Captain Glory as an equivalent or a distant counterpart)

What statement, and in which issue? I assume from the rest of your question that it is something about Mar-Vell having / not having a counterpart in Noh-Varr's reality, but it isn't clear. And "some consider Captain Glory" - who considers this? Unless it is from a comic, then it is just speculation.

Melou wrote:

Secret Invasion/Initiative:
9) Well, it's not that clear, as they could have kidnapped people, THEN made them join. Well, I will consider that every of them joined and then was replaced

Some of those replaced were very minor, low powered heroes. Replacing them in the hopes of them getting assigned to the right Initiative teams would be a gamble.
Simpler to pick easy targets from existing teams. But at the end of the day, that is only speculation.

Melou wrote:

10) Were Magnitude, Revolutionary, Blacksmith and Grasshopper replacing some people (powered or not, and then replaced by powered skrulls), or were they created from "nothing".

Revolutionary was definitely a replacement for someone, as we saw the real one in Avengers: Initiative #20 at the post-abduction group meeting, so the others probably were too. Some might have died rather than be captured, or have been killed in captivity - given the track record of past Grasshoppers, I'd half expect to find that the Grasshopper the Skrulls replaced got killed by them.

Melou wrote:

11) Except for Skyhawk (and/or only his skrull replacement), does anyone else has joined the Initiative's Earth Force ?

It's probable the other members were the same as the pre-Initiative roster, but we just don't know for certain.

Melou wrote:

12) Except for Cybermancer (Suzi Endo), was any other members of the Force Works (Initiative) revealed ?

Was Cybermancer identified as one of the Initiative Force Works members? I thought she was a rebel during the Civil War and got herself deported to Hong Kong, never joining the Initiative. And by the time she came back, she'd ditched the costume again.

Melou wrote:

13) So, to resume: Conquistador (Orlando) was killed by zombies, replaced by another Conquistador (not Orlando), replaced by the Devil Dinosaur Skrull ?

Apart from the name Orlando (where did you get that from?), yes. Per the Conquistadores handbook entry:
The Fathers ... later decided to send an ambassador into the world. Called the Conquistador and apparently so saturated with the fountain’s waters that he leaked the water rather than bled when injured and was resistant to conventional injury, he joined the Initiative’s Command team in Florida. His assignment was cut short when zombies infected by a virus from Earth-2149 tore him to pieces. Another Conquistador took his place, but was soon replaced by a Skrull with powers based on Devil Dinosaur and Moon Boy. The Skrull was defeated by the Skrull Kill Krew and the Initiative, and the true Conquistador was presumably returned to Earth along with other heroes following the Skrull invasion

Melou wrote:

14) Who was the Heavy Hitter Skrull impersonating ?

No idea.

Melou wrote:

15) Is the clear reformation of the New Warriors from the Counter Force and Night Trasher depicted somewhere ?

I don't believe so. I think it happened between issues.

Monolith
Aug 29, 2013, 01:57 pm

Melou wrote:

So here we go, an other load of questions, including old one

On the mutants/possible mutants
4) So the Initiative's Asylum is unprecised for now. But was Henrique Gallante's last appearance (Thunderbolts) post-M-Day ? And was he dragged into the Thunderbolts, for one or another use ? Neither the issue or the things found on the internet were clear.

Secret Invasion/Initiative:
10) Were Magnitude, Revolutionary, Blacksmith and Grasshopper replacing some people (powered or not, and then replaced by powered skrulls), or were they created from "nothing".

11) Except for Skyhawk (and/or only his skrull replacement), does anyone else has joined the Initiative's Earth Force ?

12) Except for Cybermancer (Suzi Endo), was any other members of the Force Works (Initiative) revealed ?

13) So, to resume: Conquistador (Orlando) was killed by zombies, replaced by another Conquistador (not Orlando), replaced by the Devil Dinosaur Skrull ?

14) Who was the Heavy Hitter Skrull impersonating ?

15) Is the clear reformation of the New Warriors from the Counter Force and Night Trasher depicted somewhere ?

4) Agents of Baron Zemo visited Gallante at the asylum to access the Darkforce Dimension. They recovered Atlas's brother Smuggler from the DD using Gallante's access tap. It was post-M-Day.

10) Magnitude and Blacksmith are unclear. I believe someone in Revolutionary's silly hat appeared in A:I #20, in Alicia Masters' reorientation seminar for the Skrull abductees.

Killing Grasshopper was a running joke with the Great Lakes Avengers / Initiative. The first appeared in GLA #2, where he joined the team only to be killed seconds later by Zaran. Two more men appeared using the Grasshopper armor in the GLX-Mas Special and GLI Summer Fun Spectacular, each dying in those issues. The Skrull-Grasshopper presumably presented himself as a 4th Grasshopper. However, we don't know for certain if he (A) pretended to be one of the previous Grasshoppers back to life or (B) if a real 4th Grasshopper existed before being killed and replaced by the Skrull.

11) None confirmed. You could reasonably assume Earth Lord and Wind Warrior were part of it, but they were never shown or mentioned.

12) No members of Force Works were directly referenced. When War Machine and Suzi Endo first met up during the Skrull invasion in War Machine: Weapon of SHIELD, he referenced her time with Force Works, but it wasn't 100% clear he was talking about the Initiative team or the original Force Works.

14) Never identified. Same with the Skrull on The Called (or any other Called members).

15) No. Counter Force was last seen in NW IV #15. The Warriors disbanded in #20. Night Thrasher resurfaced working with Justice's group, now calling themselves the New Warriors again, in Avengers: The Initiative #21-24.

Melou
Aug 29, 2013, 02:37 pm

  Stuart V wrote:

If you are going to link to Arath, I'd rather you link to a site that references where the info comes from:
http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix4/arathsubby.htm
I notice that the equipment info on the Database is word for word the same as the one on the Appendix, which I do not believe is coincidental. There's lots of ways that info might have been worded, but the exact same? It might only be a single sentence, but that isn't winning me over on the "not plagiarising other sites anymore" when I see stuff like that.

I will rework that page once I will have time.

  Stuart V wrote:

New Thunderbolts #16 is set post M-Day. The issue is fairly clear on what happens - he's in an asylum (appropriately enough), and his powers are clearly still working, so he's not depowered.

I was talking about his possible affiliation with the Thunderbolts
"Months later, Baron Zemo sought out Gallante in his mental ward, sending members of the Thunderbolts to recruit Asylum so that they could use his access to the Darkforce Dimension to rescue the Smuggler. Since the Thunderbolts support of the Superhuman Registration Act, Asylum remained with the team."
(http://marvel.com/universe/Asylum_%2...ue_Gallante%29), but I think he might be confusing with Blackout/Suggler (Marcus Daniel), who is the only one who seems to be recruited. Or have I missed some issues ? (Wikipedia also states the same, but that doesn't really matter.)

  Stuart V wrote:

In what comics, specifically?

In the first issue of Marvel Boy Vol.2. And later in flashback, in the 5th issue I think.

  Stuart V wrote:

Yes, he is. As you note, it is stated on the Marvel Appendix. The name isn't in quotes, meaning it isn't a name the Appendix has given them for ease of reference, and the entry you cite even specifies which comic it comes from. "The name Rogue Fantastic comes from the Marvel Knights/Marvel Boy Genesis Edition#1."

I know, I read that part. But as I hadn't that issue, I wanted a confirmation.
Was Cybermancer identified as one of the Initiative Force Works members? I thought she was a rebel during the Civil War and got herself deported to Hong Kong, never joining the Initiative. And by the time she came back, she'd ditched the costume again.
Stated in Iron Man Vol. 4 #33. (Secret Invasion)

  Stuart V wrote:

Apart from the name Orlando (where did you get that from?), yes.

Marvel Wikia. "Orlando Furio". Is it a mistake ? The ref of the name refers to Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe #3

Stuart V
Aug 29, 2013, 03:14 pm

Melou wrote:

I was talking about his possible affiliation with the Thunderbolts
"Months later, Baron Zemo sought out Gallante in his mental ward, sending members of the Thunderbolts to recruit Asylum so that they could use his access to the Darkforce Dimension to rescue the Smuggler. Since the Thunderbolts support of the Superhuman Registration Act, Asylum remained with the team."
(http://marvel.com/universe/Asylum_%2...ue_Gallante%29), but I think he might be confusing with Blackout/Suggler (Marcus Daniel), who is the only one who seems to be recruited. Or have I missed some issues ? (Wikipedia also states the same, but that doesn't really matter.)

I'll have to double check, but, while they used him as a power source, he wasn't in any fit state to join a team in the normal sense. The lights were on (but only just), but nobody was home.

Melou wrote:

I know, I read that part. But as I hadn't that issue, I wanted a confirmation.

I haven't read that issue myself either, but Markus, who wrote the Appendix entry, is one of the Appendix's most reliable writers. Since I don't have the issue to check myself, I can't 100% swear it is accurate, but given it was Markus and he's cited the relevant issue, I'd go to 99%.

Melou wrote:

Marvel Wikia. "Orlando Furio". Is it a mistake ? The ref of the name refers to Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe #3

Oh, yes, that's a big mistake. Wrong Conquistador. The foe of the Beast who used the Conquistador name is Orlando Furio (and that civilian name was revealed in the handbooks), but he's not the Command's Conquistador.

People do get the Conquistadors mixed up - Orlando is shown in New Avengers when SHIELD puts up a list of depowered mutants whose power signatures have been detected within the Collective, but Orlando isn't a mutant. That should have been Miguel Provenza, the enemy of el Aguila, who was a mutant. Since we later learned that Wiz Kid messed up the files to hide the fact that he was still powered, hence why he was depicted too, the discrepancies are explained (in universe) by Wiz Kid having messed up other files, not just his own, as a way of obfuscating what he had done to his own file. Also, the Marvel Spotlight Secret Invasion Aftermath issue depicted Furio as being the Conquistador who was replaced by a Skrull, but that's also an error.

Melou
Aug 29, 2013, 07:04 pm
Concerning the (un)officiallity of the Marvel Avenger Ultimate Guide (or something like that), an editor stated "Tom Brevoort stated that the Ultimate Character guide is official and also contacted Dan Slott and the writer of the guide, Alan Cowsill who is a contracted employee of Marvel who says it is a official report.".

So a lot of work on Conquistador, thanks for the intel.

Well, Rhodes to talk about an existing team, isn't he ? (But that's true it isn't that clear)

Stuart V
Aug 29, 2013, 07:25 pm

Melou wrote:

Concerning the (un)officiallity of the Marvel Avenger Ultimate Guide (or something like that), an editor stated "Tom Brevoort stated that the Ultimate Character guide is official and also contacted Dan Slott and the writer of the guide, Alan Cowsill who is a contracted employee of Marvel who says it is a official report.".

I guess it is feasible that Tom B may have stated that somewhere, but I'd personally like to see a citation that directs me to the the statement and exact wording, not just go on a second hand account. Alan Cowsill isn't, as far as I can see from his online biography on his own site, a contracted employee of Marvel - he's a freelancer, just like the handbook writers. That's not to do him down - like I said, the handbook writers are freelancers too. But there's a world of difference between being an employee and a freelancer, making the accuracy of whichever "editor" you got the info from a bit more doubtful.

The various Dorling-Kindersley Guides related to Marvel characters are written by people who are often Marvel writers and always pretty knowledgeable about Marvel. They are generally way more accurate than online fan sites. I'm not putting them down in any way, and I personally own most of the DK guides, because I am into character guides. But they do make mistakes, just like we all do, and since they are not edited and published by Marvel, they are not official in the normal sense of things. They are licensed and endorsed, but that's not the same thing.

Edit: Going to add this. New info is anything that didn't make it into print in a comic - e.g. an origin for Cloud 9's powers. When the handbooks include new info, they usually go to the original writers and they always, always have to flag it as new info and run it past our editors and Tom Brevoort for approval. That's why the information can be considered official, not just because it was included in a Marvel publication but because it had to be specifically drawn to editorial attention and approved. This oversight process is not in place for anything published outside of Marvel, so even if considered "official" in the sense of "licensed", they don't count in that other respect.

Angelicknight
Aug 29, 2013, 10:16 pm
I have a few Initiative based questions.

1) The Handbook Hardcover Initiative profile states that Blacksmith, Magnitude and Revolutionary are Skrull created identities and not replaced heroes. We see what appears to be Revolutionary with the returned captives in Avengers: The Initiative #20 in a single panel but later when the Liberteen show up in Fear Itself: Youth in Revolt he is not with them. So is the Handbook correct are is his appearance with the escapees correct.

2) She-Thing is listed as a member of the Initiative in it's profile but her individual profile omits her Initiative membership and makes it seem she was replaced prior to her joining and was not seen with the Initiative after her return except with the escaped captives in the meeting. Was the true She-Thing a member at some point? Same applies to Skyhawk though there is no profile to check on him.

3) In the Initiative update in the softcover it lists both Asylum (Unrevealed) an Asylum (Gallante) as members is this correct?

4) Under Skrull infiltrators in the hardcover and the softcover shouldn't Conquistador, Frog-Man, Grasshopper, Lobo, Razorback and Skyhawk be listed? They were omitted from both.

Melou
Aug 30, 2013, 08:35 am
So Cloud 9 is a mutant until new statement (or correction) ?

The same guy also modified your marvel staff member page, stating you're a "former" handbook writer. That's a mistake right ? (I'm not on this forum since long so I can't be sure, but I was quiet (enormously) surprised as it look like you were still working with Marvel, aren't you?)

Well, it can make sense that the Revolutionary didn't joined back. But his possible non-existence is strange.

Stuart V
Aug 30, 2013, 09:56 am
I've asked the Initiative entry writer re: Angelicknight's queries.

Melou wrote:

So Cloud 9 is a mutant until new statement (or correction) ?

It isn't from any comic, hence it is either an error / assumption (the writer of the Guide thought she was a mutant) or it is new information (the writer knew she hadn't been identified as one, but chose to say she was). If the former, then it is just an error, same as we all make from time to time. If the latter then it isn't official info unless it has been taken to Marvel for Marvel to approve. While some stuff does get revealed with Marvel's approval outside of Marvel publications (Mammomax's real name, for example, got revealed in Wizard, but most of the time new info in Wizard is not approved and not official), it's not that common. Hence, unless Tom B specifically knew of said information being newly revealed there and had approved of it, it isn't official. He might well describe the Guide as "official" but be meaning that it is licensed and approved by Marvel (unlike, for example, the 1970s Marvel Indicies), rather than "it has official permission to publish new information."

Melou wrote:

The same guy also modified your marvel staff member page, stating you're a "former" handbook writer. That's a mistake right ? (I'm not on this forum since long so I can't be sure, but I was quiet (enormously) surprised as it look like you were still working with Marvel, aren't you?)

The handbook team are still working on handbook profiles for Marvel, and I'm literally typing this while taking a break from working on some updated entries for a forthcoming trade, so no, not former.

Melou
Aug 30, 2013, 10:31 am
Corrected.

Talking about Wizard mag, an user here sent me a list of depowered mutants from that mag, including Puff Adder and Skein, which proves the unofficial character of it, as they're both supposed to be powered (Skein is listed as 198, and Puff Adder powers were used by Hope Summers). What interest me is "Did someone knows when was Puff Adder first depicted as a mutant ?", as he was formerly listed in post-M-Day mutant revelation (not activation, revelation), and except for the issue AvX 0 with Hope, and that list, I have never seen any references of it.

(Well, the list was supposed to be official, released by Marvel, of ex-mutants who will be saw later.

Also on the list: Black Tom. What about him, who reappared in Excalibur I think (not sure):
-Lost of his secondary plant mutation ?
-Use of technological replacement for powers ?

Angelicknight
Aug 30, 2013, 10:40 am

Melou wrote:

Corrected.

Talking about Wizard mag, an user here sent me a list of depowered mutants from that mag, including Puff Adder and Skein, which proves the unofficial character of it, as they're both supposed to be powered (Skein is listed as 198, and Puff Adder powers were used by Hope Summers). What interest me is "Did someone knows when was Puff Adder first depicted as a mutant ?", as he was formerly listed in post-M-Day mutant revelation (not activation, revelation), and except for the issue AvX 0 with Hope, and that list, I have never seen any references of it.

(Well, the list was supposed to be official, released by Marvel, of ex-mutants who will be saw later.

Also on the list: Black Tom. What about him, who reappared in Excalibur I think (not sure):
-Lost of his secondary plant mutation ?
-Use of technological replacement for powers ?

First time i remember seeing Puff Adder confirmed as a mutant was back in his entry in the Handbook master edition series. It may have been confirmed somewhere before that though.

Stuart V
Aug 31, 2013, 07:16 pm

Melou wrote:

Talking about Wizard mag, an user here sent me a list of depowered mutants from that mag, including Puff Adder and Skein, which proves the unofficial character of it, as they're both supposed to be powered (Skein is listed as 198, and Puff Adder powers were used by Hope Summers).

Yes, the Wizard list was definitely suspect. Jade Dragon isn't a mutant, for example, but Wizard listed him as one.

Melou wrote:

What interest me is "Did someone knows when was Puff Adder first depicted as a mutant ?", as he was formerly listed in post-M-Day mutant revelation (not activation, revelation), and except for the issue AvX 0 with Hope, and that list, I have never seen any references of it.

(Well, the list was supposed to be official, released by Marvel, of ex-mutants who will be saw later.

Also on the list: Black Tom. What about him, who reappared in Excalibur I think (not sure):
-Lost of his secondary plant mutation ?
-Use of technological replacement for powers ?

Black Tom lost all his mutations, secondary and original. He used technology to mimic some of his lost powers.

  Angelicknight wrote:

First time i remember seeing Puff Adder confirmed as a mutant was back in his entry in the Handbook master edition series. It may have been confirmed somewhere before that though.

It was the Master Edition that first confirmed Puff Adder to be a mutant. Prior to that no origin was known.

Couple more "things people keep getting wrong" while I'm here:
Wrong: The computer Mastermind killed Hauptmann Englande.
Correct: The computer Mastermind tortured Hauptmann Englande. Tortured him really badly. However, its not certain that Mastermind actually killed him.

Wrong: Albion took over leadership of what was left of the Corps at the end of X-Men: Die By the Sword.
Correct: Saturnyne offered him the role, but he turned her down, as he felt he needed to honour his word to Pete Wisdom and return to 616 to finish off the rest of his prison sentence. Saturnyne promised to get him out of it, but he still left with Excalibur when they went home.

Did Saturnyne later get him out of the sentence? We don't know, but the next time we saw the Corps Captain Britain was back in charge, so if Albion did take over he didn't keep the job for long.

Michael Regan
Aug 31, 2013, 07:40 pm
A quick personal note on Wizard Magazine: I have enjoyed the articles from the first issue, and although the majority of what they print is entertaining and valid, I have notice a number of inconsistencies and inaccuracies over the years. I tend to read more along the entertainment side of things rather than accurate.

Monolith
Sep 3, 2013, 10:23 am

  Stuart V wrote:

Black Tom lost all his mutations, secondary and original. He used technology to mimic some of his lost powers.

That appeared to be true in New Excalibur, but in his recent Deadpool appearance, Black Tom demonstrated both his bio-blasting power and plant control power, seemingly without any outside technological aids.

Stuart V
Sep 3, 2013, 01:28 pm

  Monolith wrote:

That appeared to be true in New Excalibur, but in his recent Deadpool appearance, Black Tom demonstrated both his bio-blasting power and plant control power, seemingly without any outside technological aids.

Sounds like he either got his powers back, or got better and less obvious tech which mimics same. Either way, he was depowered by M-Day, at least temporarily.

Michael Regan
Sep 3, 2013, 01:54 pm
Or, unfortunately, it was simply forgotten that he had been depowered by either the writer or the artist.

Stuart V
Sep 3, 2013, 02:00 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

Or, unfortunately, it was simply forgotten that he had been depowered by either the writer or the artist.

That may well be the real world reason. People have been resurrected because writers didn't realise they were dead. But in story, he got repowered or got better artificial means of duplicating his old powers.

Michael Regan
Sep 3, 2013, 02:02 pm
Fari enough; every real world error needs an in universe explaination.

Stuart V
Sep 3, 2013, 02:54 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

Fari enough; every real world error needs an in universe explaination.

Not necessarily every one. Some just go down as "they goofed." Stan Lee calling Spider-Man "Superman" and "Peter Palmer" are good examples of this, or Tigra appearing in an Avengers Annual during Atlantis Attacks when she simply couldn't be there - that got written off as "we messed up, she wasn't important to the story, just pretend she wasn't there." But the No-Prize is part and parcel of Marvel, so finding inventive solutions (and some not so inventive ones) that negate apparent goofs is part of the fun. Even Tigra could be explained away if someone wanted to, though you'd be looking at increasingly outrageous options. The simplest might be "what we saw was the official in-universe account published by the in-universe Marvel Comics, who mistakenly thought Tigra was present"; a more extreme option would be "Tigra's presence was the result of a brief timeslip; though her role in the battle appeared to be minor, it was actually pivotal and if she hadn't been there then the Avengers would have lost and Atlantis Attacks would have ended with Set destroying the Earth, so a powerful entity with time-travel capability (the Collector, Kang, Merlyn, you choose) brought her through time to be there, mentally influencing her teammates so none of them questioned it, and then returned her back to the moment from whence she came with her memories wiped." Both of which have actually been used in comics.

Michael Regan
Sep 3, 2013, 04:08 pm
Very true, I've always loved the No-Prize concept and equally loved the old No Prize Book which came out back in 1983. Personally, I think part of the fun in the errors is trying to explain them. Using your examples, perhaps Doc Ock had been reading a Superman book and was using the name to taunt Spider-Man and/or Palmer had been an actual slip of the tongue as people do in reality (yes, explained by Marvel otherwise, but still fun to consider... as long as the explaination is not too outlandish) One personal fav was Mister Fantastic with a hand where his foot should have been, but with his stretching powers also easily explained.

As for Tigra, why could she not appear in Atlantis Attacks? I can't think back that far at the moment. Was she assumed to be dead at the time?

Stuart V
Sep 3, 2013, 04:52 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

As for Tigra, why could she not appear in Atlantis Attacks? I can't think back that far at the moment. Was she assumed to be dead at the time?

At the time she'd become much more genuinely catlike in both mind and body in Avengers West Coast, and looked something like this
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/...8092-tigra.jpg

Michael Regan
Sep 3, 2013, 07:43 pm
Ah, yes :rofl:

Of course, like many modern stories one story could simply be placed before or after the other wherever it fits, but no need since they chose to indicate it as an error instead.

Sidney Osinga
Sep 3, 2013, 11:41 pm

  Michael Regan wrote:

Ah, yes :rofl:

Of course, like many modern stories one story could simply be placed before or after the other wherever it fits, but no need since they chose to indicate it as an error instead.

I'm pretty sure that due to the continuity in the Avenger books at the time, there was no way to place Atlantis Attacks before her going feral without messing up a lot more of it.

Stuart V
Sep 4, 2013, 01:32 pm

Sidney Osinga wrote:

I'm pretty sure that due to the continuity in the Avenger books at the time, there was no way to place Atlantis Attacks before her going feral without messing up a lot more of it.

Exactly the case.

zuckyd1
Sep 4, 2013, 02:50 pm
I contribute to a website that is trying to assemble an optimal order in which to read Marvel, and we often run into those sorts of problems.

Angelicknight
Sep 4, 2013, 03:57 pm
A couple of real name questions.

I have seen Stonewall of the Secret Warriors name listed in the books as Jerry sledge but it's also listed on several sites as Harry Creel and the Crimson Dynamo that was an ally of the Answer is listed on some sites as Gregar Valski but to my knowledge i have never seen it in an actual comic or handbook. Are these fan created names or official real names? Also Dark Angel (Mia Lessing) is that her real name or an alias?

DrGoodwrench
Sep 12, 2013, 07:57 pm
I've not been here for a while so sorry if this has been covered. I tried to search for it but couldn't find anything.

On the Comicvine page for the Kree, it says the Ruul were reverted to the Kree by Genis-Vell. I don't remember this happening, and it isn't mentioned in the handbook. As far as I remember, how the Ruul became the Kree again was never explained. Did I miss something?

Michael Regan
Sep 12, 2013, 08:04 pm
I'm not familiar with the events, and although not definitive perhaps this post helps?

http://marvel.com/universe/Ruul

Melou
Sep 14, 2013, 06:47 am

I think the Kree evolution in Ruul was a consequence of the Nega-bombing of Kree civilians planets (possibly including Hala) by the Kree military, intending to purge something or evolve. (And the link between Kree and Ruul was only revealed during Maximum Security). I think. It's quite unclear in my mind.

A few questions:
1) In mutant index (which I don't know if official or not), they state that Krakoa is a mutant (fine for me, a non-human mutant, with no X-gene). But later, his grandchild "came to" the Jean Grey School (First three issue of Wolverine and the X-Men), it qualified himself as a mutant. Is it on the same level of mutation, or does Krakoa Jr. has a further mutation ?

2) Hav-Rogg, the grandson of Yon-Rogg (enemy of Mar-Vell) is stated to be a (possible) kree-alien hybrid in the appendix: http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/zeyroggs.htm . What about that statement ?
(In Captain Marvel Vol 3 I think. The one with really few (4 or 6 issues maybe, focused on Genis-Vell)

3) Was the Wakandan ambassador to the UNO murdered in New Avengers Vol 3 7 (killed by atlanteans) the cousin of T'Challa, T'Shan, seen in Black Panther Vol 4 ?

4) The mutant index states that Catseye is a mutant alien. What about that ? (and that her real name apply for her "alien human form") I know very less about the Hellions but that's the first time I read that.

Michael Regan
Sep 14, 2013, 08:25 am
I noticed the Maximum Security mention in the text I linked to, which I hoped would help. Unfortunately that storyline falls into my personal dark ages of comic collecting.

Monolith
Sep 15, 2013, 10:20 am

Melou wrote:

I think the Kree evolution in Ruul was a consequence of the Nega-bombing of Kree civilians planets (possibly including Hala) by the Kree military, intending to purge something or evolve. (And the link between Kree and Ruul was only revealed during Maximum Security). I think. It's quite unclear in my mind.

A few questions:
1) In mutant index (which I don't know if official or not), they state that Krakoa is a mutant (fine for me, a non-human mutant, with no X-gene). But later, his grandchild "came to" the Jean Grey School (First three issue of Wolverine and the X-Men), it qualified himself as a mutant. Is it on the same level of mutation, or does Krakoa Jr. has a further mutation ?

2) Hav-Rogg, the grandson of Yon-Rogg (enemy of Mar-Vell) is stated to be a (possible) kree-alien hybrid in the appendix: http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/zeyroggs.htm . What about that statement ?
(In Captain Marvel Vol 3 I think. The one with really few (4 or 6 issues maybe, focused on Genis-Vell)

3) Was the Wakandan ambassador to the UNO murdered in New Avengers Vol 3 7 (killed by atlanteans) the cousin of T'Challa, T'Shan, seen in Black Panther Vol 4 ?

4) The mutant index states that Catseye is a mutant alien. What about that ? (and that her real name apply for her "alien human form") I know very less about the Hellions but that's the first time I read that.

-My recollection of the "downfall" of the Ru'ul is that Rick and Genis go to Hala in Captain Marvel III (when Ric is temporarily an old man) and all Kree are being upgraded into Ru'ul. Then in Captain Marvel IV (when Genis is insane), some Kree show up in a strategy session about Genis with other races, looking like classic Kree. When asked about the Ru'ul, they basically say, "Yeah...we don't do that anymore". And that was it.

There may have been a passing suggestion that Genis retconed the Ru'ul in IV #5-6 when he and Entropy restarted the universe, but I don't think that was specifically stated.

1) The student Krakoa really isn't a mutant. Kid Omega used his telepathic suggestion powers to convince Krakoa to work for the X-Men by, in part, helping him see himself as a mutant. It's definitely a "state of mind" mutant, though, and not an actual species-based mutation, like Warlock's non-aggressive transmode virus. The original Krakoa was a "mutant in name only" (a living ecosystem brought to sentience by radiation, with nothing resembling an X-gene), and Kid Krakoa was grown in a lab off of samples of the original.

2) I think the Comments section of that link lay out the idea pretty clearly. Hav-Rogg may be part alien because he's Day-Glo pink instead of Caucasian pink. However, that's completely unconfirmed, and just relies on the existing concept that the Supreme Intelligence encouraged cross-breeding with other races.

3) Rule of thumb: if the character isn't named, there's no reason to assume it was a previously named character.

4) That sounds like a mistake.

DrGoodwrench
Sep 15, 2013, 07:18 pm

  Monolith wrote:

-My recollection of the "downfall" of the Ru'ul is that Rick and Genis go to Hala in Captain Marvel III (when Ric is temporarily an old man) and all Kree are being upgraded into Ru'ul. Then in Captain Marvel IV (when Genis is insane), some Kree show up in a strategy session about Genis with other races, looking like classic Kree. When asked about the Ru'ul, they basically say, "Yeah...we don't do that anymore". And that was it.

There may have been a passing suggestion that Genis retconed the Ru'ul in IV #5-6 when he and Entropy restarted the universe, but I don't think that was specifically stated.

This was how I remembered it. What I was wondering is whether the Entropy-retcon is specifically mentioned as having re-Kreeed the Kree in anything physical that Marvel have put out.

Michael - thanks for the link, BTW.

skippcomet
Sep 19, 2013, 03:01 am
I have a question, and I'm not sure if this is the right thread or not. Is it "Doc Crocodile" or "Doctor Crocodile"?

Michael Regan
Sep 19, 2013, 08:28 am

  skippcomet wrote:

I have a question, and I'm not sure if this is the right thread or not. Is it "Doc Crocodile" or "Doctor Crocodile"?

That would be Doctor Crocodile specifically, but he may be refered to as Doc as a nickname from time-to-time like Doc Ock.


Stuart V
Sep 19, 2013, 01:17 pm

  skippcomet wrote:

I have a question, and I'm not sure if this is the right thread or not. Is it "Doc Crocodile" or "Doctor Crocodile"?

Doctor Crocodile, a.k.a. Doc Croc.

Melou
Sep 21, 2013, 05:52 am
1) Krakoa is still a mutant (cf Phoenix Handbook), but yeah, not a Homo superior mutant, of course. The term mutant keep being used in any possible occasion instead of mutate (ex: The Ani-Mator virus in recents new mutants issues), but Krakoa was detected as a mutant by Cerebro (cf the phoenix handbook)

4) Well, the term alien was used two times in three or four lines, that's why it interested me. (and I don't know much about the Hellions)

Melou
Sep 28, 2013, 05:41 pm
1) According to Broo and Warlock definitions of mutation, are No-Name (the Brood of the Warbounds) and Tyro (Warlock stepson or something like this) mutants from their species ?

2) Who are the two skrulls in the end of the Black Panther annual, assisting to the wedding of Danielle Cage and Storm and Black Panther's son ? I was thinking they could be Cadre K members (mutant skrulls).

3) Was Ms. Fingers ("Brotherhood" issue finale)'s powers invisibility and/or teleportation ?

4) (I might have ask that before): Is Hit-Monkey a mutant macaque ? (cf the editor of a magazine Deadpool)

5) In Wolverine and the X-Men 29, we saw a sentinel and a brood among the students. Are those She-Sentinel 17 and C'vrrrk Bludskuul of the Brood ? Are those mutants of their kinds ?

Rayeye
Oct 1, 2013, 04:48 pm

Melou wrote:

3) Was Ms. Fingers ("Brotherhood" issue finale)'s powers invisibility and/or teleportation ?

She could teleport and become transparent as well.

Melou
Oct 3, 2013, 09:48 am
Is Raptor (Gary Wilton, Jr.) a mutant ? (cf wikipedia (hehe) and Marvunnap) ?

Michael Regan
Oct 3, 2013, 10:17 am

Melou wrote:

Is Raptor (Gary Wilton, Jr.) a mutant ? (cf wikipedia (hehe) and Marvunnap) ?

I had assumed that he was a mutate due to the origin of his powers, but given the circumstances he could just as easily be considered a mutant.

Melou
Oct 3, 2013, 11:52 am
I had understand that he was a mutant (maybe changeling) whose mutation had been triggered by the mutate state and chemicals, but one guy had suppress the last edits (still on wikia), stating he was a mutate. The Avengers roll and call (or something like that) doesn't state anything clear about it.

Monolith
Oct 4, 2013, 09:58 am

Melou wrote:

1) According to Broo and Warlock definitions of mutation, are No-Name (the Brood of the Warbounds) and Tyro (Warlock stepson or something like this) mutants from their species ?

I'd say no.

No-Name was forcibly cut off from the Brood hive mind (and eventually all of her sisters) by exterior forces. She had to evolve a sense of individuality and made a new "hive" out of her Warbound. That's very different from Broo spontaneously developing empathy while still a part of the hive.

Tyro would be closer to an artificially-engineered mutant, like the Fenris twins or Francis Klum. Warlock's mutation was a naturally occurring non-aggressive strand of the Transmode Virus. Tyro had no such strand, but Warlock infected him with one, thereby mutating him into a Technarch with similar feelings.

Melou wrote:

Is Raptor (Gary Wilton, Jr.) a mutant ? (cf wikipedia (hehe) and Marvunnap) ?

Not according to his one and only real appearance. Raptor suffered genetic damage in utero thanks to his parents' work, then survived only because they did additional bio-chemical work on his fetus to ensure his birth. Sounds like he'd fall into the Daisy Johnson category of "born with powers but not a mutant". Outside factors triggered his mutation...they just occurred before his birth.

Also, he didn't make it onto The 198 list, but Stark was aware of him during the Civil War Battle Damage Report. Those were pretty close together, so if he made it onto the one list but not the other, its a reasonable implication that he's not recognized as a mutant.

Melou
Oct 16, 2013, 01:23 pm
Correction for precedent questions and answers:
-Madame Webb is a mutant in House of M (Secret of the House of M)
-Catseye is a mutant raised by a cat. her body is "alien" to her as she used to her feline form. (Marvel Encyclopedia #X-Men)

Phoenixx9
Oct 16, 2013, 03:26 pm
My take on Catseye is that she is a mutant who was born and raised in her feline form (most likely by some form of feral cat: housecat, wildcat or bobcat).

When Emma Frost found her, she was able to determine via telepathy that Sharon was human and had a human form that she could assume. Through training, Emma somehow got Sharon to change into her human form, and I believe Emma also taught her to speak. This was difficult for Sharon and she talks in a weird sing-song way.

In the old X-books, there were allusions that there was more to Catseye than we had seen, but I don't know if anything more about her has ever been revealed. For instance, her lavender/purple coloring and her ability to walk on ceilings. But those things could just be related to her mutation.

Melou
Oct 20, 2013, 06:18 am
I was also thinking, the black afro-haired girl in the parade in X-Men: Legacy #245 (Age of X) couldn't be Oya (Idie of the Five Lights), instead of Debrii ?

That could fit more, as Spider-Man seemingly stated that the Human Coalition started chase the mutates way after the mutants (except for Sinister's kill by Jessica Drew, except if Essex was mutant).

Melou
Oct 22, 2013, 05:53 am
Is Gibbon (Martin Blank) trully a mutant ? And does he retains his powers after M-Day (or just his furry appearance) ?

Melou
Oct 22, 2013, 06:11 am
And I had forgot:
-Is Cerise a Shi'ar mutant ?

-Are Remus and Romulus (Wolverine Origins) mutants ?

-Sunfire was "depowered" by Rogue. his mutant energies were used by the Collective. But Rogue keep using them. He was then repowered by Apocalypse.

So ?
- Was he trully depowered by Rogue ?
-- His X-gene destroyed ?
- Was he depowered by M-Day even if his powers weren't active in him at this time ?
- When he was repowered, was he:
-- "Pseudo-Repowered", with no X-Gene (Like Gazer, except if I make here a mistake) ?
-- Granted a new X-Gene/had his X-Gene restored (like Polaris) ?
-- Reactivated his powers (if he wasn't M-Day depowered, and if his X-Gene hadn't been destroyed by Rogue ?

(yep multiple question, but that case isn't reallt clear)

Melou
Oct 22, 2013, 02:58 pm
Delgado is named Marco in Dark Reign Files but Harry in X-Men Encyclopedia. Error, alias, middle-names ?

Was Bastion's mutant detector picking up mutant life-signs, because they were powered, or because those life-signs were already known, even if they were maybe depowered ? In otherswords: Were confirmed to be repowered ? That also include Unus, listed among those detected? (that could prove that he was still repowered from the mists (who could so restore the X-Gene, for a time) while he was dead)

Rayeye
Oct 22, 2013, 03:50 pm

Melou wrote:

I was also thinking, the black afro-haired girl in the parade in X-Men: Legacy #245 (Age of X) couldn't be Oya (Idie of the Five Lights), instead of Debrii ?

That could fit more, as Spider-Man seemingly stated that the Human Coalition started chase the mutates way after the mutants (except for Sinister's kill by Jessica Drew, except if Essex was mutant).

The black girl was never identified. At some wiki sites she wrongfully was listed as Debrii. That was never officially confirmed, besides her origin of powers are unrevealed (which means it's not known yet if she is a mutant or a mutate).

Melou wrote:

Is Gibbon (Martin Blank) trully a mutant ? And does he retains his powers after M-Day (or just his furry appearance) ?

Yes, he is. And he is still powered since M-Day.

Melou wrote:

And I had forgot:
-Is Cerise a Shi'ar mutant ?

No, she isn't. Just a member from a Shi'ar offshoot.

Melou wrote:

Delgado is named Marco in Dark Reign Files but Harry in X-Men Encyclopedia. Error, alias, middle-names ?

His real name is Marco Delgado, which was confirmed/stated in the Official Handbooks of the Marvel Universe. Harry Delgado was the name of the SHIELD agent who appeared in the same story as Marco. The X-Men Encyclopedia (I assume you mean the Marvel Encyclopedia: X-Men from 2003) came out before the return of the Official Handbooks, so at that time his real first name was still a point of discussion.

Monolith
Oct 22, 2013, 04:14 pm

Melou wrote:

Is Gibbon (Martin Blank) trully a mutant ? And does he retains his powers after M-Day (or just his furry appearance) ?

Assuming Marvel Apes is in-canon (reluctantly), Gibbon is apparently a full, X-gene carrying mutant, possibly the same sort of Killcrop mutant throwback as Jamie Madrox due to his mutation being active since birth.

Melou wrote:

And I had forgot:
-Is Cerise a Shi'ar mutant ?

-Are Remus and Romulus (Wolverine Origins) mutants ?


-Sunfire was "depowered" by Rogue. his mutant energies were used by the Collective. But Rogue keep using them. He was then repowered by Apocalypse.

So ?
- Was he trully depowered by Rogue ?
-- His X-gene destroyed ?
- Was he depowered by M-Day even if his powers weren't active in him at this time ?
- When he was repowered, was he:
-- "Pseudo-Repowered", with no X-Gene (Like Gazer, except if I make here a mistake) ?
-- Granted a new X-Gene/had his X-Gene restored (like Polaris) ?
-- Reactivated his powers (if he wasn't M-Day depowered, and if his X-Gene hadn't been destroyed by Rogue ?

(yep multiple question, but that case isn't reallt clear)

-Cerise was bio-engineered into adulthood, never having a childhood. It's unknown if she was engineered from a specific parent race (like Century) or if all warriors engineered like her are a distinct and separate race (like Longshot). Either way, she was likely engineered with her energy powers and therefore is probably not a mutant in the conventional sense.

-Romulus lied constantly about his origins, leaving his history in doubt. He could be from a divergent human species (like Inhumans), a divergent mutant subgroup (like the Dominent Species), or a unique mutation. No credible evidence has been provided.

-Sunfire's X-gene was not affected by Rogue's touch. That's not how her powers work. His abilities may have been "permanently" drained away, but he was still genetically a mutant. (The same way that Carol Danvers still had her half-Kree genetic code after Rogue drained her, even though her powers were gone.) Sunfire's powers were not a part of the Collective, either.

Melou wrote:

Delgado is named Marco in Dark Reign Files but Harry in X-Men Encyclopedia. Error, alias, middle-names ?

Was Bastion's mutant detector picking up mutant life-signs, because they were powered, or because those life-signs were already known, even if they were maybe depowered ? In otherswords: Were confirmed to be repowered ? That also include Unus, listed among those detected? (that could prove that he was still repowered from the mists (who could so restore the X-Gene, for a time) while he was dead)

-In X-Men (2nd series) #1-3, a SHIELD agent named Harry Delgado chased the Acolytes onto Asteroid M, where they were all captured by Magneto. Once they were brought on board, the Acolytes pledged their services to Magneto. Cut to a few hours later, Magneto leads the Acolytes into battle, including an Acolyte named Delgado (who looks noticeably different from the previously seen Harry).

The writer, Chris Claremont, failed to ever accurately explain what the deal was, although he did have Wolverine and Beast openly speculate about it in the middle of the battle. I think the jist of it was, "Different guy, same name. Or maybe he switched sides. Or maybe he was forced." Nothing further was ever said on the subject, and those Acolytes all died by the end of the arc anyway.

The early Marvel Encyclopedias took the position that the Acolyte Delgado was Harry Delgado. At some point, the Handbooks adopted the position that Acolyte Delgado was NOT the same as the SHIELD agent, giving him a new first name as "Marco Delgado".

-Regarding Bastion...context?

Melou
Oct 24, 2013, 09:05 am
Unus was depowered at M-Day, death during the Decimation (SOn of M; his powers suffocated him); resurected in X-Force Vol.3 21 (mentioned by Bastion's detector), seen in issue 24.

Also a question on the Millenial Visions: X-Men 2000, in Logan's story "Last Man Standing", who is the president John Jameson: JJJ or his son ?

Melou
Oct 27, 2013, 06:33 am
Is Psynapse an inhuman like other Dark Riders, a mutant like it is said in his final appearance (X-Man 46), or it is both of them, a mutant/inhuman hybrid with active genetic marker (unlike Luna), or an inhuman mutant (like the Beyonder) ?

Rayeye
Oct 27, 2013, 05:20 pm

Melou wrote:

Is Psynapse an inhuman like other Dark Riders, a mutant like it is said in his final appearance (X-Man 46), or it is both of them, a mutant/inhuman hybrid with active genetic marker (unlike Luna), or an inhuman mutant (like the Beyonder) ?

He is an Inhuman (and a distant relative of the Inhuman Royal Family). Him being a mutant in X-Man #46 was simply an error.
 
 
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 2:35 pm  #13


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Additional historical text from CxPulp:
 
Andy E. Nystrom
12-15-2013, 03:25 PM
Okay, this thread has been brought up to date. Post away!
 
Melou
12-19-2013, 10:04 AM
Hi!
Still correcting old stuff added to Marvel.wikia by users long time gone:
-A list of characters added as mutants, which could only had been added because they are part of mutant-team series (or are a little different from their classic types): Igor Stancheck (Radioactive Man seen in Black Panther Vol.4, allied with Klaw), Jessica Drew (Earth-1815, the first reality where were sent Blink's Exiles), Arize (the Spineless Ones who built up the rebellion), Ultimate Namora, Zoe Culloden (Deadpool's ally).

-A list of characters added as Omega mutants, which could only had been added because they are counterparts (or alleged) or blood-related to Omegas: Rachel Summers/Franklin Richards children (Hyperstorm (Jonathan Reed Richards), Marvel Girl (Dream Summers), David Richards), Madelyne Pryor/Havok's son Scott "Scotty" Summers.

Thanks.
 
Melou
12-20-2013, 02:08 AM
(It's not an affirmation, it's an asking for confirmation of those mutants, as I've checked the most material I was able to find on them, and hadn't managed to find references to approve it (but I haven't managed to find every issues or handbooks.))

Also, regarding to X-Men: Kingbreaker #2 who wrote the word shi'ar in minuscule letters, writing "Shi'Ar", so is the correct spelling Shi'Ar or Shi'ar ? ?
 
Stuart V
12-20-2013, 06:44 AM

Melou wrote:

Hi!
Still correcting old stuff added to Marvel.wikia by users long time gone:
-A list of characters added as mutants, which could only had been added because they are part of mutant-team series (or are a little different from their classic types): Igor Stancheck (Radioactive Man seen in Black Panther Vol.4, allied with Klaw), Jessica Drew (Earth-1815, the first reality where were sent Blink's Exiles), Arize (the Spineless Ones who built up the rebellion), Ultimate Namora, Zoe Culloden (Deadpool's ally).

-A list of characters added as Omega mutants, which could only had been added because they are counterparts (or alleged) or blood-related to Omegas: Rachel Summers/Franklin Richards children (Hyperstorm (Jonathan Reed Richards), Marvel Girl (Dream Summers), David Richards), Madelyne Pryor/Havok's son Scott "Scotty" Summers.

Thanks.

On the mutants - unless they have been specifically identified as such in either their appearances or the handbooks, it is purely speculation that they are mutants. Absence of an established origin is not evidence of being a mutant. And Arize is almost certainly not a mutant - he's just a Spineless One who isn't as fat as his brethern because he uses an artificial spine to enable him to walk, unlike his fellows who cart themselves around on their spider-like carriers - in other words, he's getting some exercise while the others are couch potatoes. Likewise, unless the comics stated them to be Omega mutants, they are not considered such. Hyperstorm is definitely powerful enough to probably be one, but probably isn't the same as "identified to be one", and parentage or close family relationship to an Omega is not proof either.

Melou wrote:

(It's not an affirmation, it's an asking for confirmation of those mutants, as I've checked the most material I was able to find on them, and hadn't managed to find references to approve it (but I haven't managed to find every issues or handbooks.))

Also, regarding to X-Men: Kingbreaker #2 who wrote the word shi'ar in minuscule letters, writing "Shi'Ar", so is the correct spelling Shi'Ar or Shi'ar ? ?

Shi'ar.
 
Melou
12-22-2013, 02:59 AM
That's what I thought/knew, but I was expecting more of a confirmation for the issues I missed/didn't find.

Also another subject brought to me by another editor:
"alot of the mutants are being teleported away due to Scarlet Witch's spell to transport all mutants, and I noticed on the page where Storm and Psylocke are transported away but Puck got transported away with them to which could presumably make him a mutant, so do you think this is a mistake on Remender's part or the artist?"

To what I replied:
"he is a 198 who stood hide because he was dead at that time"
"he is a new mutant post-AvX"
"he is a mutant in his tiny little heart"
"the spell wasn't that much clear or included word defining Puck as well " (the words being important in magic)
"the radius of the spell was large in space".(but that doesn't work regarding to Cap, Grim Reaper, Spider-Man..)

Have you an idea or answer for that ?
 
Melou
12-23-2013, 05:28 AM
In X-Men: Divided we stand, it stated twice that Scalphunter is the clone/copy of a clone/copy of a clone/copy. Is that an expression, or is he really the "fourth main" Scalphunter ? (the Scalphunter seen among the regular Marauders, not random clones encountered by X-Force or in Sinister London)

In Generation M #1, there is a club named the Inferno Night Club in Manhattan. Is that the same club that the Inferno Club/Daniel's Inferno presented in the series District X, also in Manhattan (in Mutant Town).

Thanks.
 
Stuart V
12-23-2013, 07:51 AM

Melou wrote:

That's what I thought/knew, but I was expecting more of a confirmation for the issues I missed/didn't find.

Unfortunately, if they are dubious and speculative, then it's all but impossible - there won't be an issue to reference.

Melou wrote:

Also another subject brought to me by another editor:
"alot of the mutants are being teleported away due to Scarlet Witch's spell to transport all mutants, and I noticed on the page where Storm and Psylocke are transported away but Puck got transported away with them to which could presumably make him a mutant, so do you think this is a mistake on Remender's part or the artist?"

To what I replied:
"he is a 198 who stood hide because he was dead at that time"
"he is a new mutant post-AvX"
"he is a mutant in his tiny little heart"
"the spell wasn't that much clear or included word defining Puck as well " (the words being important in magic)
"the radius of the spell was large in space".(but that doesn't work regarding to Cap, Grim Reaper, Spider-Man..)

Have you an idea or answer for that ?

He hasn't retroactively become a mutant. He hasn't become one post-AvX either. Real world, someone probably goofed and thought he was a mutant. In-story "no prize" explanation, Scarlet Witch's spell worked on him because she thought he was a mutant - her subconscious picked who did and didn't get teleported.

Melou wrote:

In X-Men: Divided we stand, it stated twice that Scalphunter is the clone/copy of a clone/copy of a clone/copy. Is that an expression, or is he really the "fourth main" Scalphunter ? (the Scalphunter seen among the regular Marauders, not random clones encountered by X-Force or in Sinister London)

No reason not to believe it accurate.

Melou wrote:

In Generation M #1, there is a club named the Inferno Night Club in Manhattan. Is that the same club that the Inferno Club/Daniel's Inferno presented in the series District X, also in Manhattan (in Mutant Town).

Thanks.

Sounds likely, though it isn't that unique a name for a nightclub.
 
Gijimux
12-26-2013, 11:26 PM
Mr. Vandal,

I just had one question, hopefully you might be able to clear up for me, involving latent mutants who's powers have never activated, I have seen on multiple websites about Police Detective Charlotte Jones being a latent mutant before M-Day, is there any reference to this as true or just more made up fan stuff?
 
Stuart V
01-02-2014, 07:42 AM

  Gijimux wrote:

Mr. Vandal,

I just had one question, hopefully you might be able to clear up for me, involving latent mutants who's powers have never activated, I have seen on multiple websites about Police Detective Charlotte Jones being a latent mutant before M-Day, is there any reference to this as true or just more made up fan stuff?

Just to let you know that I'm not ignoring your question. I had a short delay checking on this due to the holidays and being away from home. Now I am checking into this, but the trouble is that it is always easier to find evidence proving something than evidence that something was never the case - in other words, it takes finding a single issue that says she is a latent mutant to confirm she is one, but if she's never been referred to as such, you have to trawl through all her appearances making sure there is no such mention (and even then there's a risk she might have been namechecked in an issue she didn't appear in and the info could have been given there).
 
Melou
01-02-2014, 12:31 PM
Hi!
A little question: Is the correct spelling is Sugarman, Sugar-Man or Sugar Man ? (I've seen the three but I assume there were errors)

A more long question: In Endangered Species - Part 1 (X-Men 200), we saw Beast asking for help to nine "villains". The 4th from the left, on the upper part of the screens block is he Mojo ? He didn't appeared after, and isn't in the list of the resume of the next part of Endangered Species.

Thanks.
 
Rayeye
01-02-2014, 03:51 PM

Melou wrote:

Hi!
A little question: Is the correct spelling is Sugarman, Sugar-Man or Sugar Man ? (I've seen the three but I assume there were errors)

Sugar Man is the correct spelling.
 
Melou
01-04-2014, 11:13 AM
A new batch of questions:
-Was Scalphunter killed during Inferno (off-panel) ? The various Handbooks doesn't contradict but aren't very clear on his fate.

-Is Holocaust presented in Stryfe's Strike File #1 an early version of Holocaust/Nemesis of the Age of Apocalypse, or a character who hadn't get his time for now ?

-What were the mutant powers of the Sphinx when he was still chief wizard in the court of Pharaoh Ramses II ? (before getting the Ka Stone)

- The creator of the Sentinels MkIII, leader of MRD and part of Bastion's anti-mutant council named Stephen Lang or Steven Lang. Both names are used as well in handbooks and comics.

Thanks !
 
Eduardo M.
01-04-2014, 05:20 PM

Melou wrote:

-Was Scalphunter killed during Inferno (off-panel) ? The various Handbooks doesn't contradict but aren't very clear on his fate.
Thanks !

I'm looking at my copy of the Inferno tpb and it looks like the only confirmed kill is Prism. There is someone on the ground in panel 5 page 20 of Uncanny X-Men #241 who looks to be wearing Scalphunter's costume but the hair matches Riptide. It also doesn't help that the face is obscured.
 
Melou
01-06-2014, 11:04 AM
I will look back to my entries to have the correct sentences, but what I've saw and remember was basically "(all) the marauders were killed" in an entry, and in another a list of 2 or 3, including Riptide or Prism "killed by the Right".

- Who are the parents/grandparents of Rico ? (Genext, the universe of X-Men : The End)

By the way, thanks for the answers everyone. (I often forget to thank you guys, sorry)
 
Eduardo M.
01-06-2014, 01:29 PM

Melou wrote:

I will look back to my entries to have the correct sentences, but what I've saw and remember was basically "(all) the marauders were killed" in an entry, and in another a list of 2 or 3, including Riptide or Prism "killed by the Right

According to the Marauders entry in the hardcovers, Prism was killed while the rest were "beaten or fled" (actual phrase)

The entry for Scalphunter in the A-Z update in 2010 states he was apparently killed by Wolverine.
 
Rayeye
01-06-2014, 01:36 PM

Melou wrote:

A new batch of questions:
-Was Scalphunter killed during Inferno (off-panel) ? The various Handbooks doesn't contradict but aren't very clear on his fate.

-Is Holocaust presented in Stryfe's Strike File #1 an early version of Holocaust/Nemesis of the Age of Apocalypse, or a character who hadn't get his time for now ?

-What were the mutant powers of the Sphinx when he was still chief wizard in the court of Pharaoh Ramses II ? (before getting the Ka Stone)

- The creator of the Sentinels MkIII, leader of MRD and part of Bastion's anti-mutant council named Stephen Lang or Steven Lang. Both names are used as well in handbooks and comics.

Thanks !

- I don't know if Scalphunter was killed during Inferno, but since the Marauders have been cloned and re-cloned multiple times it's even unclear when the originals died (if they did at all).
- The Holocaust character in Stryfe's Strike File is indeed an early version of Holocaust/Nemesis. I can't remember exactly the descriptions with the profile, but perhaps it was later retconned, since Holocaust showed up later in Age of Apocalypse (Earth-295) instead of 616 (years before his kind of alternate counterpart Genocide showed up).
- The correct name is Steven Lang. Stephen Lang is incorrect and just like the misspelling Moira MacTaggart (instead of the correct Moira MacTaggert) ofted used incorrectly.

Melou wrote:

- Who are the parents/grandparents of Rico ? (Genext, the universe of X-Men : The End)

By the way, thanks for the answers everyone. (I often forget to thank you guys, sorry)

His grandparents are Reed and Sue Richards. It hasn't been revealed who his parents (perhaps his father is Franklin or his mother is Valeria).
By the way, not to sound rude because I'm glad I can help you, but shouldn't most of your questions posted elsewhere at this forum? I mean this is a thread about things people (online) getting wrong leading to persistent errors on many fan-made sites.
 
Stuart V
01-06-2014, 02:45 PM

  Rayeye wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
By the way, not to sound rude because I'm glad I can help you, but shouldn't most of your questions posted elsewhere at this forum? I mean this is a thread about things people (online) getting wrong leading to persistent errors on many fan-made sites.

Yes, to be honest most of these questions belong in the Q&A thread rather than the "things people keep getting wrong" thread.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
01-06-2014, 04:26 PM

  Stuart V wrote:

Yes, to be honest most of these questions belong in the Q&A thread rather than the "things people keep getting wrong" thread.

I'll check in with Mal32 on how he's going with getting that thread back up and will tackle it myself if need be. Prior to the holidays I gave him a deadline of the 7th and that's tomorrow. So one way or another it'll be up by the end of the week.
 
Melou
01-07-2014, 04:58 AM
Well, back on comixfan, I think I'd asked if (more or less) that was okay for my questions to be posted there (and that was the best spot to get complete and quick answers). Also, my questions are mostly meant to serve as corrections to things get wrong and copy-pasted all over the net (including on the marvel database wikia, where I edit), but I agree that Q&A would fit as well for most of them (and some other indeed only in Q&A section). Will do it as soon as I have new questions and the thread is established.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
01-07-2014, 08:07 AM
Yeah, in fairness someone did say that. I'll make sure the Q&A thread is up by Sat at the very latest.
 
Melou
01-23-2014, 06:30 AM
Georgeous George is stated to be a post-M-Day mutant on both marvel.wikia and comicvine (presumably same author or copy-pasting from one to another), but I have seen no sign or mention of it.

A mix between a hanboook and a "things people keep getting wrong", Marrow's poweration: Her involvement into the X-Cell (using knives), her aspect (potentially a "Rem"), her apparition in the Ex-Mutant Diairies, her entry in All-New Handbook (2006?) stating she was powered during a TV interview: Is she really depowered ?

Thanks.
 
Rayeye
01-28-2014, 12:43 PM

Melou wrote:

Georgeous George is stated to be a post-M-Day mutant on both marvel.wikia and comicvine (presumably same author or copy-pasting from one to another), but I have seen no sign or mention of it.

A mix between a hanboook and a "things people keep getting wrong", Marrow's poweration: Her involvement into the X-Cell (using knives), her aspect (potentially a "Rem"), her apparition in the Ex-Mutant Diairies, her entry in All-New Handbook (2006?) stating she was powered during a TV interview: Is she really depowered ?

Thanks.

Georgeous George (along with the other Nasty Boys, with the exception of Ruckus) hasn't been confirmed powered or depowered since M-Day. Marvel wiki and Comicvine aren't the most reliable sources when it comes to this. I've sadly seen a lot of made-up information about comic characters at those sites.
However during the release of the All-New Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A to Z (2006-2007) it was confirmed by one of the Handbook writers (I believe it was Eric Moreels, but I could be wrong) that when there isn't any mention of being powered or depowered in their profile in the All-New OHOTMU A to Z, those mutants can be considered presumed powered. That means at least Blindspot, Azazel, all the Nasty Boys (Ruckus being the only one recently confirmed powered in X-Men Legacy), Bella Donna Boudreaux, Marvel Boy (David Banks), Orphan-Maker, all living Promise members, Mondo and Lacuna are presumed powered until otherwise confirmed.

Marrow was absolutely confirmed depowered. That's why she was in X-Cell. Yes, she had some physical remained traits (which is called a "rem"), but she hasn't been repowered yet (but that perhaps that will change in the upcoming X-Force series?).
 
Melou
01-28-2014, 02:44 PM

  Rayeye wrote:

However during the release of the All-New Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A to Z (2006-2007) it was confirmed by one of the Handbook writers (I believe it was Eric Moreels, but I could be wrong) that when there isn't any mention of being powered or depowered in their profile in the All-New OHOTMU A to Z, those mutants can be considered presumed powered. That means at least Blindspot, Azazel, all the Nasty Boys (Ruckus being the only one recently confirmed powered in X-Men Legacy), Bella Donna Boudreaux, Marvel Boy (David Banks), Orphan-Maker, all living Promise members, Mondo and Lacuna are presumed powered until otherwise confirmed.

Marrow was absolutely confirmed depowered. That's why she was in X-Cell. Yes, she had some physical remained traits (which is called a "rem"), but she hasn't been repowered yet (but that perhaps that will change in the upcoming X-Force series?).

That statement could be interesting. However, at marvel.wikia, we only state (currently) if they are clearly depowered, powered, or unknown (with or without ref), but never "presumed powered".

So the All-New Handbook entry on Marrow was wrong.

Thanks for the answers!
 
Eduardo M.
01-28-2014, 05:26 PM
the status of characters post-MDay is not as clear as it first seems to appear. I think we can safely say anyone whose powers were used by the Collective were depowered. The members of X-cell were all depowered.


Its been stated that there are 198 confirmed still powered mutants. however its been shown that the number is not to be taken as gospel. Ex: Typhoid Mary while operating in the Initiative as Mutant Zero was considered the 199th still powered mutant. This means there could be more than 200 still with powers.

Until any members of the Nasty Boys appear, we can assume either way. Unless someone can chime with a statement from someone working on the x-books on that count.
 
Melou
01-28-2014, 10:11 PM
Well at least it makes one thing more to have been corrected on marvel.wikia. The number of mistakes there tends to became really low now.

Also, if you recall, when Mutant Zero / 199th was revealed, Gyrich stated that 198 was the number of "registered" (maybe not the word he used, "known", something like that) in the USA (really unsure about the formulation), but he stated also that the estimation was around 300.

Also also, a thing I saw on marvel.wikia Legion allegedly stated in X-Men: Legacy Vol.2 8 (allegedly as I haven't read that issue I think) that the Cerebra (mostly?) detected the powerful mutant activity. The text on marvel.wiia: "David Haller has claimed that Cerebro/Cerebra are only calibrated to detect power spikes from "flashy" mutant powers.[4]This may account for so many mutants going undetected over the years."


Also, in the Collective entry of the Mighty Avengers Most Wanted Files, are listed among :
-Wiz Kid, as we already know he in fact wasn't: Was this a mistake ? (or a very quick hacking?)
-It was stated earlier on those (or Comixfan's) pages that Sunfire hadn't been depowered, but his energies were indeed present among the Collective, and Rogue (who possess his powers) wasn't depowered at that time nor lost his abilities.
 
Rayeye
01-30-2014, 01:24 PM

Melou wrote:

Also, in the Collective entry of the Mighty Avengers Most Wanted Files, are listed among :
-Wiz Kid, as we already know he in fact wasn't: Was this a mistake ? (or a very quick hacking?)
-It was stated earlier on those (or Comixfan's) pages that Sunfire hadn't been depowered, but his energies were indeed present among the Collective, and Rogue (who possess his powers) wasn't depowered at that time nor lost his abilities.

About Wiz Kid, I asked the writer Christos Gage when he used a powered Wiz Kid in his Avengers Academy series. He replied that Wiz Kid was still powered (his powers were not seen among the Collective, only on the SHIELD screen with depowered mutants). He just had hacked into the database of SHIELD, letting them think he was depowered. So you consider that a retcon. I'm glad Wiz Kid is still powered

By the way, the last X-Men Legacy issue confirms Manifold is a mutant.
 
Melou
01-31-2014, 09:50 AM
Okay so, the handbooks that say his energies were correspond to his piratage. Good for me.

Yep, seen that, which brought another subject. Fantomex's spirit is absorbed as well: I think to remember, without any reference, that Fantomex was already stated to be kind of a mutant. But here this is real material:

-Is it an artist error ? (the answer chosen for Puck's teleportation in Uncanny Avengers)
-Is he a Sentinel "mutant" ? (as Number Two of the Sentinel Mk II, Karima (Omega Sentinel) or the Wild Sentinels who came to Chicago (all stated to be "mutant sentinel" in a more or less serious)
-He is a mutant (Homo superior) ?

And returning to that Apocalypse's Twins rapture: How happen that both Sabra (unsure but I think it's her) and Namor are still on Earth ? Is it related to their power level (as they are both Heavy hitters)
 
Hamburger Time
02-01-2014, 12:01 PM
Mr. Vandal,

I have some questions about mutants I need identifying. Several fan sites I've seen identify the pink Generation X driver as "Hick" and the two X-Force bush leaguers defeated by Corkscrew as "Mutalien" and "Nightvoid." To date I haven't been able to find scans confirming this. Are these fan names, or are they from the Handbooks? If they are real, were their real names given?

Thanks.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
02-01-2014, 12:53 PM

Hamburger Time wrote:

I have some questions about mutants I need identifying. Several fan sites I've seen identify the pink Generation X driver as "Hick" and the two X-Force bush leaguers defeated by Corkscrew as "Mutalien" and "Nightvoid." To date I haven't been able to find scans confirming this. Are these fan names, or are they from the Handbooks? If they are real, were their real names given?

I can answer part of this: In the X-Statix entry in Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe Hardcover #13, Mutalien (Shane McNichols) and Nightvoid (Joshua McMahan) are both identified.
 
Hamburger Time
02-01-2014, 01:01 PM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I can answer part of this: In the X-Statix entry in Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe Hardcover #13, Mutalien (Shane McNichols) and Nightvoid (Joshua McMahan) are both identified.

Thanks! Any significance to them both being "Mc"s?

Also, Earth's Mutant Heroes, in the Neo entry, lists two Neo named Tartarus: the helmeted one and the blond-haired one. Are there truly two Neo with this codename, or is that an error? I'd always assumed it was just the same guy in a helmet.

And talking of 2000s Claremont villains, has it ever been revealed what the members of Tullamore Voge's slaving ring are? Goth, Sanguine, Beldame, Wanderer, Killian, Bloody Bess, and Broadside. tullamore also has Neo associates, so is that what they are? Regular mutants? Aliens like Tullamore? Something else?
 
Melou
03-08-2014, 02:11 AM
Just to correct my own question, according to Age of Heroes: Villains entry of Psionex, the new Asylum is indeed a new Asylum.
 
Rayeye
03-10-2014, 08:28 AM

Hamburger Time wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Also, Earth's Mutant Heroes, in the Neo entry, lists two Neo named Tartarus: the helmeted one and the blond-haired one. Are there truly two Neo with this codename, or is that an error? I'd always assumed it was just the same guy in a helmet.

As far as I know they were supposed to be two different persons. The Tartarus with the helmet was killed by Magneto. Later at the end of Young X-Men the other Tartarus was seen among the surviving Neo fighting the Young X-Men.
 
 
Melou
03-11-2014, 04:42 AM
Also, in order to counter bad material, fan-made classifications and fan-classified Omegas, I've created and/or corrected the information on marvel database wikia.
- http://marvel.wikia.com/Mutant_Power...Classification : All the classification I've been able to find. It seems like epsilon and delta doesn't exist as one of the last Age of Apocalypse talk about the Dregs (low-level mutants) as forming a group with the betas and gammas, the sentence opposing them to the Alphas.
- http://marvel.wikia.com/Category[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]mega_Level_Mutants the Omega Level Mutants: All of them have been stated to be "Omega Level Mutant", "Omega-Level Mutant threats", "Omega Mutants", "Omega Level", "Omega", "Omega-class mutants", "Omega strength mutants", "Class Omega Contact" (this one is Rachel, still waiting before splitting her from the other categories).

I also listed apart the "potential Omega-Level", "potential Omega-class mutants" or "mutants with Omega-Level Potential" that are Chamber and Ororo.

It seems that the Omega Level Mutates quote of New Avengers Vol 3 #9 is still troubling some people on CBR, comicvine and (a little on) Marvel database wikia, where they argue if that statement concerned the three mutants seen in the following panels (Ororo (stated to be potential Omega), Rachel (stated to be Class Omega) and Iceman (stated to be Omega Level)), or if it concerned characters exterior to the scene.
 
Melou
03-16-2014, 12:41 PM
Oh, a new question. The X-Man named "Mer-Max" from Earth-15104 (Here Comes Tomorrow) is stated to be a mutant whale by comicvine, while marveldatabasewikia states it is unknown what kind of creature it is.

Have somebody a clue about it ? (human or whale, mutant, mutate or not?) Thanks !
 
Melou
03-21-2014, 05:13 AM
Concerning Cloud 9 mutation, Tom Brevoort stated she isn't a mutant (while not directly questioning the canonicity of the Ultimate Character Guide).
http://brevoortformspring.tumblr.com...mutation#notes
 
Rayeye
03-21-2014, 03:48 PM

Melou wrote:

Oh, a new question. The X-Man from Earth-15104 is stated to be a mutant whale by comicvine, while marveldatabasewikia states it is unknown what kind of creature it is.

Have somebody a clue about it ? (human or whale, mutant, mutate or not?) Thanks !

What do you mean with "the X-Man"? If you mean Nate Grey, because he hasn't been seen in Earth-15104's reality. Earth-15104 is also known as the Here Comes Tomorrow reality.
 
Melou
03-22-2014, 02:37 AM
The X-Man = the singular form of X-Men. Oh I see what went wrong, I forgot to name it. Damn. "Mer-Max". My bad, I need to stop forgetting half of my words when writing. Sorry. (I also forgot to indicate Here comes Tomorrow)

So here the correct sentence: "Oh, a new question. The X-Man named "Mer-Max" from Earth-15104 (Here Comes Tomorrow) is stated to be a mutant whale by comicvine, while marveldatabasewikia states it is unknown what kind of creature it is..."

Thanks !
 
Rayeye
03-23-2014, 08:37 AM
In the story it wasn't revealed whether he was a mutant or not. I noticed Comicvine has often a way of listing characters whose origin aren't revealed as mutants (like Debrii).
Anyway, Comicvine is wrong in this, Marvel Database is right. But since most X-Men (even in the Here Comes Tomorrow reality) were mutants, I guess it's very likely Mer-Max was a mutant as well.
 
Melou
03-23-2014, 09:26 AM
Yep, I tried to keep my watch on the marvel database, as I'm listing the special kind of mutants on it (non-human, artificials, sentinels, subs-species or other human mutants), so I tried to be the more clear possible and keep out as most speculations as possible.

But even if mutant, always the question mutant whale telepathic or whale-form telepath human mutant. Also asked Tom Brevoort, will post here the answer if he has one. Thanks anyway !
 
Rayeye
04-16-2014, 01:08 PM
Question: in the Official Handbook profile of Legion the full name absorbed girl is revealed as Marci Jane Fogerty. However online sites like Marvel Database the girl is named Marci Sabol.
I assume the Handbook got it right, but I was wondering if someone can confirm which name is the right one.
 
Monolith
04-18-2014, 01:02 PM
Her Missing Persons poster from NM #1 called her Marci Sabol.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
04-25-2014, 08:26 PM
No errors to report per se, but on Facebook someone posted a link to a Marvel Wiki entry, so I summarized in broad terms the pitfalls with that site. Just doing my good deed for the day.
 
Eduardo M.
04-27-2014, 08:20 AM
I was on Wikipedia looking up some stuff on SHIELD and had a question of two regarding the Executive Directors.

1. Should the Jasper Sitwell LMD from Nick Fury vs SHIELD be listed as one? I've never seen a list with him there.

2. Should Norman Osborn be listed as a director? As far as I know, he did nothing with SHIELD except shut it down.

3. Is Steve Rogers a former director? I know he was head of superhuman resources for the US after Osborn but I can't find an instance where he restarted SHIELD. I thought it was restarted at the end of Secret Warriors by Fury's friends with no sign of Rogers.
 
Sidney Osinga
06-23-2014, 07:41 PM
I was cruising TVTropes and found this description under 'Differently Powered Individual'
" The MarvelUniverse takes care to distinguish between "{{mutants}}" (people who develop superpowers through an inherited trait) and "superhumans" (people who gain powers due to exposure of foreign elements), mainly because of the FantasticRacism against the former (the pejorative term "[[FantasticSlur mutie]]" is quite popular among anti-mutant bigots). "Mutates" can be mistaken for either group (and many supplemental sources outside of the actual comics - and even in the comics themselves - think superhumans are called mutates) but they're former humans [[LegoGenetics genetically enhanced]] with superpowers by a villain with MadScientist credentials, such as the [[http://marvel.wikia.com/Savage_Land_...28Earth-616%29 Savage Land Mutates]]."
That implies that the Handbooks and the comics(!) are wrong, so I changed it and left this note in explanation: "Mutate is the correct term for a person whose powers were gained due to an outside force. It has been established multiple times in the comics, and to say that hey're incorrect is ludicrous. The Savage Land Mutates are examples of this (they are literally mutates from the Savage Land) and not techocally human either."
 
zuckyd1
06-25-2014, 09:25 AM
[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
I think by " sources... in the comics themselves" they might have meant that characters sometimes use the term incorrectly. Nevertheless, the original wording was needlessly confusing.
 
Stuart V
07-10-2014, 09:52 AM

Melou wrote:

Yep, I tried to keep my watch on the marvel database

Would you fix their Cordelia Frost page then and get the uncorroborated claim that she is an empath removed? Citing a supposed quote that she is the Professor X of empaths to prove she has these powers is only evidence if the quote is genuine, and for that you need to identify the specific issue where the quote is supposedly from.
 
Dr. Noh
08-21-2014, 10:09 AM
The Forever Yesterday Timeline
I'm not sure if this is the right place to list this, but I ran across this information regarding Bishop's era, Earth-1191 that for some reason was called the "Forever Yesterday Timeline" on the Marvel Wikia website:

http://marvel.wikia.com/Earth-1191

This incorrect information got used in the following article from Wired.com:

http://www.wired.com/2014/01/bishop-...s-future-past/

A quick crosscheck reveals that in truth, the "Forever Yesterday" timeline was a NEW WARRIORS story having nothing to do with Earth-1191:

http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/earthfvy.htm

Peace,

DN
 
Dr. Noh
08-28-2014, 10:27 AM
I noticed that the following article incorrectly listed Bishop's era, Earth-1191 as being called the "Forever Yesterday" timeline:


http://<a href="http://www.wired.com...ture-past/</a>


The author's incorrect information about Earth-1191 probably came from:


http://<a href="http://marvel.wikia....Earth-1191</a>


However, a quick check shows that the name "Forever Yesterday" relates to a New Warriors storyline where this timeline debuted in Marvel:


http://<a href="http://www.marvunapp...rthfvy.htm</a>

-- DN
 
Hamburger Time
10-04-2014, 07:35 PM
I had a question about (really) minor mutants, if you don't mind. Specifically, the bit-part villains The Freaks and The Arena. The Freaks were in The Hidden Years and were mutants who resembled typical circus freaks, and The Arena was an outfit run by Masque in X-Treme X-Men. On-panel, only three of the Freaks (Krueger, Blunt, and Remiped) were named, and a slightly larger handful of the Arena's gladiators, but, of all things, the Marvel Micro-heroes Wiki (always a reliable source, amirite?) claims to know the names for the full roster of both. Were these names ever given, or did the Wiki just pull them from some unmentionable place?
 
Stuart V
10-05-2014, 02:28 AM

Hamburger Time wrote:

I had a question about (really) minor mutants, if you don't mind. Specifically, the bit-part villains The Freaks and The Arena. The Freaks were in The Hidden Years and were mutants who resembled typical circus freaks, and The Arena was an outfit run by Masque in X-Treme X-Men. On-panel, only three of the Freaks (Krueger, Blunt, and Remiped) were named, and a slightly larger handful of the Arena's gladiators, but, of all things, the Marvel Micro-heroes Wiki (always a reliable source, amirite?) claims to know the names for the full roster of both. Were these names ever given, or did the Wiki just pull them from some unmentionable place?

I suspect the latter. There are no handbook entries covering these characters, and the only characters who interacted with them and hence who might have them mentioned in an entry are unlikely to have named all the subsidiary members of the group. So, unless another story has used them (which I don't believe is the case) or the author named them in an online discussion (possible, but we'd need to see that), these appear to be fan names. On one level, I can understand someone on the Micro Wiki naming them for ease of reference - what is not so good is not making it clear that these are unofficial names, as what is now likely to happen is that someone else will spread them elsewhere on the net. I note that the Micro Wiki also names a couple of alleged members of the Corps (alleged because we don't know they actually exist - we just saw Brian dressed up in these costumes during the Cross-Time Caper), and those are definitely fan names.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
10-05-2014, 08:07 AM
Just thought of another common one, albeit one that does move into some treacherous territory:

incorrect: Henry Pym (616): beat up his then wife Janet van Dyne once/multiple times (this comes up often in various comment sections online)
Truth: Pym-616 did once open handedly slap his wife (this was an artist's error but is canon nevertheless); it happened during a period of mental instability. His Ultimate counterpart, however, is indeed a wife beater.

Has Marvel ever once published an official pronunciation guide? if so characters like Magneto and Sub-Mariner whose pronunciation are often debated could be noted. But due to the comics being a print media it's probably hard to note though if there isn't some official guide somewhere. Actually come to think of it, pronunciation wouldn't be a bad thing to add to new Handbook entries, at least for code name and real name.
 
Eduardo M.
10-05-2014, 08:55 AM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Actually come to think of it, pronunciation wouldn't be a bad thing to add to new Handbook entries, at least for code name and real name.

Agreed. I wasn't until the Thor movie came out that I knew how to pronounce Mjolnir and Jotunheim. A pronunciation guide would also help for things like Demon names
 
zuckyd1
10-05-2014, 05:12 PM

  Eduardo M. wrote:

Agreed. I wasn't until the Thor movie came out that I knew how to pronounce Mjolnir and Jotunheim. A pronunciation guide would also help for things like Demon names

Hmm... it might be best not to pronounce demon names correctly.
 
Hamburger Time
10-08-2014, 06:50 PM
Is the Watchtower Administrator a mutant? Wikipedia says he is, but I haven't found anything in his appearances that suggests so.
 
Stuart V
10-09-2014, 11:53 AM

Hamburger Time wrote:

Is the Watchtower Administrator a mutant? Wikipedia says he is, but I haven't found anything in his appearances that suggests so.

Seems unlikely, given his anti-mutant stance. A quick bit of research shows that the person who added that bio to Wikipedia was warned about vandalising other Wiki entries, which lends weight to the possibility that he made up at least some of the bio from his own fevered imagination. And I see that Marvel Database has copied the info. Sigh.
 
Hamburger Time
10-09-2014, 09:15 PM
In his storyline in Marvel Comics Presents, Weapon Omega mentions absorbing the powers from a character called "The Key." Is this supposed to be the same character as The Key from Cable​, whose powers were shown to be part of the Collective? It'd make sense, but the two characters look completely different.
 
Stuart V
11-01-2014, 07:23 AM

Hamburger Time wrote:

In his storyline in Marvel Comics Presents, Weapon Omega mentions absorbing the powers from a character called "The Key." Is this supposed to be the same character as The Key from Cable​, whose powers were shown to be part of the Collective? It'd make sense, but the two characters look completely different.

Despite the name matching, and the similar (maybe even identical) powers, it seems unlikely. Apart from the costumes not matching, which is minor (people change costumes), the Key from Cable (Lachlan Patterson) was depowered on M-Day, and Weapon Omega got the powers via the Collective, but the Key seen in MCP met Pointer and lost his powers to him after Pointer donned his Guardian costume. And then there's the little detail that Lachlan operated in Australia, while the MCP Key was being held prisoner in Canada after fleeing the US to evade registration. So it isn't the same Key unless Lachlan somehow got his old powers back (unlikely, given how hard it was to get properly repowered - look at what it took the likes of Magneto and Quicksilver to get repowered) AND decided to move to the US - possible, but unlikely.

Edited: there is one possibility that would improve the odds of it being the same Key. The energy signatures that SHIELD detected within the Collective are known to be inaccurate. Wiz Kid scrambled SHIELD files so he would be listed as depowered, which is why he later turned up with his powers in Avengers Academy. Assuming he messed up a few other files to cover his tracks explains why the wrong Quill got depicted, and why the non-mutant Conquistador, Orlando Furio, was shown, rather than the mutant one, Miguel Provenza. So it is feasible that Key never got depowered, wasn't part of the Collective, and so was still around later for Weapon Omega to drain him in MCP. Of course, we'd still have the whole different costume and different continent thing to reconcile, but those are minor compared to being depowered, repowered and then depowered again.
 
Hamburger Time
11-03-2014, 10:34 PM
Thank you!
 
Stuart V
11-04-2014, 12:03 PM
Interesting new one - not new for me, as I learned it a few years ago while working on Karnak's entry, but just realised it would count as an "often gotten wrong" for many people.

Incorrect: Karnak of the Inhumans never underwent Terrigenesis - he has no powers, except those he developed via his martial arts training, the ability to divine a structure's weak point which is a mental discipline achieved through training.
But yet, also incorrect: Karnak gained superhuman powers via exposure to the Terrigen Mists.

Truth: Karnak wasn't exposed to the mists, but underwent Terrigenesis anyway, and does possess outright superhuman powers.

Past handbooks did say that Karnak had no powers, except for a mental discipline developed via his training. And indeed, many comics, from the 1960s on, also say this. However, while he usually just touched objects lightly with his hand to figure out the stress points, there are a couple of occasions (Amazing Adventures #3 and Inhumans I #10) where he actually projects a beam of energy from his head while using his powers, in both cases where he's scanning for stuff way out of sight (one is subterranean and another is locating something on the opposite side of a space station). That's evidence of an outright superpower. You might argue that these isolated examples can be ruled errors, if sufficient other stories actively contradict this and say he has no powers, but then in the Inhumans GN, when Medusa tries to assuage fears about her unborn child potentially having powers as dangerous as Black Bolts by offering not to expose the child to Terrigen, Karnak points out that isn't a guarantee, as he wasn't exposed, but his powers developed anyway, proving the Inhumans have been using the mists so long that their genetics have developed to the point where powers will emerge without the mists. That's a clear statement, fixing the apparent contradiction of some stories saying he never got exposed to the mists, when other stories show him having powers.

Slightly muddying the waters, in Mighty Avengers #27 you have two guards mention that Karnak was "exposed to the mists last week" and Karnak himself says he underwent Terrigenesis - the only time there's been a suggestion he got exposed to the mists. However, that can be explained off as Karnak having experienced a spontaneous Terrigenesis without mists and the guards assuming the mists were involved.
 
Hamburger Time
11-07-2014, 09:48 PM
Has the name of Emma Frost's pink chauffeur ever been revealed? I know the green one is "Bumpkin," and a number of fan sites call the pink one "Hick," but, again, I've never been able to find a source.
 
Stuart V
11-08-2014, 02:34 AM

Hamburger Time wrote:

Has the name of Emma Frost's pink chauffeur ever been revealed? I know the green one is "Bumpkin," and a number of fan sites call the pink one "Hick," but, again, I've never been able to find a source.

No, I don't believe he was ever officially named. Hick is, afaik, a fan-picked name.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
11-09-2014, 03:07 PM
Just noticed that a certain X-Men character whose first name is Moira isn't on the spelling part of the list. In fact I'm so uncertain which spelling is correct I won't even risk a guess at it. I think she was on the list on the Comixfan site. Maybe she got lost in the switchover?

On another note the part about not posting can be edited out of the first post now.
 
toddcam
11-10-2014, 10:05 AM
It's MacTaggert.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
11-12-2014, 04:04 AM
Stuart, are you tracking versions from other media in this list? If so here's another:

Incorrect: Galactus in Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer was a cloud.
Truth: You briefly see the shadow of Galactus's helmet within the cloud, suggesting that the cloud isn't him but rather obscuring his actual features. So he was actually within the cloud.

My suspicion is the filmmakers were trying to make Galactus seem more godlike by not showing him directly. Unfortunately instead this resulted in people assuming what they could most easily see was in fact him.
 
Hamburger Time
12-13-2014, 12:31 PM
Here are the list of characters in the Marvel Wikia's "Possible Mutants (reference needed)" category, where a source is needed as to whether they are or are not. Does anyone here know?

* Arath
* The Boar
* The Swarm
* Proton (from the Initiative)
* The Russian Radioactive Man, Igor Stancheck
* Ghost Girl
* Oxbow
* Snowblind (Ghost Rider villain)
* Zoe Culloden

Thanks again!
 
Andy E. Nystrom
12-13-2014, 02:33 PM
I don't have an answer to the above question, but since a lot of the misinformation on mutants seems to stem from Marvel Wiki, I decided to check who they list as mutants. The Beyonder?!? Santa Claus?!?
 
Hamburger Time
12-13-2014, 03:28 PM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I don't have an answer to the above question, but since a lot of the misinformation on mutants seems to stem from Marvel Wiki, I decided to check who they list as mutants. The Beyonder?!? Santa Claus?!?

I actually think the latter is right; was in one of the Holiday Specials if I recall.
 
Rayeye
12-13-2014, 05:31 PM

Hamburger Time wrote:

Here are the list of characters in the Marvel Wikia's "Possible Mutants (reference needed)" category, where a source is needed as to whether they are or are not. Does anyone here know?

* Arath
* The Boar
* The Swarm
* Proton (from the Initiative)
* The Russian Radioactive Man, Igor Stancheck
* Ghost Girl
* Oxbow
* Snowblind (Ghost Rider villain)
* Zoe Culloden

Thanks again!

Proton's counterpart in the Ultimate Universe was a mutant, so - though not confirmed - it's very likely Proton is a mutant too.
Zoe Culloden was never mentioned or stated as a mutant. Oxbow is a mutate, not a mutant. IIRC Ghost Girl (Lilli Stephens) is indeed a mutant.
 
Andy E. Nystrom
01-11-2015, 11:46 AM
When I was researching the spelling just now of Crimson Dynamo (Bukharin)'s first name for the Master List, I noticed a number of online sources spelling it as it ought to be and not what it actually is. So we can add (reluctantly) that it's Dimitri Bukharin and not Dmitri Bukharin.
 
Melou
01-15-2015, 08:17 AM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

I don't have an answer to the above question, but since a lot of the misinformation on mutants seems to stem from Marvel Wiki, I decided to check who they list as mutants. The Beyonder?!? Santa Claus?!?

- Santa Claus, according to the fact he was detected by a Cerebro (Marvel Holiday Special #1991)
- Beyonder, an Inhuman mutant, according to Xavier (New Avengers Illuminati Vol. 2 #3)(still controversial for some, but Xavier clearly stated it)
We try very hard to make no mistakes on that matter. For Santa Claus, the issue remains unsure.

Some users were recently interested by the Xorn and Zorn killed by the Cabal during an Incursion: Are they mutants (like Xorn and Shen Xorn) or does their powers came from the Source (like Zorn and Ultimate Xorn) ?

Also, the handbook "The Wolverine Files" mention "Horatio Huxler" :
- Horatio Huxley is stated to be level 13, although level 10 is supposed to be the upper level existing. It is an editorial error, a special status or a hierarchy different from S.H.I.E.L.D.'s ?
- Is it an error (or an alias) and is he Horatio Huxley ?

Thanks !
 
Melou
01-15-2015, 11:00 AM
Also, while taking down a lot of fan-made stuff on X-Men Wikia, I fell on some things that would need clarifications:
-Selene is still not confirmed Omega, right ?
-"Mutants are immune to the AIDS virus as revealed in an issue of Uncanny X-Men in which the character Archangel discussed he did not need an HIV test due to his status as a mutant". Isn't that simply for Archangel, as he has Cheyarafim healing powers ?

Thanks.
 
Melou
01-23-2015, 03:41 AM
About X-Men: Phoenix, especially due to the energy readings stating "one unclassifiable" (which can be the mutant/cosmic being hybrid Rachel Summers, the clone Lexii or the allegedly X-Factor negative but telepathic Blaquesmith):
- Is Lexii a mutant ? (she is a genetically-designed warrior)
- Is Blaquesmith a mutant ? (He is stated to be X-Factor negative, telepathic and with a genetic defect
- It is stated that it was the Phoenix (in Jean's form), and not Jean herself who gave birth to Rachel Summers: Is she a cosmic being/mutant hybrid or did the Phoenix gave her genetic settings of Jean Grey only (like Skrull Pym for Tigra's son), or more ?

Also, on the first issue of the arc, the redheaded member of the Parliament of the Order of the Witnesses, isn't she a Summers as well (classic question when you see a redheaded telepath).
And is Qua the Atlantean (issue 2) an Atlantean mutant ?

Thanks.
 
Melou
01-24-2015, 07:07 AM
And also a matter that need to be corrected on the Marvel Database Wikia: The children of mutates who are supposed to be mutants. That involves especially Spider-Man's progeny:
- Ben Parker (Peter+Gwen Stacy of Earth-88896) is a mutant with an extra chromosome (=Mutant trisomic? The story seemed to me as a not subtle metaphor of the handicaped children and how to deal with them, except their parents usually don't turn into giant spiders then are shot by an angry mob)
- Mayday (MC2, Earth-982) is not a mutant but received her powers from her powers (according to Brevoort)

But what about :
- Ashley Barton ?
- Ben parker (Brother to Mayday, Earth-982)
- Other spider-children I forgot
- Torus Storm (Lyja and Torch son), Earth-982
- The Purple Children (there is some hints)
- Any other you might think of...

And is Tuk ( http://marvel.wikia.com/Tuk_(Earth-616)?action=edit ) a mutant ? (cf http://brevoortformspring.tumblr.com...ve-boys-mutant )

Thanks (if someone came back on that thread).
 
Melou
01-29-2015, 06:16 AM
Other cases of the "Spider-kids" and "Fantastic Children" stated to be mutants who need some confirmation, would involve Daniel, Yancy and Jacob Grimm (Ben Grimm-Alicia Masters) (respectivelly super-speed, sonic powers and force fields), Earth-71166 (Fantastic Four).
 
Stuart V
02-01-2015, 07:56 AM
Apologies, first of all, for taking a while to get back on many of these. If I have overlooked any others, please direct me to the posts or repost them.

Hamburger Time wrote:

Here are the list of characters in the Marvel Wikia's "Possible Mutants (reference needed)" category, where a source is needed as to whether they are or are not. Does anyone here know?

* Arath
* The Boar
* The Swarm
* Proton (from the Initiative)
* The Russian Radioactive Man, Igor Stancheck
* Ghost Girl
* Oxbow
* Snowblind (Ghost Rider villain)
* Zoe Culloden

Thanks again!

Okay, first, a general starting point. All too many sites go with the ASSumption that if an origin isn't given, then the character must be a mutant. That's a bad move. Even in the past, just because we'd not seen an origin, or we'd seen a character develop powers without apparent cause, there were plenty of other reasons someone might gain powers. They might have been exposed to mutagens (chemicals, unusual or arcane energies, etc) without realising it, for example. But nowaways, even more than before, the mutant assumption is a bad one. We've had the concept of Caterpillars introduced, children who are not considered mutants but who gained their powers via "damaged genes" inherited from their parents. We've got half-aliens (who didn't know they were half-alien - cf. Hulkling or Jack of Hearts) or even full aliens unaware of their heritage (hello Karolina Dean). We've got people who didn't know their powers came from a demonic lineage (cf the vampiric Blackout, who learned he was a Lilin, descended from Lilith). And, though the possible of someone being unwittingly an Inhuman or Deviant was always there, now we've got far widerspread Inhuman heritage causing someone to be born with powers. Especially when Marvel seems to be trying to downplay mutants due to movie issues, assuming a new character with powers is a mutant is a bad conclusion to jump to. So unless some is specifically stated to be a mutant, the correct assumption to make is that they are NOT.

With regards to the specifics:
* Arath. Could easily be a deliberate induced mutation.
* The Boar. Could be a mutate, a High Evolutionary's New Man, etc.
* The Swarm - do you mean someone other than the Nazi made of bees? Because that Swarm is definitely a mutate.
* Proton (from the Initiative) - might be a mutant, given his 1610 counterpart was. But even then, the 1610 Proton was an artificially created mutant - e.g. someone took what would have been a normal embryo and grated the X-gene to it.
* The Russian Radioactive Man, Igor Stancheck - could have duplicated the Chinese one's origins.
* Ghost Girl - assuming you mean the Alpha Flight one, has been previously assumed to be a mutant because she was a legacy, born with powers. However, that was in the days before widespread Inhumanity and Caterpillars, so that's no longer a safe assumption.
* Oxbow - again, no idea how he gained his powers, so not safe to assume he's a mutant.
* Snowblind (Ghost Rider villain) - ditto
* Zoe Culloden - since most of her powers seem to be technological in nature, I'm not sure why she's even on a list of possible mutants.


Melou wrote:

- Santa Claus, according to the fact he was detected by a Cerebro (Marvel Holiday Special #1991)
- Beyonder, an Inhuman mutant, according to Xavier (New Avengers Illuminati Vol. 2 #3)(still controversial for some, but Xavier clearly stated it)

Santa was present where Cerebro detected a powerful mutant - doesn't mean he was the mutant it detected. He's a magical being, so he could probably fool Cerebro if he had a reason to want to, though quite what that reason might be, I can't imagine. As for the Beyonder, I have no doubt he was a mutant Inhuman...at that particular moment in time. Given he can alter reality at a whim, he can be whatever he wants. And then change it a moment later.

Melou wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Some users were recently interested by the Xorn and Zorn killed by the Cabal during an Incursion: Are they mutants (like Xorn and Shen Xorn) or does their powers came from the Source (like Zorn and Ultimate Xorn) ?

No way to tell. Wrong to go with the assumption that they are mutants.

Melou wrote:

Also, the handbook "The Wolverine Files" mention "Horatio Huxler" :

It is a typo. Should be Huxley.

Melou wrote:

- Horatio Huxley is stated to be level 13, although level 10 is supposed to be the upper level existing. It is an editorial error, a special status or a hierarchy different from S.H.I.E.L.D.'s ?
- Is it an error (or an alias) and is he Horatio Huxley ?

Level 13 had to do with the secret experimentation level within Department H, which Huxley was in charge of.

Melou wrote:

Also, while taking down a lot of fan-made stuff on X-Men Wikia, I fell on some things that would need clarifications:
-Selene is still not confirmed Omega, right ?
-"Mutants are immune to the AIDS virus as revealed in an issue of Uncanny X-Men in which the character Archangel discussed he did not need an HIV test due to his status as a mutant". Isn't that simply for Archangel, as he has Cheyarafim healing powers ?

Thanks.

I'm not aware of Selene being confirmed as Omega anywhere. That's not to say a comic might not have done, but as always the onus should be on the person claiming she is Omega to prove it, not others to disprove it. The prover only needs to cite a single example to verify their claim; it's virtually impossible to disprove something, given you'd not only need to check that none of her appearances state it, but also that no other comic, including handbooks, writer interviews (which wouldn't be firm proof of Omega status, but which might count as circumstantial evidence), etc. says she is.

According to Angel and Husk, all mutants are apparently immune to AIDs. Whether that's actually the case, is another matter. People get some weird and inaccurate notions in their heads sometimes, so characters shouldn't be any different - in other words, Angel and Husk might believe it to be the case, but that doesn't make it true.

Melou wrote:

About X-Men: Phoenix, especially due to the energy readings stating "one unclassifiable" (which can be the mutant/cosmic being hybrid Rachel Summers, the clone Lexii or the allegedly X-Factor negative but telepathic Blaquesmith):
- Is Lexii a mutant ? (she is a genetically-designed warrior)
- Is Blaquesmith a mutant ? (He is stated to be X-Factor negative, telepathic and with a genetic defect
- It is stated that it was the Phoenix (in Jean's form), and not Jean herself who gave birth to Rachel Summers: Is she a cosmic being/mutant hybrid or did the Phoenix gave her genetic settings of Jean Grey only (like Skrull Pym for Tigra's son), or more ?

Also, on the first issue of the arc, the redheaded member of the Parliament of the Order of the Witnesses, isn't she a Summers as well (classic question when you see a redheaded telepath).
And is Qua the Atlantean (issue 2) an Atlantean mutant ?

With regards to Lexi and Qua, see previous comments. Do not assume to be mutants unless a reliable source has claimed they were. With regards to Blaquesmith, he has been identified as a mutant, but I'll have to check where and what context - it may be that people simply assumed him to be one, given his association with mutants, and he's actually a Deviant/Inhuman/alien/mutate. Don't assume that red hair and telepathy makes someone a Summers. They aren't the only people with red hair in the Marvel Multiverse. As for Rachel, we don't know - I presume the Phoenix is powerful enough to completely and accurately duplicate Jean's DNA, so Rachel may well be genetically Jean's daughter, with no trace of cosmic DNA (whatever that might be).

Melou wrote:

And also a matter that need to be corrected on the Marvel Database Wikia: The children of mutates who are supposed to be mutants. That involves especially Spider-Man's progeny:
- Ben Parker (Peter+Gwen Stacy of Earth-88896) is a mutant with an extra chromosome (=Mutant trisomic? The story seemed to me as a not subtle metaphor of the handicaped children and how to deal with them, except their parents usually don't turn into giant spiders then are shot by an angry mob)
- Mayday (MC2, Earth-982) is not a mutant but received her powers from her powers (according to Brevoort)

See above - we used to believe that anyone born with powers via their parents being empowered was a mutant. We've now learned otherwise, so Mayday might be what we now consider a Caterpillar. Or not. We simply can't say for sure, and so shouldn't jump to any conclusions.

Melou wrote:

But what about :
- Ashley Barton ?
- Ben parker (Brother to Mayday, Earth-982)
- Other spider-children I forgot
- Torus Storm (Lyja and Torch son), Earth-982
- The Purple Children (there is some hints)
- Any other you might think of...

And is Tuk ( http://marvel.wikia.com/Tuk_(Earth-616)?action=edit ) a mutant ? (cf http://brevoortformspring.tumblr.com...ve-boys-mutant )

Thanks (if someone came back on that thread).

Purple Girl/Persuasion was pursued by Sentinels, and unlike the time a Sentinel pursued Falcon there was no evidence of the pursuers being faulty, so I would say she is almost certainly a mutant. All the others? Not mutants unless identified as such.

With regards to Tuk, I may be misreading Tom B's post, but in the post you link to it doesn't look to me like he is confirming Tuk to be a mutant. He seems to be responding to someone claiming Tuk is, and saying he disagrees with the idea of there being a mutant human who predates non-mutant humans.

Melou wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Other cases of the "Spider-kids" and "Fantastic Children" stated to be mutants who need some confirmation, would involve Daniel, Yancy and Jacob Grimm (Ben Grimm-Alicia Masters) (respectivelly super-speed, sonic powers and force fields), Earth-71166 (Fantastic Four).

As above - make no assumption that they are mutants.
 
 
Andy E. Nystrom
02-01-2015, 08:17 AM

  Stuart V wrote:

Apologies, first of all, for taking a while to get back on many of these. If I have overlooked any others, please direct me to the posts or repost them.

I've made a few suggestions, one admin, the rest actual "got wrong" types

Admin: the part about not posting can be edited out of the first post now.

The rest:
Moira MacTaggert, not various other variant spellings (thx for the assist, toddcam). I think this one used to on the list in the Comixfan site.

If you include errors from other media (so far the list only has comic examples but this one is very widespread):
Incorrect: Galactus in Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer was a cloud.
Truth: You briefly see the shadow of Galactus's helmet within the cloud, suggesting that the cloud isn't him but rather obscuring his actual features. So he was actually within the cloud.

Crimson Dynamo (Bukharin)
Incorrect: First name Dmitri
Correct: First name Dimitri
This appears to be a case of people using the traditional spelling vs the spelling used in the comics
 
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 3:25 pm  #14


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Not sure if Andy's finished uploading the historical stuff, but I'll throw this in anyway. It's off Wikipedia now (because I removed it), but for a while the List of SHIELD agents had this false information:
*Capt. Jacob "Ski" Strzeszewski. Fifth known executive director. Former active S.H.I.E.L.D ground agent (Agent 10). Promoted through the ranks to become Head of Special Internal Operations for S.H.I.E.L.D.

That's 100% fan-made rubbish. And for those on Wiki who insist that Wikis are reliable because "bad information is quickly removed", that fake info went up on 1st March 2014, and remained unchallenged until I removed it on 11th January 2018 - almost four full years!

 

 

2/06/2020 3:48 pm  #15


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

All wiki's are notorious for that. I post on the Marvel one and 99 percent of the time i cite where i get what i post from. I don't tend to remove the bad stuff which i tried early on and by the next day it was back up.again. But as long as anyone can edit there is no way to fix it. This is one off my favorite threads from the original forum so keep up with the good work outing the false info.

 

2/06/2020 4:04 pm  #16


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

 
Additional historical text from CxPulp:
 
Melou
02-01-2015, 01:48 PM

  Stuart V wrote:

Apologies, first of all, for taking a while to get back on many of these. If I have overlooked any others, please direct me to the posts or repost them.

No problem, we all have a life besides the comics.

  Stuart V wrote:

Okay, first, a general starting point. All too many sites go with the ASSumption that if an origin isn't given, then the character must be a mutant. That's a bad move. Even in the past, just because we'd not seen an origin, or we'd seen a character develop powers without apparent cause, there were plenty of other reasons someone might gain powers. They might have been exposed to mutagens (chemicals, unusual or arcane energies, etc) without realising it, for example. But nowaways, even more than before, the mutant assumption is a bad one. We've had the concept of Caterpillars introduced, children who are not considered mutants but who gained their powers via "damaged genes" inherited from their parents. We've got half-aliens (who didn't know they were half-alien - cf. Hulkling or Jack of Hearts) or even full aliens unaware of their heritage (hello Karolina Dean). We've got people who didn't know their powers came from a demonic lineage (cf the vampiric Blackout, who learned he was a Lilin, descended from Lilith). And, though the possible of someone being unwittingly an Inhuman or Deviant was always there, now we've got far widerspread Inhuman heritage causing someone to be born with powers. Especially when Marvel seems to be trying to downplay mutants due to movie issues, assuming a new character with powers is a mutant is a bad conclusion to jump to. So unless some is specifically stated to be a mutant, the correct assumption to make is that they are NOT.

Can't say I disagree, far from that. And there is also the "gifted" without X-Gene (like could be Blaquesmith).

  Stuart V wrote:

With regards to the specifics:
* Arath. Could easily be a deliberate induced mutation.
* The Boar. Could be a mutate, a High Evolutionary's New Man, etc.
* The Swarm - do you mean someone other than the Nazi made of bees? Because that Swarm is definitely a mutate.
* Proton (from the Initiative) - might be a mutant, given his 1610 counterpart was. But even then, the 1610 Proton was an artificially created mutant - e.g. someone took what would have been a normal embryo and grated the X-gene to it.
* The Russian Radioactive Man, Igor Stancheck - could have duplicated the Chinese one's origins.
* Ghost Girl - assuming you mean the Alpha Flight one, has been previously assumed to be a mutant because she was a legacy, born with powers. However, that was in the days before widespread Inhumanity and Caterpillars, so that's no longer a safe assumption.
* Oxbow - again, no idea how he gained his powers, so not safe to assume he's a mutant.
* Snowblind (Ghost Rider villain) - ditto
* Zoe Culloden - since most of her powers seem to be technological in nature, I'm not sure why she's even on a list of possible mutants.

Nothing to disagree except, for Swarm, I found a ref for his bees to be "mutant". But the non-human mutants is another matter (often more of mutates). (I tried to list that here: http://marvel.wikia.com/Non-Human%20Mutants , but there is no consistency in their treatment, currently)

  Stuart V wrote:

Santa was present where Cerebro detected a powerful mutant - doesn't mean he was the mutant it detected. He's a magical being, so he could probably fool Cerebro if he had a reason to want to, though quite what that reason might be, I can't imagine. As for the Beyonder, I have no doubt he was a mutant Inhuman...at that particular moment in time. Given he can alter reality at a whim, he can be whatever he wants. And then change it a moment later

.
For Santa Claus, it indeed stay a problem. It goes the other way: Instead of extrapolating he is a mutant given no proof, we have to doubt proofs he might be.
For the Beyonder, currently, he will be treated as a mutant, but we might be approaching a new origin soon.

  Stuart V wrote:

It is a typo. Should be Huxley.
Level 13 had to do with the secret experimentation level within Department H, which Huxley was in charge of.

Thanks, those two points bothered me. That will be corrected soon.

  Stuart V wrote:

I'm not aware of Selene being confirmed as Omega anywhere. That's not to say a comic might not have done, but as always the onus should be on the person claiming she is Omega to prove it, not others to disprove it. The prover only needs to cite a single example to verify their claim; it's virtually impossible to disprove something, given you'd not only need to check that none of her appearances state it, but also that no other comic, including handbooks, writer interviews (which wouldn't be firm proof of Omega status, but which might count as circumstantial evidence), etc. says she is.

True that. I encountered countless people stating that Rachel Summers was officially an Omega in every aspect, but asking me the proof she wasn't. But that's what I look for here, a confirmation that they are. If there is no confiration, I take them out, given the fact that fan-made stuff is present on internet (like that: http://www.newsarama.com/15488-alpha...fications.html )
Concerning the interviews, we created a dedicated category (for Storm and Psylocke).

  Stuart V wrote:

According to Angel and Husk, all mutants are apparently immune to AIDs. Whether that's actually the case, is another matter. People get some weird and inaccurate notions in their heads sometimes, so characters shouldn't be any different - in other words, Angel and Husk might believe it to be the case, but that doesn't make it true.

It was during the Secondary Mutations period ? (Mutantes Sans Frontières, Exodus' Brotherhood, etc.)

  Stuart V wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
With regards to Lexi and Qua, see previous comments. Do not assume to be mutants unless a reliable source has claimed they were. With regards to Blaquesmith, he has been identified as a mutant, but I'll have to check where and what context - it may be that people simply assumed him to be one, given his association with mutants, and he's actually a Deviant/Inhuman/alien/mutate. Don't assume that red hair and telepathy makes someone a Summers. They aren't the only people with red hair in the Marvel Multiverse. As for Rachel, we don't know - I presume the Phoenix is powerful enough to completely and accurately duplicate Jean's DNA, so Rachel may well be genetically Jean's daughter, with no trace of cosmic DNA (whatever that might be).

I wasn't assuming she was indeed a Summers, but we know that the redhead girls in mutant stories are often related to it. Hope would be kind of an example.

  Stuart V wrote:

See above - we used to believe that anyone born with powers via their parents being empowered was a mutant. We've now learned otherwise, so Mayday might be what we now consider a Caterpillar. Or not. We simply can't say for sure, and so shouldn't jump to any conclusions.

Mayday was confirmed not mutant by Brevoort, Ben is said to have an X-Factor. For the others, I'm currently removing them from the confirmed mutants, as they seems to be mistakes or quick assumptions.

  Stuart V wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Purple Girl/Persuasion was pursued by Sentinels, and unlike the time a Sentinel pursued Falcon there was no evidence of the pursuers being faulty, so I would say she is almost certainly a mutant. All the others? Not mutants unless identified as such.

I'm not talking about Purple Girl (who is confirmed to be a 198) but the Purple Children, her half-siblings (http://marvel.wikia.com/Purple_Children ). There are some hints but nothing clear (explicit).

  Stuart V wrote:

With regards to Tuk, I may be misreading Tom B's post, but in the post you link to it doesn't look to me like he is confirming Tuk to be a mutant. He seems to be responding to someone claiming Tuk is, and saying he disagrees with the idea of there being a mutant human who predates non-mutant humans.

He indeed seemed to mock the person questionning, that's what I thought.
 
Melou
02-06-2015, 06:09 AM
On another matter, there is a little thing that need correction, from the X-Men Millenial Visions and the Appendix.

http://marvel.wikia.com/Jubilee/Psylocke_(Earth-1003)
http://marvel.wikia.com/Frenzy/Rogue_(Earth-1003)
Those two characters are stated to be respectivelly Jubilee and Rogue by the Appendix, but as Psylocke or Frenzy for others. For the first, I don't really know, but the second seems more Frenzy than Rogue to me. So some users think of it as possibly a mistake.

As you (have) work(ed?) with/among the Appendix, I was wondering if you would have a clue about it, in order to solve those problems that I have put here: http://marvel.wikia.com/Category:Uns...rt=mostvisited

Thanks for your time.
 
Melou
02-09-2015, 04:44 AM
Another matter on mutants: Gaia of Generation X. There is a few point that could need some clarifications:
- Is Gaia from another reality ?
-- I thought to understand that, as did some websites
-- The appendix hasn't released any designation for her
-- The handbook (Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Update #4) doesn't mention it
- Is Gaia a mutant ?: Yes, I think. She is stated to be by M-Plate, by Gen-X teachers and students, perharps by herself (not sure), and by the handbook
- Is Gaia an alien or a human:
-- cf. She came from another reality ? But that doesn't really help
-- She is 17.000 years old: Not very helping (mutant powers, possibility of an effect of the COTUA mentioned in the handbook), except by the fact human mutant are allegedly born 10-14.000 years ago (Selene).
--- If she is from another reality, the age doesn't help (mutant or alien powers, sliding scales between realities)(without mentioning theories of time-travel)
-- She is from another galaxy (so are the Jaffa in Stargate, but still originated from Earth in the beginning)
-- It can be interpreated that it is intended by the handbook that she is not human but that's a lot of speculation

Most of the arguments can be related one to each other, in both ways.

Let's have a look to what says the websites (who are often wrong on such matter):
-Comicvine: Alien or alternate reality mutant
-Wikipedia: "Human mutant" ; "alien mutant" ; "possibly a mutant or extraterrestrial"
-Marvel Database: Mutant, nothing more, nothing less, but I intend to correct that with a more accurate thing.

Somebody got a clue to solve this mess ?
 
Stuart V
02-09-2015, 09:26 AM

Melou wrote:

On another matter, there is a little thing that need correction, from the X-Men Millenial Visions and the Appendix.

http://marvel.wikia.com/Jubilee/Psylocke_(Earth-1003)
http://marvel.wikia.com/Frenzy/Rogue_(Earth-1003)
Those two characters are stated to be respectivelly Jubilee and Rogue by the Appendix, but as Psylocke or Frenzy for others. For the first, I don't really know, but the second seems more Frenzy than Rogue to me. So some users think of it as possibly a mistake.

As you (have) work(ed?) with/among the Appendix, I was wondering if you would have a clue about it, in order to solve those problems that I have put here: http://marvel.wikia.com/Category:Uns...rt=mostvisited

Thanks for your time.

The second one is definitely Rogue. The hair streak is a dead giveaway, but also when the Millennial Visions book came out Frenzy hadn't been seen in the comics for ages, AND she was an undeniable villain. Yes, this was showing an alternate reality, so things are different there, but it makes Frenzy's usage in what was meant to be a showcase for variations on the existing X-Men far less likely than Rogue. And the only evidence cited on the page you linked to for it being Frenzy is "the hairstyle and the skin tone are far more closer to Frenzy". Her hairstyle can barely be seen, and doesn't look very much like Frenzy's dreadlock look, and her skin tone is darker because she is further back in the picture and so in shadow.

As for the other, look at the hair and purple jumpsuit under the black jacket. Jubilee very rarely has hair long enough to tie back in a ponytail; Psylocke always has long hair. Jubilee favours red and yellow costumes; Psylocke purple. So yes, that is Psylocke.
 
Melou
02-10-2015, 03:35 AM

  Stuart V wrote:

The second one is definitely Rogue. The hair streak is a dead giveaway, but also when the Millennial Visions book came out Frenzy hadn't been seen in the comics for ages, AND she was an undeniable villain. Yes, this was showing an alternate reality, so things are different there, but it makes Frenzy's usage in what was meant to be a showcase for variations on the existing X-Men far less likely than Rogue. And the only evidence cited on the page you linked to for it being Frenzy is "the hairstyle and the skin tone are far more closer to Frenzy". Her hairstyle can barely be seen, and doesn't look very much like Frenzy's dreadlock look, and her skin tone is darker because she is further back in the picture and so in shadow.

As for the other, look at the hair and purple jumpsuit under the black jacket. Jubilee very rarely has hair long enough to tie back in a ponytail; Psylocke always has long hair. Jubilee favours red and yellow costumes; Psylocke purple. So yes, that is Psylocke.

Well, the idea was thzt the story being on Genosha, it wouldn't be strange to see her there, and she doesn't really seems to be in the shadow for the skin tone (Psylocke is behind her and not that dark). Except for the white streak (which isn't really "Rogue-like" on her),
Concerning the hairstyle, while we don't see really the dreadlocks, the structure of the hairstyle seems although to fit. See here the disambiguation page who allow to do some comparisons: http://marvel.wikia.com/Frenzy

For Jubilee/Psylocke, that seems fair. I am myself not really sure of any of them (costumes and hairstyles not really explicit, eve if your points are acceptables to determine it).

Thanks !
 
Stuart V
02-10-2015, 08:58 AM

Melou wrote:

Well, the idea was thzt the story being on Genosha, it wouldn't be strange to see her there, and she doesn't really seems to be in the shadow for the skin tone (Psylocke is behind her and not that dark). Except for the white streak (which isn't really "Rogue-like" on her),
Concerning the hairstyle, while we don't see really the dreadlocks, the structure of the hairstyle seems although to fit. See here the disambiguation page who allow to do some comparisons: http://marvel.wikia.com/Frenzy

For Jubilee/Psylocke, that seems fair. I am myself not really sure of any of them (costumes and hairstyles not really explicit, eve if your points are acceptables to determine it).

Thanks !

Let's be clear on this one. I think it is Psylocke, but Jubilee is a credible option - she was also an X-Man around this time, so seeing her in an unlabelled group of alternate reality X-Men is not unusual. Note that the Millennial Visions tended to identify characters when they weren't normal members of the teams in 616. However, I'm leaning personally to it being Psylocke based on that minimal amount of visible costume - Psylocke and Jubilee have distinctive preferred colouring schemes.

But the other one is Rogue, not Frenzy. I don't consider it even debatable. Frenzy did sometimes have a white stripe in her temples, but Rogue was the one known for it, and Frenzy at this time had always been depicted with her hair in cornrows and dreadlocks. The character you link to isn't Caucasian, just shaded, her skin tone way too light for Frenzy. Here's the image of the character you think is Frenzy
[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]and here's Rogue from her early days [img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]

Looks very much like the same individual. She's changed the white streak over the years, but she ALWAYS has it. It's her trademark.

And for comparison, here's Frenzy around the time of the Millennial Visions being published.[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img] She doesn't always have the white streak, and her skin tone is usually dark brown rather than light.
 
Melou
02-11-2015, 05:05 AM
Ah I had forgot this hairstyle (good emplacement of the streak for this one, terrible look for Rogue).
 
Melou
02-14-2015, 09:14 AM

Melou wrote:

Another matter on mutants: Gaia of Generation X. There is a few point that could need some clarifications:
- Is Gaia from another reality ?
-- I thought to understand that, as did some websites
-- The appendix hasn't released any designation for her
-- The handbook (Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Update #4) doesn't mention it
- Is Gaia a mutant ?: Yes, I think. She is stated to be by M-Plate, by Gen-X teachers and students, perharps by herself (not sure), and by the handbook
- Is Gaia an alien or a human:
-- cf. She came from another reality ? But that doesn't really help
-- She is 17.000 years old: Not very helping (mutant powers, possibility of an effect of the COTUA mentioned in the handbook), except by the fact human mutant are allegedly born 10-14.000 years ago (Selene).
--- If she is from another reality, the age doesn't help (mutant or alien powers, sliding scales between realities)(without mentioning theories of time-travel)
-- She is from another galaxy (so are the Jaffa in Stargate, but still originated from Earth in the beginning)
-- It can be interpreated that it is intended by the handbook that she is not human but that's a lot of speculation

Most of the arguments can be related one to each other, in both ways.

Let's have a look to what says the websites (who are often wrong on such matter):
-Comicvine: Alien or alternate reality mutant
-Wikipedia: "Human mutant" ; "alien mutant" ; "possibly a mutant or extraterrestrial"
-Marvel Database: Mutant, nothing more, nothing less, but I intend to correct that with a more accurate thing.

Somebody got a clue to solve this mess ?

Also, Synch was able to use his synch powers on her to mimic her abilities to activate the Universal Amalgamator. But I don't really know if Synch can synch on something else than human mutants, so does that really helps...
 
Andy E. Nystrom
02-22-2015, 10:29 PM
Slight tangent: Just found this article which illustrates that misinformation on Wikipedia isn't always detected right away. In fact some hoaxes including a fictional cartoon series called Snappy & Friends lasted over nine years! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_hoaxes_on_Wikipedia

Back on topic, how long did the Deadly Earnest II hoax last? If memory serves it was on Wiki for some time.       
 
Stuart V
02-23-2015, 10:05 AM

  Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Slight tangent: Just found this article which illustrates that misinformation on Wikipedia isn't always detected right away. In fact some hoaxes including a fictional cartoon series called Snappy & Friends lasted over nine years! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_hoaxes_on_Wikipedia

Back on topic, how long did the Deadly Earnest II hoax last? If memory serves it was on Wiki for some time.

Created 28th March 2008, removed 7th August 2011. So 3 years, 4 months, and few days.
 
Melou
03-18-2015, 03:01 AM
Hi!

Are the Foursaken (Amina Synge, Godfrey Calthrop & Ned Horrocks) (Uncanny X-Men #472-474) mutants ?

I don't think to have seems the word mutant on their side, and it doesn't appear to me they are. I thought to understand the First Fallen gave them powers (others seems to think he activated their latent powers).

The Phoenix handbook entry on the First Fallen states that they "eventually manifested powers", which could indicate mutants but doesn't fit with the comics.

Of course, Comicvine states they are, wikipedia states they are mutates. As often, I try to correct or confirm the Marvel Database Project with references.

Thanks in advance.
 
Stuart V
03-18-2015, 01:22 PM

Melou wrote:

Hi!

Are the Foursaken (Amina Synge, Godfrey Calthrop & Ned Horrocks) (Uncanny X-Men #472-474) mutants ?

I don't think to have seems the word mutant on their side, and it doesn't appear to me they are. I thought to understand the First Fallen gave them powers (others seems to think he activated their latent powers).

The Phoenix handbook entry on the First Fallen states that they "eventually manifested powers", which could indicate mutants but doesn't fit with the comics.

Of course, Comicvine states they are, wikipedia states they are mutates. As often, I try to correct or confirm the Marvel Database Project with references.

Thanks in advance.

Not mutants, as things currently stand. They had potential for powers, which is why they were picked by the First Fallen, but potential for powers is not the same as being mutants or latent mutants, and they were introduced at a time when Marvel writers were under an embargo for creating new mutant characters in the wake of M-Day.
 
Stuart V
03-21-2015, 04:23 AM

Melou wrote:

Another matter on mutants: Gaia of Generation X. There is a few point that could need some clarifications:
- Is Gaia from another reality ?
-- I thought to understand that, as did some websites
-- The appendix hasn't released any designation for her
-- The handbook (Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Update #4) doesn't mention it
- Is Gaia a mutant ?: Yes, I think. She is stated to be by M-Plate, by Gen-X teachers and students, perharps by herself (not sure), and by the handbook
- Is Gaia an alien or a human:
-- cf. She came from another reality ? But that doesn't really help
-- She is 17.000 years old: Not very helping (mutant powers, possibility of an effect of the COTUA mentioned in the handbook), except by the fact human mutant are allegedly born 10-14.000 years ago (Selene).
--- If she is from another reality, the age doesn't help (mutant or alien powers, sliding scales between realities)(without mentioning theories of time-travel)
-- She is from another galaxy (so are the Jaffa in Stargate, but still originated from Earth in the beginning)
-- It can be interpreated that it is intended by the handbook that she is not human but that's a lot of speculation

Most of the arguments can be related one to each other, in both ways.

Let's have a look to what says the websites (who are often wrong on such matter):
-Comicvine: Alien or alternate reality mutant
-Wikipedia: "Human mutant" ; "alien mutant" ; "possibly a mutant or extraterrestrial"
-Marvel Database: Mutant, nothing more, nothing less, but I intend to correct that with a more accurate thing.

Somebody got a clue to solve this mess ?

Managed to overlook this when it was first posted. Point by point:

Melou wrote:

Gaia of Generation X.
- Is Gaia from another reality ?

I don't believe so. She's a character I am not overly familiar with, but her handbook entry should have mentioned if there was evidence of her being extradimensional. Since it didn't, I am going to go with her being from 616. If you have reason to believe otherwise, please cite the evidence, and I will take it to the other handbook team members for discussion.

Melou wrote:

-- The appendix hasn't released any designation for her

See above. This might be an oversight, but more likely means that we don't consider her to need one.

Melou wrote:

-- The handbook (Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Update #4) doesn't mention it

As above.

Melou wrote:

- Is Gaia a mutant ?: Yes, I think. She is stated to be by M-Plate, by Gen-X teachers and students, perharps by herself (not sure), and by the handbook

I think you answered your own question.

Melou wrote:

- Is Gaia an alien or a human:
-- cf. She came from another reality ? But that doesn't really help
-- She is 17.000 years old: Not very helping (mutant powers, possibility of an effect of the COTUA mentioned in the handbook), except by the fact human mutant are allegedly born 10-14.000 years ago (Selene).
--- If she is from another reality, the age doesn't help (mutant or alien powers, sliding scales between realities)(without mentioning theories of time-travel)
-- She is from another galaxy (so are the Jaffa in Stargate, but still originated from Earth in the beginning)
-- It can be interpreated that it is intended by the handbook that she is not human but that's a lot of speculation

Yes, that's a lot of speculation. Since she comes from another galaxy, it is entirely likely she is not human. However, as you rightly say, it isn't outside the realms of possibility that her forebears were from Earth, so we can only say she is likely to be alien, not definitely. The dates don't help - Selene is the oldest known mutant, but there's no reason others might not predate her. We just haven't met them yet, largely because they'd either have to have survived to modern times to appear in a story, or we'd have to have a story with a flashback to pre-Atlantean times, and those are few and far between.

Melou wrote:

Let's have a look to what says the websites (who are often wrong on such matter):
-Comicvine: Alien or alternate reality mutant
-Wikipedia: "Human mutant" ; "alien mutant" ; "possibly a mutant or extraterrestrial"
-Marvel Database: Mutant, nothing more, nothing less, but I intend to correct that with a more accurate thing.

Unless such websites cite specific comics that can be checked to back their claims, they are next to useless. So let's not even bother with what they say, unless they have the evidence cited.

Melou wrote:

Somebody got a clue to solve this mess ?

Yes - as above, probably alien, probably not extradimensional, definitely mutant. Subject as always to change if a retcon comes along, or previously overlooked evidence can be provided.
 
Melou
03-21-2015, 08:45 AM

  Stuart V wrote:

Not mutants, as things currently stand. They had potential for powers, which is why they were picked by the First Fallen, but potential for powers is not the same as being mutants or latent mutants, and they were introduced at a time when Marvel writers were under an embargo for creating new mutant characters in the wake of M-Day.

That's what I thought, thanks. (By the way, are they "magic-based mutates")

  Stuart V wrote:

Managed to overlook this when it was first posted. Point by point:

Yes, that's a lot of speculation. Since she comes from another galaxy, it is entirely likely she is not human. However, as you rightly say, it isn't outside the realms of possibility that her forebears were from Earth, so we can only say she is likely to be alien, not definitely. The dates don't help - Selene is the oldest known mutant, but there's no reason others might not predate her. We just haven't met them yet, largely because they'd either have to have survived to modern times to appear in a story, or we'd have to have a story with a flashback to pre-Atlantean times, and those are few and far between.

Unless such websites cite specific comics that can be checked to back their claims, they are next to useless. So let's not even bother with what they say, unless they have the evidence cited.

Yes - as above, probably alien, probably not extradimensional, definitely mutant. Subject as always to change if a retcon comes along, or previously overlooked evidence can be provided.

Seems right to me too.

Concerning Selene, you are right, as I found many mentions of her being 10 000 years old, while the Neyaphem are something like 15 000. (I think to recall)
 
Stuart V
03-22-2015, 01:11 PM

Melou wrote:

That's what I thought, thanks. (By the way, are they "magic-based mutates")

Most probably, though that's not outright confirmed either.

Melou wrote:

Concerning Selene, you are right, as I found many mentions of her being 10 000 years old, while the Neyaphem are something like 15 000. (I think to recall)

Selene was active at least 10,000 years ago, as that is apparently when she encountered Kulan Gath. But she might be older - she only admits to being born "after the oceans swallowed Atlantis", so she might have been born any time between 18,000 (time of Great Cataclysm) and 10,000 BC.

Azazel was active in "Biblical times", so he, and his Neyaphem offspring, are probably younger than Selene.
 
Melou
03-31-2015, 01:33 AM

  Stuart V wrote:

Selene was active at least 10,000 years ago, as that is apparently when she encountered Kulan Gath. But she might be older - she only admits to being born "after the oceans swallowed Atlantis", so she might have been born any time between 18,000 (time of Great Cataclysm) and 10,000 BC.

Azazel was active in "Biblical times", so he, and his Neyaphem offspring, are probably younger than Selene.

Carbon datation stated the existence of mutants in Las Islas Des Demonas (or something like that) was from 15.000 years ago, before neolithic (9000-3000) (UXM #422). It is likely that she predated them from a few millenia, and that they lived on the same earth together for some time. X-Necrosha stated she was born 17.000 years ago, indeed "after Atlantis was swallowed" and "before the rise of the sons of Aryas" (for this last part, I'm not an expert on Conan's stuff).
 
Stuart V
04-01-2015, 02:57 AM

Melou wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Carbon datation stated the existence of mutants in Las Islas Des Demonas (or something like that) was from 15.000 years ago, before neolithic (9000-3000) (UXM #422). It is likely that she predated them from a few millenia, and that they lived on the same earth together for some time. X-Necrosha stated she was born 17.000 years ago, indeed "after Atlantis was swallowed" and "before the rise of the sons of Aryas" (for this last part, I'm not an expert on Conan's stuff).

Good catches. That narrows down the dates nicely.
 
Melou
04-10-2015, 04:00 PM
Another thing that bothers me often s it is unclear everywhere: Is Hyperion an "human Eternal" (those evolved from Celestials experiments on pre-humans) or from another species like Grom/Overmind ("Eternian"? Is that right?), Ard-Con/Ultimus (Kree) or Kly'bn/He (Skrull) ?


Also the latin/binomial names of : I know those are correct:


  • Homo superior (Homo superior)
  • Homo mermanus or mermani
  • Inhomo supremis (Inhumans)



But for those, I have no proof except some fan-made websites with unreferenced material, so I asked myself if someone here had ever heard of it.

  • Homo aeternus (Eternals)
  • Homo deviare (Deviants)
  • Homo inhumans (Inhumans)

  • Thanks!

 
Melou
04-11-2015, 06:59 AM
And is it "Mephisitoid" (Avengers #378) or "Mephitisoid" (Messiah Complex Mutant Files) ?

Thanks.
 
Stuart V
04-11-2015, 08:43 AM

Melou wrote:

Another thing that bothers me often s it is unclear everywhere: Is Hyperion an "human Eternal" (those evolved from Celestials experiments on pre-humans) or from another species like Grom/Overmind ("Eternian"? Is that right?), Ard-Con/Ultimus (Kree) or Kly'bn/He (Skrull) ?


Also the latin/binomial names of : I know those are correct:


  • Homo superior (Homo superior)
  • Homo mermanus or mermani
  • Inhomo supremis (Inhumans)



But for those, I have no proof except some fan-made websites with unreferenced material, so I asked myself if someone here had ever heard of it.

  • Homo aeternus (Eternals)
  • Homo deviare (Deviants)
  • Homo inhumans (Inhumans)

  • Thanks!


 
I can't say with 100% certainty, as there's always a chance they cropped up in an issue somewhere, but I'm not aware of any of the latter trio being used in a comic (nor, for that matter, Inhomo supremis, unless that's something recent in an issue I have yet to read).
[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]

Melou wrote:

And is it "Mephisitoid" (Avengers #378) or "Mephitisoid" (Messiah Complex Mutant Files) ?

Thanks.

Mephitisoid. The other way round is a simple spelling error.
 
Melou
04-11-2015, 09:45 AM

  Stuart V wrote:

I can't say with 100% certainty, as there's always a chance they cropped up in an issue somewhere, but I'm not aware of any of the latter trio being used in a comic (nor, for that matter, Inhomo supremis, unless that's something recent in an issue I have yet to read).

Mephitisoid. The other way round is a simple spelling error.

Inhomo supremis was used by Karnak or Medusa in Inhumanity #1.

Thanks.
 
Melou
04-11-2015, 03:19 PM
And about Hyperion ?
From what I read, his Earth-712 version seems to be from Earth, but his 13034 version (current Avengers) seems to be from another planet (but he could be a Titanian, an Uranian, or every other "human Eternals" who at some point left Earth. His last animated version doesn't seems to be from those, and could simply an alien (as seems to be Thanos animated and MCU versions).

By the way, is there an accepted term for the Eternals from Earth (all those originated from the Celestials experiments on pre-humans) ? (including the Eternals of Titan, Uranus, Titanos and Olympia)
 
toddcam
04-11-2015, 04:58 PM
I know this thread is about incorrect info, but I gotta say, Inhomo supremis? Did the writers know anything about taxonomy? I'm pretty sure in order to interbreed you have to be at least of the same genus.
 
Melou
04-12-2015, 02:07 AM
I agree with you on the fact this name is quite odd.

Let's assume they intended to focus on the fact they aren't anymore part of the natural evolution of the Homo genus. Or it is maybe a term created by Inhumans to set themselves apart from the humans, as they always do.
 
Stuart V
04-12-2015, 06:11 AM

Melou wrote:

From what I read, his Earth-712 version seems to be from Earth, but his 13034 version (current Avengers) seems to be from another planet (but he could be a Titanian, an Uranian, or every other "human Eternals" who at some point left Earth. His last animated version doesn't seems to be from those, and could simply an alien (as seems to be Thanos animated and MCU versions).

By the way, is there an accepted term for the Eternals from Earth (all those originated from the Celestials experiments on pre-humans) ? (including the Eternals of Titan, Uranus, Titanos and Olympia)

712 Hyperion is a human Eternal, at least as far as current evidence goes. And, though you didn't ask, 712 Zarda is an Inhuman.

The ones in 616 vary - we've had a construct and a Microverse resident (so that would count as extraterrestrial), and most recently the current Avengers one. We know he came from another planet, but like you said, that could be Titan or Uranus, making him a human Eternal, or he could be an Eternal of a human-looking species (plenty of those to choose from). Since his story is still unfolding, we can't say for sure.

toddcam wrote:

I know this thread is about incorrect info, but I gotta say, Inhomo supremis? Did the writers know anything about taxonomy? I'm pretty sure in order to interbreed you have to be at least of the same genus.

Could be worse - some bright spark decided to identify the Silurians in Dr. Who as Homo reptilia, completely missing the point that to be "homo xxx" means you have to belong to the same family tree as humanity.

Melou wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
I agree with you on the fact this name is quite odd.

Let's assume they intended to focus on the fact they aren't anymore part of the natural evolution of the Homo genus. Or it is maybe a term created by Inhumans to set themselves apart from the humans, as they always do.

Yes, I wouldn't take it as a scientifically accurate name.
 
 
Melou
04-14-2015, 01:51 PM
A last one: I don't recall King Hyperion being even hinted to be "human" Eternal. He did encounter a human Eternal Hyperion (-712) (or two, regarding the other Hyperion who allied to the -712 version thanks to Beak). Any idea on this one ?
 
Stuart V
04-14-2015, 05:06 PM

Melou wrote:

A last one: I don't recall King Hyperion being even hinted to be "human" Eternal. He did encounter a human Eternal Hyperion (-712) (or two, regarding the other Hyperion who allied to the -712 version thanks to Beak). Any idea on this one ?

Nope. Don't think we have any evidence for any one option.
 
Melou
04-15-2015, 02:51 PM
Thanks a lot.

So here the results (for now) on Marvel wikia database:
The Eternals sorted by nationality/communities and by species/race: http://marvel.wikia.com/Category:Eternals
Still something to be done about the distinction between Earth and Titan Eternals as the current Titans are half-original Eternals/half-post-"Kronos_Exploded" Eternals (Sui-San X A'Lars). And about the Eternians of Eternius (if that's the real name)/Eternals of Eyung, and about the Deviant Syndrome.

And the mutant population across the eras: http://marvel.wikia.com/Mutant_Population
 
Melou
04-17-2015, 11:02 AM
New thing: Were the Inhumans made up from Eternals' DNA in the first place?

In what if? #28 and in the Fantastic Four handbook (2005), it is just stated that finding the Eternals and finding out that someone had made genetical engineering gave them the idea to experiment on humans as well.

In What If? #29, both Zuras and Azura hint something but not much.
 
Melou
04-19-2015, 01:16 PM
From the handbook Thor & Hercules:
-Eternals are Homo immortalis
- Deviants are Changing People.
 
Melou
05-19-2015, 03:20 PM
Another true name/fan name question: The External named Burke was never named "William", was he ? (A duplicate and unused page on Marvel Wikia, and a mention on Comicvine, and never seen in comics, but I prefer to double-check...)
 
Monolith
05-20-2015, 06:23 AM
No. It's an example of cross-contamination. In Wolverine (2nd series) #79, Cyber investigated the corpse of William Burke, known serial killer. A few months later, the External named Burke was confirmed as dead in X-Force (1st series) #37. People instantly connected the two but, IIRC, William Burke was not identified as the External in the Wolverine issue.
 
Melou
05-23-2015, 09:04 AM
Thanks !

Melou wrote:

New thing: Were the Inhumans made up from Eternals' DNA in the first place?

In what if? #28 and in the Fantastic Four handbook (2005), it is just stated that finding the Eternals and finding out that someone had made genetical engineering gave them the idea to experiment on humans as well.

In What If? #29, both Zuras and Azura hint something but not much.

Someone has a clue on those ?
 
Monolith
05-23-2015, 10:59 AM
There's no indication in those issues that Inhumans were made from Eternal DNA. The Kree speaking before the Supreme Intelligence specifically mentioned performing their OWN experiments on early humans, not trying to duplicate the Eternals. The Watcher's final soliloquy calls Inhumans "yet another offshoot of humanity, DIFFERENT from the Eternals".

Thena says Black Bolt has molecular manipulation abilities like an Eternal, but that's the nature of his power, not its origin.
 
Stuart V
05-24-2015, 12:55 AM

Melou wrote:

New thing: Were the Inhumans made up from Eternals' DNA in the first place?

In what if? #28 and in the Fantastic Four handbook (2005), it is just stated that finding the Eternals and finding out that someone had made genetical engineering gave them the idea to experiment on humans as well.

In What If? #29, both Zuras and Azura hint something but not much.

As stated, no evidence that the Kree took anything much more from their Eternal corpse than the realisation that humans had good genetics for manipulating and the inspiration to do some experiments of their own.

  Monolith wrote:

No. It's an example of cross-contamination. In Wolverine (2nd series) #79, Cyber investigated the corpse of William Burke, known serial killer. A few months later, the External named Burke was confirmed as dead in X-Force (1st series) #37. People instantly connected the two but, IIRC, William Burke was not identified as the External in the Wolverine issue.

In addition to the above: William Burke was a real life killer, and his skeleton really is on display in a museum. He was one of two body snatchers, along with his partner William Hare, who initially robbed graves to sell the fresh corpses to medical schools in Edinburgh, and then hit on the idea that killing people would be easier than digging up graves - less effort, less irregular supply than waiting for people to die of other causes, and fresher bodies not damaged by accident or disease. Burke was eventually hung, and his body dissected the next day, with his skull examined by phrenologists, his skeleton put on display, and his skin allegedly turned into a book cover and wallets. Even for the Marvel universe, that's pretty dead.

Is it feasible that William Burke was the External Burke, survived his execution as a result, swapped in another body for dissection with nobody noticing the switch despite it being attended by hundreds of people, some of whom knew him in life or had attended his trial? Sure - this is comics, it could have happened, but it isn't particularly likely. And that would mean the remains Cyber checked out in Wolverine #79 were the swapped ones, not those of the External Burke, which means them showing up a few months before the External was confirmed to be dead remains a total coincidence.
 
Melou
06-02-2015, 09:24 AM

  Monolith wrote:

There's no indication in those issues that Inhumans were made from Eternal DNA. The Kree speaking before the Supreme Intelligence specifically mentioned performing their OWN experiments on early humans, not trying to duplicate the Eternals. The Watcher's final soliloquy calls Inhumans "yet another offshoot of humanity, DIFFERENT from the Eternals".

Thena says Black Bolt has molecular manipulation abilities like an Eternal, but that's the nature of his power, not its origin.

  Stuart V wrote:

As stated, no evidence that the Kree took anything much more from their Eternal corpse than the realisation that humans had good genetics for manipulating and the inspiration to do some experiments of their own.

In addition to the above: William Burke was a real life killer, and his skeleton really is on display in a museum. He was one of two body snatchers, along with his partner William Hare, who initially robbed graves to sell the fresh corpses to medical schools in Edinburgh, and then hit on the idea that killing people would be easier than digging up graves - less effort, less irregular supply than waiting for people to die of other causes, and fresher bodies not damaged by accident or disease. Burke was eventually hung, and his body dissected the next day, with his skull examined by phrenologists, his skeleton put on display, and his skin allegedly turned into a book cover and wallets. Even for the Marvel universe, that's pretty dead.

Is it feasible that William Burke was the External Burke, survived his execution as a result, swapped in another body for dissection with nobody noticing the switch despite it being attended by hundreds of people, some of whom knew him in life or had attended his trial? Sure - this is comics, it could have happened, but it isn't particularly likely. And that would mean the remains Cyber checked out in Wolverine #79 were the swapped ones, not those of the External Burke, which means them showing up a few months before the External was confirmed to be dead remains a total coincidence.

I had already removed it from the wikia, before here a confirmation. Thanks !

For Burke: Waow. Well, he could team up with Evil Deadpool and Deadpool enemy Black Swan. I should read that story arc.

Thanks again.
 
Hamburger Time
06-10-2015, 03:50 PM
What, exactly, is Johnston Coffin? Other characters speculate he's a mutant, but he gloats about being an embodiment of "hatred." Mutant? Demon? Very, very weak Abstract?
 
Melou
06-29-2015, 02:21 PM
Are Adventures of the X-Men from the same reality (Earth-92131) then the animated series ? Marvel wikia, and wikipedia states it, but I lack to find a correct source, and I don't know enough about it yet.

Edit: Given the issue #9 and how Vanisher presents himself, I have indeed a doubt it is Earth-616.
 
Stuart V
06-29-2015, 03:30 PM

Hamburger Time wrote:

What, exactly, is Johnston Coffin? Other characters speculate he's a mutant, but he gloats about being an embodiment of "hatred." Mutant? Demon? Very, very weak Abstract?

As yet unknown. He might be any of these things, or even more than one (humans can become demons, so a mutant could too, for example). Or he might be speaking metaphorically when he claims to embody hate. Characters speculating him to be a mutant means zip - that's almost a default position for many people in the Marvel universe when it comes to explaining where someone got their powers from, and it gets misapplied a lot. I was just re-reading some old Hulk issues a few days ago and noticed Thunderbolt Ross describing both Hulk and Abomination as mutants. It's the 616 equivalent of real world people calling spiders or centipedes "insects" or pterosaurs "dinosaurs."

Melou wrote:

Are Adventures of the X-Men from the same reality (Earth-92131) then the animated series ? Marvel wikia, and wikipedia states it, but I lack to find a correct source, and I don't know enough about it yet.

Edit: Given the issue #9 and how Vanisher presents himself, I have indeed a doubt it is Earth-616.

It's definitely not 616. It was originally intended to be the same reality as the animated series, and as far as I know nothing happened in the comics to prevent that being the case.
 
zuckyd1
06-29-2015, 04:04 PM

Melou wrote:

Are Adventures of the X-Men from the same reality (Earth-92131) then the animated series ? Marvel wikia, and wikipedia states it, but I lack to find a correct source, and I don't know enough about it yet.

Edit: Given the issue #9 and how Vanisher presents himself, I have indeed a doubt it is Earth-616.

The series was originally titled X-Men Adventures and consisted of adaptations of the TV episodes. Later it was retitled Adventures of the X-Men and mostly told original stories set in the same reality. The final issue of the series (#12) reveals that Earth-92131 was the reality which immediately preceded 616, i.e. the reality from which Galen originated—a fact which has since been confirmed in several Handbook entries.
 
Melou
06-30-2015, 11:04 PM
Another thing: Is the Sphinx a mutant ? Mad Merlin had the same origin (stated mutant, mutated by the Caretakers of Arcturus, powered by a magical stone), but was stated to have been erroneously stated a mutant (All-New Official Handbook... #7). Maybe the Sphinx was already a mutant/latent mutant, or maybe it is a similar error than for Mad Merlin...
 
Hamburger Time
07-04-2015, 09:55 PM

  Stuart V wrote:

As yet unknown. He might be any of these things, or even more than one (humans can become demons, so a mutant could too, for example). Or he might be speaking metaphorically when he claims to embody hate. Characters speculating him to be a mutant means zip - that's almost a default position for many people in the Marvel universe when it comes to explaining where someone got their powers from, and it gets misapplied a lot. I was just re-reading some old Hulk issues a few days ago and noticed Thunderbolt Ross describing both Hulk and Abomination as mutants. It's the 616 equivalent of real world people calling spiders or centipedes "insects" or pterosaurs "dinosaurs."

Thanks. Relatedly, what are the Crimson Pirates? And the Goth's people?
 
Stuart V
09-18-2015, 11:18 AM

Melou wrote:

Another thing: Is the Sphinx a mutant ? Mad Merlin had the same origin (stated mutant, mutated by the Caretakers of Arcturus, powered by a magical stone), but was stated to have been erroneously stated a mutant (All-New Official Handbook... #7). Maybe the Sphinx was already a mutant/latent mutant, or maybe it is a similar error than for Mad Merlin...

Hamburger Time wrote:

Thanks. Relatedly, what are the Crimson Pirates? And the Goth's people?

Sphinx - may be a mutant, but it's not 100% certain, given the other factors in his origin.

Crimson Pirates - no way to know. Could be mutants, aliens, humans from very different evolutionary timelines, or a mix of any of these.

Goth - ditto.

And reiterating an old one, because I see it is back on a few wiki sites. 616 Captain America has no middle name. Grant was a fake name, added as part of a cover identity and memory implant in case the Nazis ever captured him.
 
Melou
09-28-2015, 06:02 AM
Another point that is seemingly got wrong by at least some people: The definition of First-Generation Eternals.
- The first generation are only the first hundred Eternals, emerged from the Wanderers (Uncanny X-Men Annual #1989/#13), the tribe of ape-men modified by the Celestials (into three groups) during the First Host.
- The first generation are all Eternals of Titanos, born there or originated from the First Host. This is presumably explained by the statement in What If? #28 "Titanos, the city of our birth" said by one of Uranos' followers.

Retcons and errors doesn't help to clear the Eternals' stories, because Eternals Vol. 3 #1 states Ikaris was made by the Celestials (among the first Eternals) 1 million years ago (the rest of the series include Zuras, Makkari, Sprite, Sersi, Druig... among them). He (and all others "main" Eternals) also appeared 2,7 million year ago in X-Men Vol 3. (Evolutionaries story-line)(the error was explained by the author by time-travel). The Thor and Hercules Mythologica Encyclopedia treat of it without much details.

I read somewhere (don't recall where, but outside comics, so not something really helpful) that it was possible that Sprite used fake memories and lied to the other Eternals along with his other memory manipulation.

The finality of my question being:
-What is the definition of a first generation Eternal ?
-Which Eternals were Wanderers/ape-men transformed by the Celestials ? I would tend to include (with possibly errors) Kronos, Uranos, Arlok, Astron, Daina, Elo, Oceanus, Shastra, Thyrio, and possibly Sprite (or else the volume 3 loose part of consistency (and affect furthermore the volume 4), even if Sprite could have been lying all along again and acting with lesser reasons).

It's mainly for this page : http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Humans about the Marvel humans (all humanities) evolution.
 
Melou
09-28-2015, 03:05 PM
Independent question, in issues Thor of #231-233, about Armak and Arnold Nicolson, was he:
-a real Neanderthal dragged into Arnold Nicolson body (three million years Neanderthal ? More likely a manner or speech, "neanderthal"=cave-men)
-a fake Neanderthal, created by Loki ?

(most of the Internet states he possess people, which is not what state in #233)
 
Melou
11-12-2015, 01:24 PM
On the Skrulls, I have a doubt on what is published on the marvel database wikia and what can be read on the Skrulls! handbook : Are the Warskrulls simply an other name Super-Skrulls, or a different thing (natural abilities, different project, etc?). Thanks!
 
Melou
12-02-2015, 03:39 AM

  zuckyd1 wrote:

The series was originally titled X-Men Adventures and consisted of adaptations of the TV episodes. Later it was retitled Adventures of the X-Men and mostly told original stories set in the same reality. The final issue of the series (#12) reveals that Earth-92131 was the reality which immediately preceded 616, i.e. the reality from which Galen originated—a fact which has since been confirmed in several Handbook entries.

I had missed the complete weight of this post.

That would mean Earth-92131 is Earth-0, and is both an alternate reality and the previous version to Earth-616 ?

I can't find the entries you've mentioned (except of course the part about Galactus coming from the previous universe, but without any mention to Earth--92131).
 
zuckyd1
12-02-2015, 08:05 AM

Melou wrote:

I had missed the complete weight of this post.

That would mean Earth-92131 is Earth-0, and is both an alternate reality and the previous version to Earth-616 ?

I can't find the entries you've mentioned (except of course the part about Galactus coming from the previous universe, but without any mention to Earth--92131).

Galactus's entry mentions the Phoenix Force and the shattering of the M’Kraan Crystal, which occurred in Adventures of the X-Men #12. The events of that issue are also referred to in the entries for the Phoenix Force ("In the dying moments of the previous universe…"), the M'kraan Crystal {"the Crystal’s destruction at demonic hands"), and the Dweller-in-Darkness ("possibly surviving from the previous universe"). See also the Living Tribunal's online Handbook bibliography: http://marvel.com/universe/OHOTMU:Bibliography-AZ6#Living_Tribunal
 
Melou
12-02-2015, 10:49 AM

  zuckyd1 wrote:

Galactus's entry mentions the Phoenix Force and the shattering of the M’Kraan Crystal, which occurred in Adventures of the X-Men #12. The events of that issue are also referred to in the entries for the Phoenix Force ("In the dying moments of the previous universe…"), the M'kraan Crystal {"the Crystal’s destruction at demonic hands"), and the Dweller-in-Darkness ("possibly surviving from the previous universe"). See also the Living Tribunal's online Handbook bibliography: http://marvel.com/universe/OHOTMU:Bibliography-AZ6#Living_Tribunal

Ah!, found an entry for Galactus in the Annihilation Nova Files that develop that part.

The Living Tribunal is a more tricky choice to link Earth-92131 directly to Earth-616 (given the multiversal aspect of the character, I will not use it as much.

The problem remaining is the fact that Earth-92131 and Earth-0 are consequently the same. But which designation should prevail (Like Earth-81211 was known as Earth-616, but wasn't. That's not the same kind of case, but you follow me?).
 
zuckyd1
12-05-2015, 11:23 AM

Melou wrote:

The problem remaining is the fact that Earth-92131 and Earth-0 are consequently the same. But which designation should prevail (Like Earth-81211 was known as Earth-616, but wasn't. That's not the same kind of case, but you follow me?).

Has the designation "Earth-0" ever actually been used in the comics or official reference material? Aside from sites such as Wikia, the only really credible source I could find is the Appendix: http://www.marvunapp.com/master/earthteaz.htm. Besides, DC—which of course has crossed over several times with the Marvel multiverse—already has a pretty strong claim on that designation. The Brothers even get a shout-out in that final issue of Adventures of the X-Men! (Of course I suppose there's nothing to say that numerical designations can't be reused in different multiverses.)
 
Melou
12-06-2015, 03:49 PM

  zuckyd1 wrote:

Has the designation "Earth-0" ever actually been used in the comics or official reference material? Aside from sites such as Wikia, the only really credible source I could find is the Appendix: http://www.marvunapp.com/master/earthteaz.htm. Besides, DC—which of course has crossed over several times with the Marvel multiverse—already has a pretty strong claim on that designation. The Brothers even get a shout-out in that final issue of Adventures of the X-Men! (Of course I suppose there's nothing to say that numerical designations can't be reused in different multiverses.)

In fact, the Wikia used it because the Appendix proposed it (I thought you were an appendix guy yourself, my bad), as their list of reality designations is considered as canon/semi-canon (regarding the Wikia user...), as the Appendix contributes to some/the (? unsure about which one is true) handbooks and the designations fit.
 
zuckyd1
12-06-2015, 04:37 PM

Melou wrote:

In fact, the Wikia used it because the Appendix proposed it (I thought you were an appendix guy yourself, my bad), as their list of reality designations is considered as canon/semi-canon (regarding the Wikia user...), as the Appendix contributes to some/the (? unsure about which one is true) handbooks and the designations fit.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Appendix site. But the key term is "semi-canon". Nothing there is completely official until Marvel publishes it. Which is why, to answer your previous question, I think the Earth-92131 designation should prevail.
 
Melou
12-06-2015, 05:37 PM

  zuckyd1 wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I love the Appendix site.

No no, a "guy" like "staff", "member". I am too, while they don't focus on the thing interesting me in some comics, many articles are more than useful for obscure subjects.

  zuckyd1 wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
But the key term is "semi-canon". Nothing there is completely official until Marvel publishes it. Which is why, to answer your previous question, I think the Earth-92131 designation should prevail.

Seems fair. That's pretty much where I try to lead a discussion on the wikia (we are discussing the problem of the Marvel "universe" iterations).
 
zuckyd1
12-06-2015, 06:14 PM

Melou wrote:

No no, a "guy" like "staff", "member".

I've submitted a few corrections that they've been kind enough to credit me for, but that's about it.
 
Melou
12-10-2015, 02:54 PM
I contacted the Appendix for corrections and questions, here part of the answer:

"Despite similarities, Reality-92131 is the X-Men cartoon reality, which is not the same as the Adventures of the X-Men series reality.
Further, "Earth-0" is specifically in quotes as it is not a true designation. It is a reality designation for a reality from the previous multiverse."


"Earth-0" seems consequently to prevail (I use it on the Wikia as far), but as a substitute to the absence of official reality designation.
 
vanhornluke
12-10-2015, 03:52 PM
Is there anything official that says that the cartoon series and the comic series are different continuities? Absent something official I would think we should assume that the cartoon and the comics series that tells more stories using the same characters!​ are the same continuity.
 
zuckyd1
12-10-2015, 03:56 PM

Melou wrote:

I contacted the Appendix for corrections and questions, here part of the answer:

"Despite similarities, Reality-92131 is the X-Men cartoon reality, which is not the same as the Adventures of the X-Men series reality.

I'm curious as to the reasoning behind their statement. Are there any elements of Adventures of the X-Men that don't fit in with the cartoon's continuity? My understanding was that the series was basically just a retitling of the previous X-Men Adventures series, which had partly consisted of adaptations of cartoon episodes. X-Men Adventures ended the month before Adventures of the X-Men began, and they both shared the same creative team.
 
zuckyd1
12-10-2015, 04:15 PM
Some further evidence:
We know Adventures of the X-Men and Adventures of Spider-Man are in the same reality because they cross over. Here is a statement from the final issue of Spider-Man Adventures:
[image missing]
And these are from the cover and first page of Adventures of Spider-Man #1:
[image missing]
Furthermore, Adventures of the X-Men #1 includes this editor's note:
[image missing]


vanhornluke
12-10-2015, 05:11 PM

  zuckyd1 wrote:

Some further evidence:
We know Adventures of the X-Men and Adventures of Spider-Man are in the same reality because they cross over. Here is a statement from the final issue of Spider-Man Adventures:
[image missing]
And these are from the cover and first page of Adventures of Spider-Man #1:
[image missing]
Furthermore, Adventures of the X-Men #1 includes this editor's note:
[image missing]

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Yeah, absent some official statement contradicting them, I would think those statements establish that the cartoons and comics are the same continuity.


 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 4:05 pm  #17


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

 
Melou
12-11-2015, 03:18 AM

  vanhornluke wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Is there anything official that says that the cartoon series and the comic series are different continuities? Absent something official I would think we should assume that the cartoon and the comics series that tells more stories using the same characters!​ are the same continuity.

  zuckyd1 wrote:

I'm curious as to the reasoning behind their statement. Are there any elements of Adventures of the X-Men that don't fit in with the cartoon's continuity? My understanding was that the series was basically just a retitling of the previous X-Men Adventures series, which had partly consisted of adaptations of cartoon episodes. X-Men Adventures ended the month before Adventures of the X-Men began, and they both shared the same creative team.

I would have preferred to have "Earth-0" being Earth-92131, that would have given me an official reality designation to deal with (with the exception of the Secret Wars 92' series would have been a mess to explain).

  zuckyd1 wrote:

Some further evidence:
We know Adventures of the X-Men and Adventures of Spider-Man are in the same reality because they cross over. Here is a statement from the final issue of Spider-Man Adventures:
[image missing]
And these are from the cover and first page of Adventures of Spider-Man #1:
[image missing]

  vanhornluke wrote:

[img]file:///C:\Users\Andy\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png[/img]
Yeah, absent some official statement contradicting them, I would think those statements establish that the cartoons and comics are the same continuity.

The keyword this time is "based on". I would advocate that the meaning is "adapted from", rather than a real tie-in.

I had found a blog that made the review of the Adventures of X-Men series, pointing out some inconsistencies of continuity from the cartoon to the comics (well he starts the review with "Adventures of the X-Men is not set in official Marvel continuity, but in the continuity of the ‘90s animated series" before starting the slaughter with the section “Um, Actually…”, with variable levels of acceptance for those inconsistencies. Given I have never fully watched this shows, it helps.
#1 to #4 : http://notblogx.blogspot.fr/search/l...&by-date=false
#5 to #12 : http://notblogx.blogspot.fr/search/l...%20the%20x-men
Given the number of time the author asks how the author (who was also working the series) let pass this or that, it make question the fact it is indeed the same reality. But that's not a proof either (I think it's Brevoort who said "continuity is a tool", and hasn't to be always respected).

I try to find that official statement, but it's often a difficult matter to find. As far, I will give faith in the handbook writers' statements, but it would have been easier if the complete thing was explained directly in the handbooks.

Yes, the Adventures of Spider-Man are in that continuity (cross-over from Adventures of the X-Men #3 to Adventures of Spider-Man #3 with a Sinister plot)

  zuckyd1 wrote:

Furthermore, Adventures of the X-Men #1 includes this editor's note:
[image missing]

Good catch, I had missed that detail. That seemingly establish X-Men Adventures (the first series of comics) as part of the same continuity as Adventures of the X-Men at least.

My contribution would be to check the last message of the mail page on the Adventures of the X-Men #9 issue. I haven't read X-Men Adventures myself, but he states "I most recently enjoyed the retelling of the Shi'ar vs. The X-Men battle [...] and yet another ending to this epic". Of course, that message is without answer, that would had been too much easy. It could mean X-Men Adventures was adapted

So currently we have (without doubt as far):
-"Earth-0" (not a true designation), home to Galan, reality of Adventures of the X-Men and Adventures of Spider-Man, seemingly X-Men Adventures
-Earth-92131, reality of X-Men and Spider-Man cartoon.

"Earth-0" is stated to be Earth-616 by some people on the wikia (multiversal renewal having conserved Earth-616 in the current multiverse, they think it applied the same before. Not my opinion, but "wait and see" as far), or Earth-92131 (here).

The Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z #5 (I think it's the #5) list realities and the Earth-92131's entry is simply "X-Men cartoon (1992)", not very helpful on our matter.


I've asked about it (and X-Men Adventures and X-Men: The Manga) to the Appendix (the man is also a handbook writer. I tend to give credit to those, and to consider their statement as usable material on occasions (that's not a primary source, but it can help on many occasions)) but he can't answer right now.

The points we lacks to establish without doubt the whole connections (or lack of connection) are:
-The reality connection between X-Men Adventures and The Adventures of the X-Men (but seemingly solved: same continuity)
-The reality connection between Spider-Man Adventures and The Adventures of Spider-Man
-The reality connection between X-Men Adventures and the X-Men cartoon
-The reality connection between Spider-Man Adventures and the Spider-Man cartoon

Until he answer or one of us finds more on the subject, I think we can wait and see.
 
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 4:06 pm  #18


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Historical text from Capes(Optional):
MISSING

 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 4:10 pm  #19


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Historical text from Facebook:
Andy Nystrom
October 19, 2019
CBR just did a... rather creative rendition of the original Scourge history so I made extensive corrections in the Comments section. The article alone shows why Official Handbooks are still needed
https://www.cbr.com/captain-america-scourge-of-the-underworld-return/
Reply 1.
Stuart Vandal
"While Scourge's identity might be a mystery, it's one that Captain America -- and readers -- are eager to get to the bottom of quickly." Since the last image on the page seems to show Scourge wearing Night Raven's mask, that cat might be out the bag. Though I hope it isn't Night Raven - he deserves better than to be subsumed into another character, plus he's a hero. But yes Andy, plenty of errors in that article - not least that the Golden Age Angel was never the Scourge himself.
Reply a.
Andy Nystrom
That error definitely jumped out. Even if a story eventually establishes slower aging due to the sliding timescale (otherwise eventually no WW2 characters should be alive if aged normally), he's clearly drawn as in too bad a shape to be going around killing criminals. Dominic Fortune even prior to de-aging maybe but not Angel. I forgot to mention: there's also another article posted yesterday on Squadron Supreme members. Their image of the Whizzer is clearly Robert Frank, not Stanley Stewart. Making matters worse, that image made it into the link headline.
Reply 2.
Rob Horne
It's CBR. Their articles are usually either poorly researched, or badly justified efforts at being "woke" (like the one about how the main character in "Detective Pokemon" should have been the female reporter), or written by Brian Cronin and therefore researched and put into context.
 
 


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

2/06/2020 4:18 pm  #20


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

And first post on the new site, another case of different media but still Marvel Mulitiverse. It involves what's arguably the most pivotal moment of the first season of Agents of SHIELD. Even though it's quite a few years old I know at least one person who's watching it for the first time and others who plan to get to the show at some point, so I'll include spoiler tags. This error even made it into the book Agents of SHIELD: Season One Declassified.

Right before before Grant Ward murders Victoria Hand and other agents, lots of viewers perceive Hand as handing Ward her gun. In actuality he uses his own gun.

Last edited by Andy E. Nystrom (2/06/2020 4:19 pm)


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

3/10/2020 3:56 pm  #21


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

New one:
Incorrect: Genndy Tartakovsky's Cage! miniseries from 2016 is out of continuity (e.g. not 616). 
Truth: The series is set in 616.

Can't entirely blame people for this one, since the advance solicits did indeed state it was an "out of continuity tale." Not sure who wrote that solicit or why they said that (presumably they thought it was out of regular continuity, and perhaps Tartakovsky was working from the remit of "don't worry about making it fit, you can do your own thing continuity-wise"), but when I was asked to cover this for the Marvel Fact Files, they requested I check with Marvel for confirmation of the status - if it was not 616, then the entry would need a reality designator and stats for Cage; if it was 616, then it required neither of these. I put the request to editorial at Marvel, and was told the regardless of what the solicit had said, this mini was set in 616. 

 

6/01/2020 5:39 pm  #22


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

This isn't one that is a very common misconception, but I am seeing it slowly becoming more widespread:

Incorrect: Conan appears in Ultraforce/Avengers #1.
Truth: A character called Axus appears in Ultraforce/Avengers #1.

In the aforementioned comic there is a crowd scene where characters from across the Omniverse (read: non-Marvel, appearing with permission of their creators) show up as alternate reality Avengers or alternate reality Ultraforce members. One of them is this guy:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/8/85763/7402992-axus.jpg

A few (but growing) number of sites have identified this individual as Conan. It's not an entirely unreasonable identification - dark haired, muscular barbarian type swinging a sword is a fair description of Conan, and he's certainly closely associated with Marvel. Obviously he's more commonly lacking headgear and bare chested, and you'd expect any nod and wink cameo to use his most recognizable look, but he has donned scale mail and helmets on occasion. I also draw your attention to the discs riding above his shoulder and by his neck as he flexes his sword arm - that's a necklace, as we'll see below - and to the bracelets he wears on his wrists.

But it isn't Conan. UF/Av came out in 1995. Marvel still had the license for Conan through to 1996, so they absolutely could use him in a non-Conan comic, and did even have him cross over with the Ultraverse, taking on Rune in another title. But because Marvel don't own Conan, they had to include his copyright info in the indicia, acknowledging he was being used under license. Could they slip in a cameo without this? Sure, and they did from time to time (such as in Excalibur or Fantastic Four), BUT the indicia for UF/Av is actually pretty thorough in listing the ownership info for the non-Marvel characters in there:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/8/85763/7402999-copyright.jpg

He's nowhere to be seen. Okay, maybe he's the one guy they missed. Not impossible. But look at this line of that indicia:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/8/85763/7403000-copyright2.jpg
Barry Windsor-Smith's Freebooters are listed. Now, that's a fairly obscure title, so you'd be forgiven for not knowing it. Let's check it out:
https://www.barrywindsor-smith.com/studio/fbcovernew.jpg

Gee, that guy on the cover, Axus, looks familiar, standing there in his horned helmet, scale mail shirt, wrist bracelets and necklace made up of large discs. Yes, Conan has worn horned helmets before (noticeably on his first ever Marvel issue), but those helmets had forward-facing horns, and guess who drew that cover? Yep. Barry Windsor-Smith, the same guy who originally designed and drew Axus. No wonder they look somewhat alike.  

But make up your own minds:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/scale_super/8/85763/7403055-conanaxus.jpg

 

6/15/2020 12:25 am  #23


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

 

Stuart V wrote:

11-04-2014, 12:03 PMInteresting new one - not new for me, as I learned it a few years ago while working on Karnak's entry, but just realised it would count as an "often gotten wrong" for many people.

Incorrect: Karnak of the Inhumans never underwent Terrigenesis - he has no powers, except those he developed via his martial arts training, the ability to divine a structure's weak point which is a mental discipline achieved through training.

But yet, also incorrect: Karnak gained superhuman powers via exposure to the Terrigen Mists.

Truth: Karnak wasn't exposed to the mists, but underwent Terrigenesis anyway, and does possess outright superhuman powers.Past handbooks did say that Karnak had no powers, except for a mental discipline developed via his training. And indeed, many comics, from the 1960s on, also say this. However, while he usually just touched objects lightly with his hand to figure out the stress points, there are a couple of occasions (Amazing Adventures #3 and Inhumans I #10) where he actually projects a beam of energy from his head while using his powers, in both cases where he's scanning for stuff way out of sight (one is subterranean and another is locating something on the opposite side of a space station). That's evidence of an outright superpower. You might argue that these isolated examples can be ruled errors, if sufficient other stories actively contradict this and say he has no powers, but then in the Inhumans GN, when Medusa tries to assuage fears about her unborn child potentially having powers as dangerous as Black Bolts by offering not to expose the child to Terrigen, it's points out that isn't a guarantee, as Karnak wasn't exposed, but his powers developed anyway, proving the Inhumans have been using the mists so long that their genetics have developed to the point where powers will emerge without the mists. That's a clear statement, fixing the apparent contradiction of some stories saying he never got exposed to the mists, when other stories show him having powers.Slightly muddying the waters, in Mighty Avengers #27 you have two guards mention that Karnak was "exposed to the mists last week" and Karnak himself says he underwent Terrigenesis - the only time there's been a suggestion he got exposed to the mists. However, that can be explained off as Karnak having experienced a spontaneous Terrigenesis without mists and the guards assuming the mists were involved.

Reposting the above because I just stumbled across the fan wiki stating that the Karnak entry in the Avengers Roll Call handbook "incorrectly stated" that Karnak underwent Terrigenesis, and also that "the only explanation for his displayed abilities is training...as for energy projection, that's potentially never been shown, so possibly just another error on Marvel's part when they put together his official power grid."

Taking that piece by piece: Handbook stating Karnak underwent Terrigenesis: What the entry actually says is "In his teens, Karnak’s innate powers developed even without direct Terrigen exposure due to generations of familial mutation, allowing him to sense weaknesses in people and objects."
And here's where the comics say that:

https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/8/85763/7421397-karnak1.jpg

So no, the handbook didn’t state he’d undergone Terrigenesis, incorrectly or otherwise. And whether or not it is correct to use the term depends on whether the user means “exposed to the mists” - in which case, he wasn’t as a child - or “developed superpowers via Inhuman genetics (and not just training)” - in which case yes, he did spontaneously undergo it (possibly triggered by his intense training), which is presumably why he states he has in Mighty Avengers#27.As for his power grid being “just another error on Marvel’s part” to list energy projection because he’s “never been shown” to project energy: 
From Amazing Adventures II#3:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/8/85763/7421398-karnak2.jpg


From Inhumans I#10:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/8/85763/7421399-karnak3.jpg


Sorry to go on about this, but it's a bit of a pet peeve of mine to see people dismiss stuff they disagree with in the handbooks with a hand-waving "oh, they just got it wrong." We do make mistakes, and we own up to them, but before you dismiss something as an error, check the issues and check with us. Frequently supposed errors are actually results of information provided in a comic the error-claimant overlooked.

 

7/04/2020 7:12 am  #24


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Found another one while indexing the old Handbooks. Under spelling:
Incorrect: Modok
Correct: MODOK
MODOK is an acronym for Mental Organism Designed Only for Killing, so every letter needs to be captalized. However, original, Deluxe, and Master all use the incorrect spelling.


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

7/04/2020 3:50 pm  #25


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Found another one while indexing the old Handbooks. Under spelling:
Incorrect: Modok
Correct: MODOK
MODOK is an acronym for Mental Organism Designed Only for Killing, so every letter needs to be captalized. However, original, Deluxe, and Master all use the incorrect spelling.

Yep. All capitals for MODOK. Ditto SHIELD, SWORD, AIM, etc. Also HAMMER though nobody knows what it is an acronym for (or, indeed, if it really is an acronym - Osborn claims it is, but he's insane. Nevertheless, all capitals for HAMMER). Hydra, on the other hand, isn't, despite how Wikipedia sometimes displays it. Rom likewise should not be all capitals, but tons of people insist on writing it as ROM. 

 

7/04/2020 5:31 pm  #26


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Funny how the older Handbooks had the opposite problem for Hydra and for MODOK. Though I get the confusion in the cases of Hydra and Rom 9the latter being spelled correctly in older Handbooks). In Hydra's case, it's tempting to think that because the other side uses an acronym, and because AIM and THEM, which have strong ties to Hydra, are acronyms, Hydra must be one too. And with Rom, his robotic look tends to make people think of the term ROM (Read Only Memory); it wouldn't surprise me if that was the real world inspiration for the name.


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

7/05/2020 12:38 am  #27


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Andy E. Nystrom wrote:

Funny how the older Handbooks had the opposite problem for Hydra and for MODOK. Though I get the confusion in the cases of Hydra and Rom 9the latter being spelled correctly in older Handbooks). In Hydra's case, it's tempting to think that because the other side uses an acronym, and because AIM and THEM, which have strong ties to Hydra, are acronyms, Hydra must be one too. And with Rom, his robotic look tends to make people think of the term ROM (Read Only Memory); it wouldn't surprise me if that was the real world inspiration for the name.

Yes, I can see how they came to be commonly written wrongly as all caps. Still mistakes though. What gets me about Rom vs ROM in particular though is how some people stick to the wrong version, all evidence be damned. Before I stopped trying, because I realised I was banging my head against a wall of utter stupid, I sometimes corrected people on various forums. Virtually every time they'd come back with stating that it was all caps on the cover of the first issue (and in the text, but for some reason the cover is the one usually cited). I'd point out that EVERY word was all caps, because that was just the standard text; I'd point out by that logic it is CAPTAIN AMERICA and not Captain America; I'd include images of Marvel spelling Rom as a mix of caps and lower case whenever they actually didn't use all caps. And I'd almost always get back "Well, I've always spelled it ROM." Literally an admission of "I admit it is wrong, but I will keep doing it wrong anyway." I've never understood that mentality. There have been plenty of times when I've misspelled or mispronounced stuff, and done so repeatedly because I thought that was the correct version. But whenever I learn I've been doing so, I stop doing it and start using the correct version. 

 

7/10/2020 5:37 am  #28


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Another naming error seen in various Handbooks including the Marvel Legacy trade, this time of a real life person:
Incorrect: Herbe Trimpe
Correct: Herb Trimpe


My photostream (over 5.6 million photos!)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/
     Thread Starter
 

8/05/2020 3:12 am  #29


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Minor one, but it's on sites including Comicvine (until I just removed it), comics.org, etc.
False: Captain England is in Secret Avengers I#22
Truth: He's not.
This is an understandable one - we've got this guy:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/8/85763/7501500-captainscotland.jpg

in this one panel from Secret Avengers I#22. And this is Captain England:
https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/uploads/original/0/77/150141-170253-captain-england.jpg

There's some similarity in appearances, with the red cross, bulky build and beard, so you can see why people think it is him in Secret Avengers. But the guy in Secret Avengers also differs in appearance, with the blue elements of his costume that Captain England lacks. And we've got to remember that many of the Corps look similar - costumes based to varying degrees on the Union Flag, and many being alternate reality counterparts to other members. Plus if you know your UK dialects you know that "laddie" is more commonly associated with Scotland than any English region. So just from the panel there's an element of doubt. I don't have any doubt though, as I can cheat; I have access to something those sites don't, the script for the issue, which identifies the guy speaking by name. He's Captain Scotland.  

 

8/05/2020 9:06 am  #30


Re: Things people keep getting wrong (Round 2) redux

Loki wrote:

I don't have any doubt though, as I can cheat; I have access to something those sites don't, the script for the issue

It never occurred to me that that would be one of the resources handbook writers might consult. Makes sense though, and probably very useful!

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum