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
 

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.
 

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.
 
 
 
 
 

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.


 

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.

 

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
 
 

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.

 
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.